The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR99-021 Transit Alternatives for roaring fork corridor investment study�1 Commissioner nt6rrL moved adoption of the following Resol tion: BOARD OF COUNTY COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 99- [ c Z A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING AND ENDORSING THE TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROCESS FOR THE ROARING FORK VALLEY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR INVESTMENT STUDY WHEREAS, The Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (hereinafter "RFRHA ") was created on December 31, 1994, through an Intergovernmental Agreement between Pitkin County, Eagle County, Garfield County, the City of Glenwood Springs, the City of Aspen, the Town of Carbondale, the Town of Basalt, and the Town of Snowmass Village. The purpose of forming RFRHA was to conduct the public purchase, management and planning of the transportation and recreational use of the Aspen Branch of the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Right -of- way (hereinafter the "Property") as an asset to the people of the Roaring Fork Valley and the State of Colorado. WHEREAS, On June 26, 1997, the member governments of RFRHA amended and restated the Intergovernmental Agreement as follows: 1. Member government participation was modified to make Garfield County a non- voting, non - funding entity for management and planning of the Property. However, Garfield County did retain voting status on the approval of the Comprehensive Plan for the Property. 2. The Colorado Department of Transportation, Great Outdoors Colorado, and the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Board were added as non - voting entities that did not participate in the funding of the management and planning of the Property. The underlying purpose of RFRHA was modified to state that: a. the purchase of the Property will satisfy the mutual, immediate goal of the participating entities to retain the Property for the good of the general public use; b. the primary use of the Property under the future Comprehensive Plan will be as a public transportation corridor; and w ., C. secondary uses of the Property can include recreational opportunities and access to adjacent public lands, provided that these secondary uses do not preclude the primary use as a public transportation. corridor. WHEREAS, On June 30, 1997, RFRHA purchased the property from Southern Pacific Transportation Company. WHEREAS, As part of the purchase of the property, RFRHA made a commitment to carefully evaluate the feasibility of using some or all of the property for a valleywide transit and trail system, develop a comprehensive master plan, and determine the best use for the property. This work, which is known as the Corridor Investment Study (CIS) began in October of 1997 and will be concluded by July 1, 1999. WHEREAS, At the beginning of the CIS process, a list of "Project Objectives" was developed by attendees of the public scoping sessions, citizen task forces, the CIS Policy Committee, and the RFRHA Board. These objectives, which are listed below, are being used to evaluate the study alternatives: 1. Affordability and Economic Viability 2. Community Based Planning 3. Environmentally Sound 4. Flexibility 5. Increased Transportation Choices 6. Integrated Approach to Transportation Planning 7. Livability S. Safety 9. Trails and Recreational Resource WHEREAS, Forty -seven (47) technology options, nineteen (19) propulsion options, sixteen (16) station options, and five (5) alignment options were developed through public and agency scoping meetings, citizen task force meetings and CIS policy committee meetings. These options were put through a series of screening processes including a "reality check" screening, and a "fatal flaw" screening. The options remaining after these two screening processes were as follows: 1. Remaining Technology Options: No -Build (do nothing), Improved Bus /Transportation Systems Management (TSM); Build Bus on dedicated guideway; Build Rail on a dedicated guideway. 2. Remaining Propulsion Options: Diesel, gasoline, hydrogen internal combustion, electric (battery), electric (overhead catenary), electric (hybrid), liquid propane gas, and natural gas. 2 I . Remaining Potential Station Locations: West Glenwood Springs, Glenwood Springs, South Glenwood Springs, State Highway 133, Downtown Carbondale, Hooks Spur, Basalt High School, Emma, Willits area, Midland Avenue (Basalt), Old Snowmass, Aspen Village, Woody Creek, Brush Creek Road, and the Pitkin County Airport. 4. Remaining Alignment Options: Alignment "A " : Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to a location north of Brush Creek Road where it crosses to State Highway 82 and runs into Aspen. Alignment "B " : Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to a location north of Gerbazdale where it crosses over to the State Highway 82 and runs into Aspen. Alignment "C " : Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to an area near Catherine Store (CR 100) and then cross over the State Highway 82. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to Wingo Junction and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen. Alignment "D " : Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to the area near Emma where it crosses over to State Highway 82. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to the Wingo Junction area and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen. Alignment "E " : Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to the Sutank river crossing near State Highway 133 before Carbondale. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to the Wingo Junction area and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen. WHEREAS, on December 18, 1998, after several months of technical review and study, the citizen task forces recommended to the CIS Policy Committee that the following "Build" alternative be carried forward in the study with the "No- Build" and "Improved Bus /TSM" alternatives: 1. Build Technology: Rail 2. Build Alignment: Alignment "C" with a crossing at the Brush Creek area. 3. Build Station Locations: West Glenwood Springs, Glenwood Springs, State Highway 133, Downtown Carbondale, Willits area, Midland Avenue, Brush Creek Road. 4. Build Propulsion options: Diesel, gasoline, hydrogen internal combustion, electric (battery), electric (overhead catenary), electric (hybrid), liquid propane gas, and natural gas. The CIS Policy Committee voted to accept the citizen task force recommendation with the condition that a decision on the crossing in the upper valley was to be deferred until both alignments and crossing could be visited in the field on January 6, 1999. The RFRHA Board accepted and approved the CIS Policy Committee's recommendation. WHEREAS, On January 6, 1999, the CIS Policy Committee voted to accept the Lower Gerbazdale crossing as a part of the preferred `Build" alternative. The Preferred Build Alternative will be vigorously compared against the "No- Build" alternative and the "Improved Bus /TSM" alternative as a part of the continuing CIS process. From these three alternatives a "Locally Preferred Alternative" will be selected and adopted by RFRHA no later than July 1, 1999. A full description of all three alternatives to be considered is attached as Exhibit "A ". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO: THAT the Board hereby acknowledges and endorses the three alternatives being carried forward as a part of the Roaring Fork Valley Transportation corridor Investment Study with the following comments and observations: 1. Eagle County has established a Level of Service C for the Eagle County Roadway System and Level of Service D for intersections. Where appropriate these requirements should be incorporated in the analysis. 2. Eagle County completed an extensive transportation planning effort which modeled traffic in the Roaring Fork Valley portion of Eagle County. The model confirmed significant trip generation in the Missouri Heights and El Jebel area. Any examination of the alternatives must address these areas thoroughly and examine opportunities for siting a transit station in the El Jebel area. 3. Any assessment of alternatives should consider transportation ridership opportunities to and from the Eagle River Valley portion of Eagle County. THAT the Board finds, determines and declares that this Resolution is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado. 11 MOVED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of the Countysf Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held th day of J4 j2 W 1999. ATTEST: COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, By and Through Its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS �Lo K/'t' , By: a'La,v,Y-- Clerk to the Board of Johnnette Phillips County Commissioners C49IT- o $Ffi1 1;4 Tom C. Stone Jai,vi'es E. John: Commissioner Commissioner -Q seconded adoption of the foregoing resolution. The roll having been called, the vote was as follows: Commissioner Tom C. Stone Commissioner Johnnette Phillips — a,(&o Commissioner James E. Johnson, Jr. This Resolution passed by C -� vote of the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado.