HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.con.048.1995 :A,
, ,
� ,. � ._..._.
.�h.A.-�.:- ".,ti��.S:Y(IS M:1'.. ��.�1i:.:� � :•�. �...: ' � .:. - ' ��.lEt::.' i[�} +' "'c1kHi'r.".i'L•vt?f1 .'r'�wR...rs� - 1r�r.:,ve.f. J
....... . ......_.. ....._. -'J.
. .t �9�-v�' `' �':'
�.
� _ .i^. js..
�x',���'
;..
� Agreement between the Colorado Department of Transportation i� ��
� and the City of Aspen . � `.�a'
� for a Cooperative Process Contributing to the �, '_y.✓
�� Entrance-to-Aspen EIS �� ,
' E'-� �.,:J t,-
' ��� $ , f
� This cooperative agreement is made and entered inco as af this 1�,�day of March, 1995,by �` ` .
-- ' and between the City of Aspen and the Colorado Deparmient of Transportation(CDOT}to :
� provide for additional citizen educarion and involvement wiih respect to the development of the �
�� �•,.,,�:����; :
� Entrance-to-Aspen Envuonmental Impact 5tatement(EIS). :'�-;::: .
� �
; VTHEREAS,CDOT is responsible for developing an EIS on behatf of the Federal Highway Y'•':�`
f Administ�ation to evaluate alternatives for transportation improveutents to the Colorado State j�'
. Highway 82 cozridor for the eatrance to Aspen;and �i
!
• WHEREAS,the EIS will be prepazed under the requirements of the National Environmental i;• ~
Policy Act(NEPA)and other federal and state regulations,which require a thorough and �
; iategrated analysis of proposed alternatives;and �
_ ' �.,
, ' WHEREAS,the EIS will identify environmental and quatity of life impacts associated with r
� ; � each proposed alternative,evaleaate appropriate measures to avoid,minimi�e,or midgate tt�ese �
impacts and select a preferred option fot transportadon improvements in the corridor;and :
� WHEREAS,tfie City of Aspen has been engaged in a cooperative decision making process �
}�.
- , � with Pitkin County and the Town of Snowmass ViIlage to pzovide for alternafive modes of
transportation to reduce tra�c congestion,air pollution,and other automobile impacts,while
improving safety and conformance with the Clean Air Act;and
WHEREAS,the Aspen Rrea Communiry Plan calls for limi£ing vehicle trips into Aspen to °
create a less congested downtown,and supports the development of mass transit and demand �
reducuon strategies;and 3� '
� . `_
; WHEREAS,many users of State Highway 82 remain concerned that automobile accessibiiity ;
and safety continue to be provided for in any transportadon development plan;and
� � WHEi2EAS,citizens concemed with the environment and 4uality of life issues have expressed •
concem that transportation and highway faciiities may impact sensitive environmental areas
� and open space; , f
�.
�� NOW THEREFORE,the City of Aspen and CDOT,in cooperation with Pitkin County>agree •
to enter inro the following agreemen[to provide for special elements of the planning and
� educational activities to analyze,identify,and implement a transportation alternative which ' � :"`�
� j�:
� 1 ;� ;';'�.
�
y��,.: : '_
C�::
. .�.�..,.� ,_. ' t
. ._{ t L S,r�Y�'frv W'�� 4 _ ...._... � . _.. ».• . ��}'�r _
/ '
. :: . , ' . . , ` �-.
. ...' .; •.� ..:... : '.. . .. . . ' . - .. . � ,. . ,� � . . . . .� Y.
. � . ' . , .. , -��
. �\ - . � . . �: . . . '
, . . .� � .. . . . . .. . . ��^„ ' '
\ ' � .. _ � . . .. � ' . ' / .�.. .. . . . ." ..
. 1 . ... . . . ' � . � � . . . � �. . .
� . . / . . . . . . . . . . . f .. .
���. ' . . �.. . . . .' . . _' . . .. . . . , . �, •
,��!7 . ... . , . . . .
�}�
..
' , ..
,.
