Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.cclc.ag.07022008COMMERCIAL CORE & LODGING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 130 S. GALENA SISTER CITIES MEETING ROOM JULY 2, 2008 8:30 A.M. 8:30 I. Roll call and approval of June 18th minutes II. Public Comments not on the agenda (please limit your comments to 3 minutes) III. Commissioner Comments 8:30 IV. Pitkin County presentation -Road and upcoming improvements of the airport and water quality. Power point presentation. 9:15 V. Bus Rapid Transit - RFTA presentation 9:30 VI Approval of Dish Aspen mall lease G- ~~ ~,. ^~' C n ~~ n ~, f y W c ffA I~ Q J n U J O ^n L S Page 1 of 2 Kathy Strickland _. _. From: Jim Considine Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:35 PM To: Kathy Strickland Cc: John Sobieralski Subject: RE: Y-5 Hi Kathy, The "story' re "free" public wireless Internet access in the core is as follows: • The concept of free wi-fi access in the core was first introduced to us as a way to increase dwell time in the downtown. • In roughly the same time period the State of Colorado passed Senate Bill 152 which prohibited municipalities from providing Internet services in direct competition with the private sector unless the provision of these services was approved through a citizen vote. • Also, at this time the City was approached by two vendors who made overtures to the City that they were willing to provide a municipal wireless service "on their dime". One of these providers was CenturyTel who was doing a wireless system in Vail. • In early 2007, the City issued a Request for Information (RFI) that was intended to gauge actual interest in providing aCounty-wide wireless system that had high speed wireless services for commercial customers, City and County departments, and Public Safety. One of the requested features of the commercial component was free but limited access for the Public in designated locations. • In general, the results of the RFI were very disappointing for the following reasons: o No vendor stepped up and offered to provide a wireless network "on their dime". In a short period of time, the vendors who had made "promises", found that a good business model did not exist and suggested plans that would have required a significant up-front investment by the City and County. o One of the facts that emerged during the RFI process was the significant investment that would be required to implement the required infrastructure for ahigh-speed wireless network. Wireless access point density was specified at 45 to 50 points per square mile. This required density made the provisioning of an effective system wireless system in the downtown core especially problematic due to lack of support infrastructure and the historic nature of the infrastructure that was available. • By mid 2007, the City and County had backed away from further considering a wireless system until such a time that the technology was in place that required a considerably less dense access point distribution. Currently, any rollout of wireless Internet access in the core is on hold. One possibility would be to approach a commercial provider to implement such a service. I suspect that this implementation would require a significant subsidy in order to make providing "free" public access a viable commercial venture. ' Hope this helps, 1im Jim Considine 6/26/2008 ~~~~ ~ Roaring Fork Transportation Authorit; Sylvia Cranmer & Kristin Kenyon -~~ ~~ Ragiond Bus Rapid Tran3il Project Rm~ snt New GARFIfLD COUNTY RFTA Service Area ~ RfTA Member ' • Nonmember' served by RFTA 'including unincorporated areas of each County 2008 Statistics ^ 4.6 million passengers ^ 3.6 million miles of service ^ 250 employees during peak winter season 70 Mile Region ^ 40 miles on SH 82 from Aspen to GWS ^ 30 miles on I-70 from GWS to Rifle EAGLE COUNTY ~ITKIN CDUNTY Snowmen vuuge ~ I~'iI'/~ Regional Bus Rapid Transit Project 1 S,SOO,000 ;,aoo,ooo a 3,300,000 s a ~ z,zoo,ooo 0 F 4.4M in 2007 -y. I' 2008 projected demand ~ . i oo,cx~o o+ 1q~~ ~q^~ ~Q~~ ~~~ry ~`~°' ~q~" ~~~ ~`~'~ ti~~ ~~~ ~~"b ~°~~ ti~~ very ti~A ti~b ti~~ Make the transit trip faster ~ "~~ ~~~` Address system capacity issues, projected _.~'' population and traffic congestion increases ~ ; Make the transit trip more attractive to the choice rider Assist in reducing auto co~agesti©~ ~r~d ~ related global warming facte~a~s ~~ Reduce energy dependency: ``~ '`'.. . ;:. Promote transit-oriented land use policy ,~ ~ . ~~ .. ,~ r'~ . ~. , ~~ Bgpwd Bm Bapitl innsit P.ojM 2 75 ,,, ~o Lim{tedstops6 ^yRT TOtdl Reduced Dwell 6b Time Nine within 5 E i~~,inutes of ~~ E ss _ _ - - a~-,: > No diversion ~ 60 Y •°- 16 Signal ~ priordy, 40 queue e..:yr ~~, sfh r.i>w jumpers. ~.,YI-c•.-M station ~ -____ access -. ~- Local BRr Goal Auto ^ Running Time at Free Speed ^ Di~rsions from SR 82 (Basalt, EJ) ^ Traffic Signals and Congestion ^ Stops (Dwells +Accel + Decel) ~~ aa9ional sus Rapid Transit Projoct Scaled BRT Vision to fit available revenues and implement in stages ^ Existing - no growth in services (not realistic given demand and growth) ^ Likely trend -minor expansion in peak hour services ^ BRT Vision -Estimated capital cost not implementable given realistic funding limitations ^ BRT Lite or Phase 1 BRT - reduced from Full BRT to meet realistic funding constraints BRT Vision a Existing (Status Quo) 3 Service Plans: Core and Peak hour Plans with new BRT service (utilizes SH 82 Bus/HOV lanes, new Aspen bus lanes, and queue lanes for half of project length) Transit Priority (bypass lanes and signal priority at 8 intersections) ITS and Real Time Information Station and stop improvements New buses Organizational capacity increases -more drivers, mechanics, staff, housing, new Maintenance Facility (locally funded) ~~ Rerjiaul Bvs gap~tl Transit Rbjeci CORE -INITIAL BRT (2013) MaH nm.. Snowmass ..I..,.Y Owa CrwM RO Aspen ~ elw ROafi l CluMauu d ~~g" ~ ~ ~~ t..~,n.eb.. Basalt ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ,~,~ ~ Q slnpM Servlu stop O MultlpN Servlp Stop ~ ~ Llmlted Servlca BR7 Core Servks• ~ AapenCarboMala Loul•' ~ AatxnSnowmass Vllkgs Local ~ Carbondale-RMe LocaF' aaaP BRT and Loul Stop ame Local Stop Only Rifle 41MbR PaN b .~ (~ RRN vaa Q conommoo Silt ~ p vx.nw« Q sin coop Carbondale New Castle tMInL 1]] ~ Nw PIR Glenwood °""""n'" ~.nrl "'°"'""" Springs a~ ,# b$w.~ ~~a a~ a ~ ~~m ~~ ~ a~~~ ~~ o i y a:~ EI Jebel 4 INITIAL BRT (2017) a., vul.a. NNI C Snowmass Nlar fuwny OW CrNk Rd Aspen aw. ReerF ~. sS p pp S gg • 6 ~ a~ ~ ` N..eew as awnow. or ~~~ $ ~ ~~ u.el~.l.aew Basalt ~a Y3 4 ~~ (~ 6 ~ _ -INITIAL BRT (2013 & 2017) Snowmass j Aspen ~s ~ m ~` ~ Y ~r may., 0 Single Service Stop Q Mutdpla Service Stop ... Llmitad Sarvlu BRT Core Service' ~ AspemCarbandale Local /lapensrlOWmaaL ~ Village Local ~ Car6ondala-RNIe Local aN- BRT and Local Stop seep Local Stop Only 'NO w....,U w kM,.,nl.p unlw Rifle 4 """~"' ~S ,trWm 1 U Rill, P/R 1 6 e«.~.ooa Sllt ~ p Fx,ros,. D an coop 4 fpn 6IINn Carbondale New Castle a m wl ~ N,w PaR o Pool w ar..e. Glenwood NNWPw, of GN:""'" a""'"P`" "' rings Sp eee.ra.er y1 y )f S )ae p ~ ~ pCr ~ iti j OS O~{ F ~r b~ ? 