HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.con.009.1981 ,�, ,�.__. _____
� .1
} ;' �'�
rj�"`''""��Fir.y4'.=..'�}?,l,r:..��....,..?i�:i;.it�e.#i�...;. ,.n.i:,�.r.,d..�, r� _..w... _a _,.i...._t_..;a.r.��.i"r��T'snw r.. ,:ili:,3...cp.t:^,"crrL«i::..::';' .._.., ':.Y �-
� Y�yk'�.t�..
f � � ti���'.. '
C,� � • . �i:�,�:: .
`Z � , E�B���• . ..
�`�
��
Mh�10RANDLIl�1 OF UNDERSTANDING
CA 9(81)
THIS MEMORAPIDiIM OF UNDERSTAbIDING, made this �7�� daY of N[�y-�7 �
� 1981, between the ODIARADO DEPAF�Fr OF HIGEi[�YS, hereinafter refesred tA as
r
the "STATE", PITKIN �UNTY, hexeinaftes referred to as the "COUNTY", and the
_ CITY � ASPE�3, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", sets out mutually agreeable
acbninistsative arid fiscal arrangenents by which the Aspen/Pitkin County Busway
Feasibility Work Program will be conducted. This c�ork will be cronclucted to
answer three busway feasibility questions that were raised by the 5tate:
1. Will the busway divert sufficient traffic so as
�
• tn preclude the need for widPnj*� SH 82 tD four lanes? �I
2. Could the �sway be utilized as part of SH 82 and ;
�
sPSVe as the "secoirl half" of a four-lane facility,
if such use became necessary or desirable? �
3. Can Aspen/Pit]cin County reasonably meet the operating
s ��,
_ rnsts of the pmposed transit systan? �
-�{� I
� It is the intention of the parties of this Mamrandwn wi11 move to secure
� fvnding, if available, for the implanentation of the project. �.
Selection of Consultant
The State, County and City will jointly select a oonsalt�nt to cca�lete
n
a Busway Feasibility Study in conformance with the Scope of Work (attachedl.
The process for selection of the oonsultant and pursuing tl�e work will comply �
tD applicable federal, state and local requirar�nts. A board canprised of
State, County and City representatives �ri.11 interview qualified consultants.
€:
The fism detenai.ned tA be the best rn,a�ified to perform the work will be asked
to silinit a writtPn proposal which will serve as a basis for a formal agrcanPnt.
$
AIaNIINTSTRATI0�f7 OF CONSULTANT AGREII�IENT •
The contract for the performance of the Scope of Work will be betw�� the
,
St�te, tl�e County. the City, ani the selected oonsultant. SUpesvision of the q
perfoxmance of the work done will be by the Coun �
tI'. in 000peration with the
State and the City. �
�
Payment for all w�rk performed by the c�nsultant will be divided equally �
azmng the 5tate, the County, and the City. �
It will he the responsibility of tlze County to distribute all progress
�
� reports and technical maroranda in a timely fashion bo the State and the City. ,
�'.
�,
.rf�',:�. .
�
•�/IY'�.�yr�. . .
��'.J:�...t(C� , - .
,.�
s "' . '
f]'�'����F�'Ahis+.;�s.;1a':�'3'.,,.�:.':.�c�.�:�,u.:,�.�._.i._ . �:F�............,,:a;...:t.s<,..�,...h•T.,....2.;i+'��c�MtitiriiY��F'X.F:.�:;`EiSlrotr. `�mlA�;cx�.+a�ti��i -�
; f��t¢
tt "� � �`�
V • td�t
P ' `�,
� • r�;� '. _
� Study Approach
r� The Busway Feasibility Work Program will proceed incranesitally on a t�sk
by task basis, with feasibility rn��tions answered adequately prior tn proceeding
f: with werk on the subsequent task. The deta�;.,ation of the feasi.bility of the
r4; i
�. elarnnts of the L•usway founcl in each work task will be the responsi.bility of the I
re�esentatives of the State, the County, a�l the City.
� The consultant's c.ark will be divi.ded into the four tasks outli.ned in the
Scope of Wark. A technical merosandinn wi11 he prepared by the consultant azrl
presented to the State, the County, and the City. Ra�resentatives of the State,
' the County, and the City will hold work sessions to discuss the oonsultant's �
li
findings. Work will proceed on the next task when the representatives of the �`
State, the County, and the City are in agreamlit t1�at the feasibility issues
i
are adequately ansc,�sed. In the event agreen�nt cannot be reached, the study
tATr++n�tes with the c�leted task aru2 the oonsultant will be discharged.
i�`pp
Public Participation �
The County will be responsible for conducting meetings with the public �
_ �:
�f� to discuss the f;TM?;*�s of the consuJ.tant for each kvrk task. Representatives �
� �
� of the State and the City will attend these meetings. i
IScecution �
• In s'�+in� this Marorandian of Understanding, the undersigned recr�gnize
ec g ��
i
that the successful crn�letion of this project r�n,;res the necessaty in- �
wlvanent of a rnnnb�er of public agencies in a cooperative planning process. t
The undersigned will ensure tl�at all personnel involved in their jurisdiction r
will coopexate fully in carrying out the intent and provisions of this agrcenent.
, IN WI�SS Wf�70F, the �*-i-;es hesetn have executed this Mamrarniian o£ ; `
Undersi-a�xting the day and year first written above. r
COIARADO DEP � HI S s
[
BY: /�'�l�t .
!J Pury O�.eECTO�2
BOARD OE' COUNTY COM�IISSI �
PITKIN COUNPY, p0IA12ADp
BY��vv -�� �
Bob Chi.ld, ChaiYman �
� �
CITY QF A5PEN I
, �
BY: i Z�La�- �
� H Edel, Mayor i
�,.
.t.'�;,
_ _ Z _
Y,.I
�,,�u� �
�`'-rc1'tJy.?`� . � .
!
�
� '",` I�
��15����"r'CCYC�ao.a+ac':��.«w:.��3:=:d:it"d'.KC�x'-:.�...0 _.n�� . . _-.. . .. .:T.�_�s... a . . .ca�.-w o....r s....... .rc.-s:.0 ..
i 1 � ' � �{+i�t
�• ' : . � . • .. .k4Y`�r
� .. � • . . . -. . � . ��':=ii.. .. .
� EXIIIDIT A �
� • • IIUSY7AY FEASZBILITY SCOPE OF W�RK
TASK 1. DETEP.I4INATIGPI OF IIUSSQAY ALIGt7MENT
1.1 Review Prior PlorY, „ . ' � ��
rHighway II2,Design Concept Stucly �
� . -TSt, Alternatives Study ' ,
� 1.2 Gather Addi.tonal Data . , • � �
- " • -Directional Tra�£ic Counts • . � j
-I,and Oornership Records . 4
. ` -Geotechnical Data • " �
�
� -Topographi.c 29aps/Hydrology Dai:a � ' �
°-Recent Aerial Photos �
y . . . �
1_3 Identi'.'y Al1 Facets Ia£luencing Alignment
` -Geoqzaphic Constrai.^.L-s _ ��
-Dcsired Station and Interchange Locations _ �
� -Enviror_Tental Factors • �-,
- . ' -Compaiibility with I:and Use and Master Plan 3oals • :
, .-Assess Feguir�n,er.ts £or Busway Convertibili*y to Hig'nway Use i
__ . :
. ' . I� .s .: . . .: t
1.4� Assess Alternatives 2nd Select Preferred A3.i'c,�nment � ' .
- � -Dev�lop Several Possible Alternatives • . i
. -Select Evaluation Cri�eria, Including Land Availability and " i
� . Environmental Impacts � -
-Identify Preferred Alignment . � .... : ;�
- . 1.5 Devel� Detailed Descri °��
_ p ption of Pre£erred Alignm�:nt ;�.
!# .. . •-Pla. an;. Pro£ile Drst•:ings o� the Bus:.ay AliSnment. �
. -Schematic Design of Interchanges '
� -Conc�ptual RenZ�rinas , � �
' • . a
1.6 Piepare a Teci.nical Meinorandum ior Task 1 . i�
TAS3C 2. DETERD;II�ATION OF O1�ERATTO:�AL FElSIBILITY • . � ;�
2.1 Asscss Traific Engineeriiiq Compo�ients ' '�
' --Traf:fi.c Impact to SCate }lighway 82 • .