� , ... . . . ... .... _. _. __ . __._ . .- .-
;�� . ... �� ,'-
.� - • �;_.
y.�.
� �t.;
aclmowledges and addresses the goals of the various user groups,the Aspen Area Community
P(an,open space preservation,the Intermodal Surface Transportation E�ciency Act(ISTEA), `
and the requirements of t6e NEPA process. These ac[ivi6es are to be structured as follaws: �'�
- ;�•
; f. The City of Aspen aclmowledges and endorses the"Entrance to Aspen IIS Project "
,� 06jectives°dated Mazch 1, 1495 developed for the Entrance to Aspen Environtaental Impact ,`
���ei StaCE$CIIC, r� P
� ..
�:1 F
__ � 2. Boih parties agree that it is necessary to proceed as expedidously as possible with the �.
� Environmentai Impact Statement process. It is understood that CDOT hopes co release a draft
� Environmental Impact Statement during the Spring of 1995. �� -
y 3. CDOT agrees that tfie aiternadves identified in the draft EIS may be subject fo
y� mod'i["ication,including the addidon of new alternatives,if the public and interagency review
. � process for the draft EIS should warrant these changes. ,;
a
,.' ' 4. The City of Aspen and CDOT agree to participate in the following meetings,
coordinated and facilitated by Leadership Aspen and the Rceky Mountain Iasticute,and
including a broad coalition of community groups. These meetings are designed to engage all
interested par[ies and stakeholders in the development of the EIS and in selecting the best �
transportation alternative:
A. A"Citizens'Transportation Summit"held in January 1995,bringing
� together all interested parties and cafacilifated by Leadership Aspen
Alumni and the Rocky Mountain Institute.
Purpose: Give attendees basic background information on the EIS/community
� involvement process;provide an overview of how their participarion will be useful;
present Pcoject Objectives,the screening process for atternatives,and preferred
alternatives;elicit comments and concerns on areas requiring fiuther discussion.
This event will include:
� - - A discussion of the EIS process as an opportunity to thoroughly and systematically
- .
� evaluate all options,and to examine their costs and benefits.
• Presentauon of the timeline and steps of the EIS process;target dates for each steg
and finat end decisions. •
' • Overview of the EIS process,including presentation of Project Objectives, �`
screening process and preferred altematives. ��
• Faciiitated group discussions to reach agreement on criteria that will be used to
evaluate altematives(including a review of Project Objectives and ISTEA factors)
and discuss issues of community interest and concern.
• Develop concepts for a survey to sample public opinioa �4;
�;:±
�.=
2 t:.
,y
i ',
. . ' .,.,aw..s.� _... . ..,�_... ... —.' ' ' ._ __. �. .,� ........�:;;..r e:�''%k,.�,
` , � , '. .. �.. � _. . . �� . . � � .. S �....
. .
. . / , . . . . . .. . . . �-�. �., ..
. � . . � � . . ' .. . y.:
� . . . . .. . . .. . _ . .. 1. � s
.. , � . � - � � : - . . � . t� .t�
. . � - ��,�..; . s .
''.` . . . . . . . � .. . '� . . � f'�'.-.
. . . � . . . . : . . � . . _ . .
. � . . �. . � . � . � . . . � � .. �- . - . �. `��, .. � � . � .. .-
� , �
• �
•�; ' ,
�.��� .. . . . .. .
'Ff�
:;. - , 1,
�r: .> . �:.,�. i .. .�, �... ` . ..�a.� ._:.'�,eri,i:a,y,�,di�niii!aa��a}.r�iihae.Md:�'i-ei f4y.lry.."{i.,�:'
r •-'- . ..,... .. ..n+� . .,. . � , ,.!.
. ....... _.... � � �
.... . . . . . ._ �: �. . ... _.._ . .: _.._ . .•�.�w..__... , ..
r
'9;'
. \ 1-G
�, �
. ' ' _ . (;�,3a+�.���t':
u4 ,
�`_.--,
• Form citizen task forces to explore identified topics. �;;. ,��
• Provide a summary of comments and concerns for further diseussion at the {r:.��
February 1995 Open House. y -
.�•.