4Q9~ ~S~ ~C 1 p 3 {' ~ ~ ~ y~ pq EI Jebel a~ Rifle Y RMM PaR tttt~Carbondale-Basalt Umi[ed ~ Snowmass Direct Express $ Cottoiiooe ~ Express P8R Sarvlce ~ Flr,hou. ~a~ 0 single Servlee scup Q Multiple Service Stop ... Llmitad Sarvlce ~...c~ Glsnwood Direct Express ~ Rule-0lenwood Limited Slit fYl Deep NuAOwaotl O 4 em a N.M New Castle Rw« v,uy Ran 0 M,w Paa d Carbondale {~ w owewoo Peel Q.: ve Glenwood i~ Basalt C.bonMY P6R ° r n g S p i s ~ ~ ' ,,,„,ewe ~ yvv ,,[~ / ~ (y p(y (~ yy,~ K ys i~ u ' . ~ . . ~iWJIp.. ~... ? al~sr~..... ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ W ~ . J i Y7 a y ~?i` ~~ EI Jebel ~~ 5 Location • Existing (2007) . • Likely Trend (2017) •- BRT Phase 1(2017) •. Full BRT (unconstrained) CORE SERVICE HOURS (OFF PEAK) EI Jebel/Basalt Upvalley BRT and Express buses 3 3 6 9 Locals 6 6 6 9 CarbondalelGlenwood Upvalley BRT and Express buses 0 0 6 9 Locals 6 6 6 9 PEAK HOUR PERIOD EI Jebel/Basalt Upvalley BRT and Express buses 27 3 I 37 74 Locals 5 5 6 14 CarbondalelGlenwood Upvalley BRT and Express buses 10-15 13-18 22-27 45-62 Locals 3-5 3-5 6 9-14 Note: This chart shows 25,000 projected ridership for 20,000 FULL BRT that is unconstrained 15,000 and assumes signif cant additional 10,000 parking supply is provided at all 5,000 stations Weekday Passenger Trips ~~ Regional &n Rapid Tnnvil PropN 2006 2025 BRT Utilize Bus/HOV Lanes and Bus Lanes Create queue bypass and signal upgrades at eight intersections CADIAVL, APC and Fare systems Close coordination with CDOT - u -~-, ~ ,' • ;~~ ~ BUS ,w-~, PRIORItY - .~ o ~_ - - _ .... y _ SIGNAL i New shelters, fare machines and real time at all stations Additional improvements at select locations (see spreadsheet for details) Facility improvements in Glenwood and along Hogback to be funded locally 111 ~~ -~~ _ ~~ ~lil~' Il~i~l l vela a.,, a~~ ..~a~ Our BRT service will be FAST, FUN and FREQUENT Fast: The velociraptor was the fastest of the land dinosaurs. Velocity is a measure of speed. Also, "veloce" is the Italian word for "in a rapid manner." Fun: The use of a dinosaur on a bus is attention-grabbing and not the expected choice. The velociraptor is familiar from the movie "Jurassic Park." Frequent: VelociRFTA embraces the current brand in a humorous way using a play on words (RFTA/raptor). ~~ 1leaional Bua Raoid irvnait Pro:wre Capital Costs ($$ in year of expenditure} ^ Federal VSS project = $44M ^ Regional project = $63M (includes additional projects to be funded locally, such as maintenance facility, Gwd/Hogback station improvements) Operating costs=$177M ($34M additional to $ 143M existing) RFTA Board examined various financing scenarios and decided on 4/10 scenario for Nov 2008 election to cover BRT Phase I Non-members being approached; Silt agreed to add RTA membership question to Nov ballot Assumes all existing jurisdictions up by 4/10% Assumes a FTA Very Small Starts grant of $22M from 2010 through 2017 RFTA solvent through 2020 and longer if new members join I~~r/~ i~ Megeonal Bus Aapid Travail Project Rtltin Gounty 0.5%transt tax 0 41 $ 3,479,552 0.41 $ 3 479,552 $ - Rfldn County 1.0%transt tax 0.48 3,932.207 0.48 3,932,207 - AspenRfAtaot-naw 0.0 - 0.4 2,189,061 2.789,061 9towmess Nllaga R7A tax-new 0.0 - 0.4 479.948 479,949 Rtldn County R7A tar-new 0.0 - 0.4 479,600 479,800 Eagla County 0.5%Iranet tex 0.5 356.244 0.5 356,244 - FagleCounty0.2%RfAtex 0.2 42,902 0.8 728.706 85,801 Glenwood firings 0.8%RfA Tm 0.8 2,887,401 1.0 4,479,002 1,791,801 Basalt 0.4%RfA Tax 0.9 523,902 1.3 1,047,804 523.902 Carbondale 0.7%RfA Tax 0.6 781,512 1.0 1,269,236 507,891 New Castle 0.4% RfA Tae 0.4 128,629 0.6 253.257 126,629 Subtotal S 11,910,379 $ 18,094,818 S 6,181,440 9tt 0.0 - 0.4 56,1411 56,146 Other new Garfield Ce jurisdciions 0.0 - 0.4 1,994,507 1,994507 Total $ 11,910,379 S 20,145,472 S 8,235,093 If Silt elects to become a RFTA member, incremental annual revenue = 56,2~O,566 Requires Carbondale to forego existing I I1O percent RTA tax rebate ~~ Rr.9~ona1 Sus Rapid Transit Prviect Information gathering/Purpose and Need Scoping and outreach activities: ^ 6 public open houses in Fall 2007 ^ presentations to all chambers in region ^ presentation to all elected boards in region ^ fact sheets, newspaper ads, spots on tv, radio ^ project website (www.rftabrt.com) ^ 4 Stakeholder Committee meetings • 3 public open houses in Spring 2008 Prepared BRT Service Plan and BRT Facilities Plan Prepared cost estimates and funding plan Project Branding - VelociRFTA ~~ RegMnal Bue Rap~4 Trnnart Rotect 9 Work on Federal Small Starts grant application (Summer 2008) NEPA Documentation -Documented Cat Ex (2008-09) Request official entry into Project Development from FTA Continue public and agency outreach activities Ask local voters to increase sales taxes for additional local funds (November 2008) ~~ Ra9ional Rua flap.d Transit Piolact 10 r CHART 1 13K I Nnase 1 Nrolect uescr(ption & ,yssumpuons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L Constrained 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 BRT 8 Express Buses 27 37 Local Buses 5 6 Carbondale Up Valley BRT & Express Buses 15 ? Local Buses 5 Glenwood Springs Up Valley BRT ~ Express Buses 10 22 Local Buses 3 to 4 6 Hogback (Rife to Glenwood) BRT & Express Buses 0 1 $5.50 $6.80 Buttermilk Bus Stop Improvements 2011 $0.23 AAgC Bus Stop Improvements 2011 $0.23 Brush Creek Road Bus Stop Improvements 2011 $5.79 Basalt Land 2010 $1.10 Basalt Stations/Surface Parking 2012 $2.67 Willits Stations 2010 $2.20 EI Jebel Stations/Road Realignment 2012 $3.96 EI Jebel Surface Parking 2013 $1.60 Carbondale Bus Stop Improvements 2011 $0.87 Roaring Fork Market Place Stations/Ped. Walkway 2011 $5.20 Downtown Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2013 $0.64 Courthouse Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.61 West Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2014 $0.67 New Castle Park & Ride paving/Bus Stops 2010 $0.50 Expansion (Land Acquisition I 20101 $1.65 CHART 2 BRT Phase 1 Project Description & Assumptions - No r ~ H runam 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 Phase 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 BRT 8 Express Buses 2r sr Local Buses 5 6 Carbondale Up Valley BRT & Express Buses Local Buses 15 5 27 6 Glenwood Springs Up Valley BRT & Express Buses 10 22 Local Buses 3 to 4 6 Hogback (Rife to Glenwood) BRT 8 Express Buses 0 1 $5.50 Priority $6.80 Buttermilk Bus Stop Improvements 2D10 $0.22 AAgC Bus Stop Improvements 2010 $0.23 Brush Creek Road Bus Stop Improvements 2011 $0.23 Basalt Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.24 Willits Stations 2010 $1.03 EI Jebel Stations 2012 $1.20 Carbondale Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.35 Roaring Fork Market Place Bus Stop Improvements 2010 $0.22 Downtown Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.24 Courthouse Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.24 West Glenwood Springs Bus Stop Improvements 2012 $0.24 New Castle Park & Ride paving 2010 $0.33 Expansion (Land Acquisition I 20091 $1.58 