__ -l:equired Trai•fic Regulation •'� '� ' '
-Functional Design Standar.ds ior Buswa.y and Triterchanges ��
, -Iniormation l:e9uirements - Signing '�
2.2 Asse�s Transit Oper�ti.ons� �
-Routing and ]I�ad�.�ay '
-DaC.crniiile Fl�:ci: Sizc � �
-Siat-ion L'ocati.on and La��out ' •
-Yar�-ancl-1:i4� Sitc Ce�Sigurntinn ' �
2.3 Prc�.»rc a R'cchnica]. Plcmor;ndum for Tas}; 2 • (:
. . �
----_._W_.....,.,_.�.,_...._..... _._.�._.____,.ry... ��.�: �
,S; , I
,a
:1� �, i �
.��..�� , �
�- �r
;+.y.{ � � � ' . . 1
`Jt � . . . - . . � .
. � �,�.'
' �C��. . . . ' . . ..
:�����..;�� , I . . ..
' ','�.ti.'�e �
��uL.ry��;.i��M�9,.� • .
��`�`''�:i�R±" �
��..�" -,.'.:�� . � . . .
1 I
,$
i fi� �t x� � . .
S 1 .',r
G ' �- .�
�"P$��?+ ; _ . .. .
fJ �R�'w°'.'rA.:hFitslt�'�rs:,td''".��� v.> ,. .
4} ._,. ..nr.4 s'.:::u -_ ....�:.._.., ,..,._tr,a`trl:iS�?",3'f��......�,:%::�u.a.-:.c;�::4+..:.�;:i�: �•3�ati* :
.� ���t
. . . . . �Y�'� ��.
� • ' , . _. . ' • • - � • , • �.4t�y�. ....
.TASY. 3. DETEP.I9INATYOid OF ENGINEERIidG F�AS7IlILIT'L •
. 3.1 Identify General Land Preparation Requireri�ents.
" - Acquisition •
- Land Clearing " .
� - Cut and Fill
. - SozJ. Stabilization •• .
� - Utility"Kelocation (if necessary). �_
' � Arainage I?equi.rements • �
� . 3.2 Identify General Requirements for All Structures
• - Bridges • �
. • -- .Reta�ning 47alls/Drainage FaciZities. '
� - Stations • - ,
' � I
3.3 Establish Design Specifications , " J
� • - • � !
_ 3.4.� Refine ?11igM�Tt in Preparatio., for Final Design and Cost� , � �!
. � Estimate , . . - : ' �. , . • .E
� 3.5 �evelop Refine Costs ��� ' � �� • _ !,
. " Bus�•ray�.Construc tion . - . _ -- - --- _ i- . . �
- -:�tations . . • - . • . ..
�. -- Par}:ar.d-Ri�e Facility .. . � '. '. .
• , � -=Final D�sign ._ "' �
- Right-of-C�Tay Acyuisition � . ' '. • ��,
�• _ . • - Operating Costs for Facility.and Bus Fleet
. � � ~ � - . ��
� � '�3�.6 Prepare Rechnical Tiemorandum ior Tes;:�3' � . f��
---�,;. _ . . . . . . . . . �f�.
� TASR 4. P�.._r.PA,.ATIOti OI'•S1•;PI,Ei•SE.^;T:TTO_�: PP.OGP3�?�S •
I� 4.1 .Prepare a Detailea Pr.oject Sche�ule • � �
� • - Design . � • . - !
� - i.ontract Document' �r�paration�. � • .
- �3idding ' . � , .
. - R�aarding ' ' . '
• . - Consiruction • • . . , , .
•d.2 °repare a Fun�ing Yrograr„Yand Assisi in the Preparation oi �
� Grant Applica'�icns • . • . ' ,• k�
. 4.3 Identify Agency Responsibilities and Yrepafe a Project fl
Tfan�z9c�icnt 1?l�n '__ ._ • ,
. f
%x.4 Preparc Tcchnical rfemorandu:n xor Task'4 � ��. :
• , ' .' • .��
� . � � � � . , � �, • ��
. • . • • • ;
' . , �
� � , ' . . i
, , , ,
. . •
, . ,
_.._ . .
: , , ___ _ ___---__._., • �___ •
�f
, - �:�,....,.......v_. ��i �
. . . . - . �
� ._ f �_
:�' '* �
� i
•`; - ':
'�.-�.�. '
��v '
���N� f
.��".��� ' !
�;' . "