' , B. An`°Open House"and Public Forunn held in February 1995 tbrough
;::�i the joint effort of the City of Aspen,CDOT, and a broad coaliflon of ;s,:;_'. f
: citizen graups and Ioca[organizatioas. �t`
:.k . . �, ;,K '
___ � Purpose:Present graphic displays of a range of alternatives to be thoroughly analyzed �''" �
; in the Draft EIS. Pcovide an opportunity for attendees to examine these aitenoatives in � ; :
°� the light of a checklist of project objectives: How well does each alternative satisfy the
;3 criteria which will be used to evaLuate them?
� This event will include:
Y�
• Aftemoon sessioas with small groups as determined at the January"Citizens'
� Summit°meeting and facilitated by LeadersIup Aspen Atumni. �*� �
• Reporting of small group discussions and interim acdvities of small groups to the
general meeting and open house in the evening. The evening session is to be ,�k
• facilitated by Barbara Cole,under contract with CDOT.
� • Report of results of survey acuvity,to be presented at the evening session. �
• A discussion of the Draft EIS alternatives wlll be presented by CDOT and �
_:� integrated with relevant ISTEA planning criteria.
• A discussion of open space related issues which witl include concepts for midgating ��
� any open space impacts. ;7�,•
• A discussion of traffic safety issues.
C. A Transportatiou Scenarios Symposivm&Charrette to be held in Marc6
� 1995,wh9ch will include design experts spealdng to various aspects of the
j'
screened aiternatives under consideration for inclusion in the Draft EIS. r . .
Purpose: To apply state of the art technical vision and analysis to the screened �r
alcernatives,and to invesdgate the inclusion of other appropriate alternauves for `'�
�;:._� . -�
consideration. i,
I �
Ttus event will include: `�
• A"Charcette"format to provide actual design problem solving along with the ,�•� � •
introduction of state-of-the-art technological concepts.
• Presentations by technical experts,foliowed by a small group discussion format,
, ' � and a repoR by the small groups to the getrerat meetiag. Presenters will include �
experts in traffic calming,demand management strategies,advanced technologies, �`
' along with rail and other fixed guideway altematives. � .,.' ':>:;
:; �. -
�, -
. i �
. 3
• I
' g't� ,
_ .� - — -�_—__ _ —_�------ -�- ,�-��''t�_s
� ,• -/ - � . . . r`."'" k ��."r r'^� ��.
t t
.. - � � .. . � ' . :�
1- `
',� . . . . . . . .
. .
,� !-. . -� . . , ' � �'��-
� . �. . .. ..� _ . . .- . .- . . ,.
� .. � .. . � . , . � � � . � � . �
.�1� . . . .. . . . ' .. . . . . . .. .
.�.., ,.. .. .. _.;,, . . ; : . . . . , . . .�. �:. ...
�. � � .. .. . .. - . .. . .. ... � ,. •
+�V� . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. � ,
:a�
�1'�d{" .^'S7 Y1fT...T:tiI�:�!ftr. . fi'>'. . . . :V,. � .. . .. '- 1 . ..�.L[....e � ....�.... . ..-__.._�...- '...._.. ::i�''i
.{�jt ,
� . ' _ ±Yy�..
A.;.,
� ��.�`'
• The symQosium will seek support and sponsorstrip from insiitudons such as the '=
Aspen Institute,Energy 20D0 Forum,and the Rocky Mountain InstiNte. +
s:± 5. Between the first and secottd meetiag as described above,the small groups will i;��
-:a coniinue to meet in order to develop responses to t[�e specific issues they are organized to <
�; address. .,'
A, n
,'��' 6. Recognizing that costs for these activities have not been included in the CDOT budget �, f
for development of the Entrance-to-Aspen EIS,the City of Aspen agrees to find or seek �
-- -; sponsorship•for these additional activities. CDOT agrees to provide represen[arion at the
� meetings described above in addition to funding and participating in those meetings and � �
� activities w}rich would otherwise have been a part of its EIS activity.
7. The City of Aspen and CDOT reaffum their intemst and willingness to work together � •
G on this transpoziation project within the time line for the Entrance-to-Aspen EIS process.
They agree to seek innovative and sustainable responses to�ansportation issues which are
� � consistent with 13EPA,ISTEA,the Aspen Area Communiry Plan,and the identified
'� interests of transportation users and the local community. :
8. CDOT and the City of Aspen agree to work together to idenrify funding sounces for
implementauon of tfie full pr.oject scape of the identified preferred transportarion
alternative,including those elements which aze not strictiy related to highway construction.
CDOT affirms tbat funding of atternative transportation projects and enhancements throngh
� federal and state funding sources is consistent with the principles of ISTEA and should be
supported as committed to in the EIS.
9. Tn preparing the Draft and Final EIS for the Entrance to Aspen,CDOT agrees to
a :. address and,to mitigate all significant impacts as called for by the NEPA regulations.
THIS AGREEMENT shall be in effect for the duration of the Encrance-to-Aspen EIS
process and stiall guide the implantation of a prefened alternative as identified t}u'ough that
process.
�_ `
��� ��1�� �5y�
, CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF '
TRANSPORTATION
B : s• ��l"� BY' � �� L'G�"' t�!.
Y
Guilletmo V.Vidal
� �ol� Executive Director
>.h,
f^'�s
q �;
' �''
� '
�._ _ x. -��_— ,,..�=�„-w----- -— .��,�.
�F
r' ��+� n.
. ,
�: . . . .�.,. .' . . �,. ,.�" .. . ...' .._�._ �.�: '...�..r .:�..
� ��i 4
� �. . t
.t' f � .. . � � _ . 4:
.. � .,. ,..-- . . -.
. . .. .. . :. ..�. � ..•� � ��.
. . . . . . . ,.,-.
- � .�� . : . . . .. � � .' � t ' .
- - . .. �';� ��,: � . .�- .. �. , .. �_ . . � .. .��.:�. . �. �,�. f. � �.
. .. .s. . . . . . .
� .SS . ... . .... . .. . . . �� . .. .. . . ' .
� � . :�, . . , . � � .. �� . . � � . , . � .. .
� r;���t�y`•� . ..� - . . . . . . . . . � . . � . . . .. ,
�>`je
. ...._.. ...._...__.
� � �
'�h1 r,r_ . �, , i'1'. � �:��'�`S�i
r,/ ..�+
da'i�'. '�
�}� y�, �
: �.y��'� �
s�,�... "���... ... _.. `y � . . ......_ .. . ' .
�s `�- r' �� x�}�'��'�
`.Y_. Q�.,y�' �Sl°1fL'��.�i I ... }�}
t,.:� �• _ � . � .. , � . . � � � . - . . . . � . �,.
. . VY� . . � . . . -. . .. . . � . , � . �}
. .. P�) ' . �� . .. � ... . . ' .. "
�K . . .. . � �. . :.�
�, � . . . . �•� �
W �-�
. . . . . . . �. . . � � �t'�t.�
-- _ t � AGREED TO IN PRINCIPLE BY
. pITKIN COUNTY . '`
`F
� .:
By:
� � :
�
- ";
- :.�.
5
, �F
_ �.
/ s
�
f
."� ' C
,,f,
��
t
�:
� S'
�� ' x
�,..< �,s:
C 2
h' t , ti:
^�.t':��: .; .,
� ,
k r!�
� j .�
3 '+
i
�
•�'.
:� H
� 1'
; 5 ' �, .
��'
.. 4
�: � � r : ,t f
: . • ` : . .
:
. �.Ior,,,._..-,�� ',�, �� �„ .. . n
` � / � t �.. r .. x � '�r
¢��
� 1 . r P : _ � �ti S�'Y-
-:'. �'. � ��,�F � - ti,y _ ��,}���4
}�
i � s—^+•� i Y '. �{ k � h '.