FAST, FUN, FREQUENT: RFTA's plan for the future --_`_. What is the Regional Bus Rapid Transit Project, and why is it needed? ~'- he goal of this project is to improve RFTA's operations and facilities to be faster, more convenient, and more comfortable. Equally important is adding capacity to RFTA's services to accommodate the increased demand occurring today and expected to continue. In 2003, RFTA completed the Corridor Investment Study (CIS). This comprehensive regional planning document recommended BRT as the most economically feasible alternative to help meet transit demand and mitigate traffic congestion, both of which are projected to increase in the future. What would the first phase o f BRT cost, and what would it include? ver the last year, RFTA completed the "Project Development" phase, which included identifying the elements and estimating the costs of Phase I BRT. Phase I represents a majority of the projects included in the full BRT vision for RFTA, with other projects to be implemented as funds become available. Cost, Millions (in year of Capital Investment* expenditure) New Buses $ 9.40 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 5.50 Transit Priority 6.80 Stations (Aspen to Hogback) 28.79 Maintenance Facility Expansion 10.75 Total, regional project (Phase I) ** $61.24 x More detail about envisioned improvements and locations is available at www.rftabrt.eom ** Of this total, RFTA is hopeful that approximately $20-25 million will come from Federal grants. The rest would come from local sources (see detail, page 3). RFTA's annual operating costs (staffing, fuel, and main- tenance) associated with BRT will be notably greater in the future (a roughly 25% increase over existing). 30 years of RFTA ridership growth 5.500,000 d 4..~o,oao I ~. 3,300,000 W D J z.2ao,ooo a ~,~oo,ooo Phase I projects include: • substantially increased bus services; • technological advances including real-time information and transit priority signals and shoulders at congested intersections; • new shelters, fare machines, and real-time passenger information at all BRT stations; and • additional facility improvements to be funded locally. ~~~/08 0 ~~^6 ~.~~~ ~.~~ s°j°~ ~~~ ~.~~ ^0~ ~^~ ~.`~'~.° ~.~~ ti~ ~N ~°~ tic tic tic The Evolution of Phase 1 BRT How did we get here? he vision for BRT was origi- ~' Wally identified in the CIS at a conceptual level. It did not include transit improvements within the city limits of Aspen as they were covered by the planning process for the Entrance to Aspen project. Project Development started in 2007 after the RFTA Board of Directors adopted the BRT implementation vision. Details were specified and costs were updated during Project Development for the full range of projects and equipment required to implement the vision. The capital cost of the full vision was estimated at $180-190 million, an amount that is infeasible given present and likely near-term sources of revenue. Implementing the vision in phases, as revenues become available, provides a realistic approach to making substantial improvements while maintaining RFTA's solvency. Phase I BRT includes a subset of elements from the full BRT vision that will greatly improve service while keeping up with anticipated growth. How will Phase 1 BRT be different than typical bus service improvements? As in past years, RFTA can continue to add additional bus runs at certain times to meet increased demand as funds are available. This is referred to as the "Likely Trend" approach. However, BRT Phase I represents a more systematic and comprehensive series of improvements focused on making transit more convenient and comfortable. Most importantly, instead of a few additional bus times added in peak commuter hours, BRT Phase I will add an entire new layer of express service operating throughout the entire day that is limited to select stops in each SH 82 comunity. Service plans are the "backbone" of BRT, and form the foundation for station, park & ride, and bus stop design and location, as well as transit priority improvements. Our goal is to provide service that delivers pas- sengers to their destinations within a similar timeframe to that of a private vehicle. The BRT Core and Peak Service Plan maps (on inserted page ar right) show stops and peak travel times for BRT. Another layer of Express services would be added during peak commuter hours to supplement BRT and local services. Headways would be roughly double that of existing service throughout the day, and three times that of existing service during peak periods (6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 to 6:30 p.m.). a N ~ ~ ~ a ~ c O m 'o 'm' a e '-" ~ ~ t a m ~ ~ U LL to tD Z N U d Z h "' ~ ~ •V C ~ ~ ~ ~ O L ~ N v °' .~ 3 c ~ p 00 G O ?; V O ~ L ro . ~ b~D L a. u ~° ~ C ~ L 0 ~y ~ c ~ • rr V/ ~ ~ ~ 0 nl O ; c ~ N N ~ m 0 v a'~ ~ H ~ iJ ~ U U L 0 ~ L L ~ O r o H N s ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ • N N J v _v Q. O > ~ ~0, J p Q H w ~ d ~ N '~ w C t0 to G> >, 'c V 2 V ~ p~ ~ ~ Q= y R d ~~ d 10 C J l0 ~ !~ a m U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~° = N ~ J m Q Q> U m J w v ~ ~ o ~' O O ~`' O a~ O ~ z~ ~ NZ J ~ ~. C1 L U m a 0 3 C M c A a m > ~ ~ ~ o ' ; E m ~ E c ~ V U V !~"~"j ~ +$4Nd S ~ Q (/~ 1S rNS~ yoj~ ~ ~ C ~S 4~t ~ O~ B la~l W V ~ uupo dl b /~ A ~ ~4h0 ,~~~, ua~~ u ~~,rs•:~~mes ps b 4 ~~~ eul~eo ~~d le4 A ~ue~ a a'OSa a~Ie~ ~'S U~'BVte~ ~ ~agPps ~ 'agar ~~ ~ ~Sd/89i . ~ / /M W N M~ W ~ 9 Y N m O Q: V G O ~ O1 m b ; C G O L V N C W m U ti 3 ~ m y ~ m '~ V ~ `~ a "$~ m N N ~ ~ ~/Nyro u~l'~1uq ~~8 O ~ ~ 3 ~ 4a 9r°yAO ~~lo~sn Jho a^v asb O ~ ~ ~ ~a~ 4 1 ~,~ ~e' ~/ v~ ~ Q jS 4te 'Y+ed ~ae'JSV?y ~f ~ ~egd Q d,{~A~ 40,~~4^r u '~'e'9/~ ~4b 0'4 a~~01 oege9 (sla ~d //~sp~ e~e8 ~~~ O S~/,ry p4$`MO 1/pse~ vo,~~n H d/y~ +_ agp~Q'~ MoosS/O aee~lr^ u ~S b sJ% ~ulu,,Nl ~iaa,,~ ~p'aM ~ ~b/O~ao~, ~~S 8y ~8b s a a c O w ' a c ' o ~ a m o ~ o V ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ to t co 2 ~ U ~~l~elll~ns O O O O 'O O.~ ~r~r.'T O ~_ I.f. 1 O O ~ ~ Gl ~ N ~ a ~ N ~. C ~ C V 'i ~ ~ . `~ {L ~ 2 / N ~ L M ~ ~ v ~ ~i 0 0 _ ~ ~ O a ~ ~ N ni ~ ~ o ~ v N p ~ a m m ~ ~ ~. 3 ~ s ao a~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ u ~ ~ L v ~ v ~> C N °o L ~.N ~, ~° .Y O~ XaX a .X ~ 1 W ~ tip- y Q1 X11 ~ .... ~ 4= /~W O ~ 0 ~ d C ii w. D) ~ !~. L ~ O A ~ d ~ w ~ '~ ~ i5 O art ~ O v~ u O «+ 'v Cl v d ~ ~ .E .° m C~ ~ H N ~ a a ° a x ~ r ~ ! E x W ~ _ r N W «. J J .,, V d v V ~ O ~ H ~ y ~ d ~ 'z o o m o oc ~ ~ Q/ ~n ~o c o ~ d e° ~ a H a~ a w; 3 ~? ~ E m C C1 t = ~ : 7 C d p p G. w o . U ~ ~ U1 ~ ~ V ~ O O ^ ~+ ,~,, O N V, S~VUb b ~ ~g yes[ ~pM4a/O C ~ ~ L ~ eae d ~ B 1e~'e Z ~ C7 V3 ad ` ~ ' ~~~ O~ ~A,~ ~~ hpJ/~w~ '~. O ~ O- - ~ ' ur ~ ~ ° _ r ~ ~ ~ ® E~', 3 C m a ~ a ~j. _ 0 "~ y ~ ~ ~ ° aQ~' ~ ~ 1 , `m a ~ ~ a U , ~ 1 A ~ ~Ye~ eh~S ~ ~.: , ~ ~ 3 ~eepe8 '~ /a ~ qe (~ V p /~ ~ ;' ~ ,° 4 ~$d~ega ~ r srq/~ '~ W ~o f'~ ~ MeB~ lo4 ~. ~ ! ~e hr `eds ti ~q~~ 1,~g~~ b t0 m ~ ~ ah48~ ~ bi/°re a 8 F 4 ~ ~8~0 ~ 8e~ 4 ~ rJ$d M ~ p4S p~0 ~ ~8eiir a d ~ V ~~ ~ ~ 0 m ~~ ~ - _.