.' � "i1 y�;� � �S :.
- K-�:w`,��, 7� ._ ti 3 F �r �t ; f � . �
\ i _
j '�^la �� r�' �'.' :.1 C h ��-r
CS' M' �Si. � �P {
G .�, L..� ; s+ t� f� t
� Yl� l�t� y� - 1 ' I • ;l
.y� '�"� -;_�, 1 _. � � .
� '� �� 4 s �-'! �^ �
a `X � ' - - �� �
f�i,�„ �� i
.. .. � R ` �: 4 -.
,
_ ��. .C 4� ; �'.
. r . , .,. , .'
�
5 'b '
�� � \
� � ,
,�• �
,��'
���� { .�� �, ,. � �
�j✓'�`.�, , •�i�'`.i�b��N�t..�,��v�'�°�i�."-�'i� li- A+�-.:. "�!' _��':4�w.. a°ti'ro"StiY�C3 -.kii°teK,Cb.'IL�a7�A���1+�4�.TC���P���4YtiR9S. � x
t �:
,t,��y�y� . . . . . . . . . . .
ti'�'A' �`4��,.
�. vk'
��!'�
f. ,
'i ATTACffi1�NT A � `'
� Entrance to Aspen EIS ">•
� ' Project Objectives �_ .4
� , March 1, 1995 . � �
:s �
. ....__ ... _.� " . E�
� 1. Community-Based Planning. Provide a process which is responsive to local community- F,:
based planning efforts, uicluding the Aspen to Snowmass Transportation Project and the � '
Aspen Area Community Plan, with special attention focused on limiting vehicle trips into `
Aspen to create a ltss congested dowatown.
F 2. Transportation Capacity. Provide needed transportation capacity for forecasted person
' trips in the yeac 2015,while reducing congesuon. In doing t}vs, the project will identify a t .
combination of travel modes,a(ignments and transportation deu►aud management actions to
� seek W achieve the siated community goal of limiting the number of veIucles in ZO15 to
_ " Ievels at or below those in I994.
3. Safety. Reduce the lrigh accident rate on State Highway 82 and the existing S-curves at
� Stata Highway 82/7th Street/Main Street, and provide safery improvements for bicyclists
and pedestriazu. Provide safe access at all intersections for all movements.
i
. 1 4. Environmentally Sound Alternative. Develop an alternative which minimizes and
mitigates adverse impacts. The process follows the National Environmental Policy Act .
(NEPA), the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), the 1991 Intermodal Surface ;
Transportation Efficiency Act(ISTEA),and all pertinent legislation.
� ' S. Community Acceptability. Develop an alternative which fits the character of the
communiry and is aesthetically acceptable to the public. .
6, Financial Limitations. Devetop an alternative that is fmancially reatistic with respect to
current and expected funding levels and programs, while being responsive to both the
community's character and prudent expenditures of public funds.
;:.�, 7. Clean Air Act Requiremeats. Since the Aspen azea is a PMIp air quaiiry nou-attainment
; area, the selected alternatives must meet the requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act
- Amendment by demonstrating project confornuty.
8. Emergency Access. Respond w the need for an alternate route for emergenty response to
incidents inside and ourside of Aspen. �' i .
9. Liveable Communities. 5eek to provide a system which reflects the small town chazacter ' `
iand scale of the Aspen community and which enhances the quality of life for residents and
i visitors. The system shaIl provide more accessible ttansportation wluch increases the
�! mobiliry of the community and therefore provides for a more Iivable communiry.
i 10.Phasing. Provide an alternauve w(uch allows for future transit options and upgrades. `"'
:.;;�;,
x...��
;� :.
6 �
�'`; .
�..
e.: ;
�::: ;
s . t. .
�. r,. — — - _ —_ _ .__ . — — ti`-- - _�,�µ
... _ - +�i :
'� �. --
` , . . .�,: '.
.
� , ' ��
: �
. f
'..�.1�', . + — , .
:,�'fr _
+>.i
. -._ ._... , �:a.,�..��.,� ,�,