~~~ Q ly~d ~~ JO ys~ N ~ a O O ~8b ~ ~ O ~~~w'B~JhB `~ 3 ~ ~ f /~ 0 ~ ~hp9apvh D J9 ~ ~+ q,~$ yJg j ~Op~Bw Q. ~ Q ~ wed oydeed d ~{ aghb What will it take to fund B~tT? mplementation of facilities and operations of a BRT system will require a large amount of new funds to likely come from a mix of sources, including: • additional local sales tax and /or visitor taxes federal "Small Starts" grant money public /private partnerships adding new member jurisdictions to RFTA Securing local funds is critical for two reasons. First, local funds are required to provide the match for Federal Small Starts grants, which can only be used for capital improvements. Second, additional local Funds will be needed to fund increased operating costs associated with BRT. To secure the additional local funds, the RFTA Board of Directors will be asking voters in all member jurisdic- tions to increase their existing sales/use tax contributions by four-tenths of one percent, as shown in the table below. This increase is equivalent to four cents on every ten dollars. This amount was chosen because it represents the anlount necessary to cover services un- der the Likely Trend scenario, as well as fund Phase I BRT (assuming a Federal grant is secured). Silt, currently not a RFTA member, will ask its voters if they wish to join RFTA this November. «« If Silt elects to become a RF7;4 mencber at 4/lOths of l °rb, incremental annual revenue would then total $6,240,586 What .are the next. steps to implement BRT? grant application • Local election for increased sales/use tax June-Dec 2008 of project elements • Conduct environmental clearance, NEPA documentation • Implement real-time technology with GPS bus fleet and maintenance facility expansion Construct BRT stations and transit priority improvements • Increase RFTA staffing * Carbaulale sales tax for RFTA will actually only increase by 3/IOths, because it is currently at 7/IOths, but the Tawn of Carbondale hits agreed to forego iu existing 1/10th rebate from RFTA, thus Cringing the Towns incremental contribution to a total of 4/IOths. • Submit Federal "Small Starts" Undertake detailed engineering Implement BRT services, with Introducing velociRFTA The new brand for RFTA's BRT service V@~OCI RiT/1 F115T. FUN. FREQUENT. randing helps the public differentiate new BRT services from existing local services. The velociRFTA logo links BRT with being fast, fun, and frequent in the following ways: FAST ...Thc velociraptor was the fastest of the land dinosaurs. Velocity is a measure of speed. Also, "veloce" is the Italian word for "in a rapid manner." FUN ...The use of a dinosaur on a bus isattention-grabbing and not the expected choice. The velociraptor is familiar from the movie "Jurassic Park." FREQUENT ...velociRFTA embraces the curent brand in a humorous way using a play on words (RFTA/raptor). Thank you for participating! ` vet the last year, RFTA held two series of public meetings and open houses in communities along SH 82 and I-70 to ask for input on developing the BRT system. We also held a series of stakeholder meetings and made presentations to elected officials and other interest groups. We received valuable input from everyone who participated, and we sincerely appreciate the time and thought behind the comments and information you provided. We heard you, and we believe your ideas and concerns are reflected in the new service plans and planned improve- ments for BRT. Your input will continue to be important to the implementation of BRT, and we encourage you to stay in touch! E-mail comments & questions: brt@rfta.eom More info: 1NW1N.r ftabrt.COR1