HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.special.202007131
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
July 13, 2020
5:00 PM, City Council Chambers
WEBEX
Go to: www.webex.com Click "Join" at the top right-hand corner
Enter Meeting Number 126 227 0623
Password provided 81611
Click "Join Meeting"
OR
Join by phone
Call: 1720-650-7664
Meeting number (access code): 126 227 0623
Meeting password: 81611
I.CALL TO ORDER
II.ROLL CALL
ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) MEETING PREPARATION
AND STRATEGIC PLAN
EOTC 2020 Strategic Plan
III.ADJOURN
1
Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC)
Thursday, July 16, 2020 - 4:00pm
Location – Town of Snowmass Village; Host and Chair – Town of Snowmass Village
EOTC Mission: Work collectively to reduce and/or manage the volume of vehicles on the road system
and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-range strategy that will ensure
a convenient and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.
Summary of State Statute and Ballot Requirements: The 0.5% County Transit Sales and Use Tax
shall be used for the purpose of financing, constructing, operating and managing a public, fixed route
mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork Valley.
Public Comment Instructions:
The meeting can be viewed and comments made live via the link and email address below. Please click
the link below to watch the meeting live: https://www.tosv.com/193/Town-Meetings . Email address to
submit comments: livecomment@tosv.com. If you wish to attend the meeting, members of the public
are welcome at Snowmass Village Town Hall but must wear a mask inside the building and maintain 6’
of social distance.
____________________________________________________________________________________
I. 4:00 - 4:10 PUBLIC COMMENT
(Comments limited to three minutes per person)
II.4:10 - 4:20 EOTC COMMITTEE MEMBER UPDATES
III.4:20 – 5:00 EOTC STRATEGIC PLAN
David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator
Decision Needed: Adoption of 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan
(If not otherwise adopted during EOTC Prep Meetings)
IV.5:00 – 6.30 EOTC COMPREHENSIVE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator
Decision Needed: Review and Consider Adoption of Updated CVTP
V. 6:30 – 6:45 UPDATES-INFORMATION ONLY
1
Page 9
Page 28
Page 43
2
A. TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATOR UPDATES
1. 2020 EOTC Work Plan Review
2.Integrated Mobility Study (IMS), Phase 1
3.Dynamic Message Sign (DMS)
4.EOTC Budget Update
5.Centralized EOTC Webpage
*Next regular meeting is October 29, 2020 – City of Aspen to Host & Chair
2 3
ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC)
AGREEMENTS & DECISIONS REACHED
AT THE APRIL 30, 2020 MEETING
Location – Pitkin County / Virtual
Pitkin County - Host & Chair
Elected Officials in Attendance:
Aspen – 5 Pitkin County - 5 Snowmass - 4
Torre Kelly McNicholas Kury Markey Butler
Ward Hauenstein Steve Child Bill Madsen
Skippy Mesirow George Newman Alyssa Shenk
Ann Mullins Patti Clapper Bob Sirkus
Rachael Richards Greg Poschman
Absent: Tom Goode
______________________________________________________________________________
Agreements & Decisions Reached
PUBLIC COMMENT
Toni Kronberg provided public comment supporting a gondola along Highway 82 to provide an
alternative means of transportation into Aspen and Snowmass. Ms. Kronberg also made a request
of the EOTC to provide $40,000 in funding to fund a gondola feasibility study.
COMMITTEE MEMBER UPDATES
Greg Poschman, Pitkin County Commissioner, provided an update on increasing Highway 82
traffic as construction activity is allowed to return to normal operations following the COVID-19
shutdown.
George Newman, Pitkin County Commissioner, provided an update on RFTA operations
potentially moving from Phase 3 to Phase 4 levels of service following the reductions in service
in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Phase 4 is expected to begin to return RFTA services to
normal.
ACTION ITEMS
Brush Creek Park and Ride – 70% Design Review (FHWA FLAP grant)
David Pesnichak - Transportation Administrator
3 4
Mr. Pesnichak provided updates on the 70% plan development. These updates included an
update on the budget, plan development timeframe, and potential construction delays. In
addition, Mr. Pesnichak reviewed the components of the 70% plans, which are substantively
similar to those reviewed at 30% plans in 2019.
It was explained that at FLAP grant submittal and 30% plans review, the budget for the overall
project was anticipated to be $4.2 million with $2 million coming from the EOTC and $2.2
million coming from the FHWA FLAP grant. Following development of the plans to 70%, the
cost estimate increased to $6.5 million. Staff is working with the design team to find ways to
bring the cost down while continuing to look for funding sources including potential COVID-19
stimulus and CMAQ funds. Any additional funding from the EOTC would be requested at the
annual EOTC budget meeting in October.
The overall review timeframe was provided to the Committee, which includes a Location and
Extent review with the Pitkin County Planning Commission in the summer of 2020, 95% plan
development by August 2020 and having the project shovel ready by fall 2020.
A potential construction delay from 2021 to 2022 was reviewed. This possible construction delay
is due to delays in the FHWA FLAP multi-year budget and construction queue.
Mr. Pesnichak explained that staff is requesting Committee acceptance of a list of “options” for
the FLAP project, which are components of the project that are in addition to the base scope of
restrooms and associated well and septic, and paving of the recycled asphalt area and associated
lighting and landscaping. These “options” allow staff a degree of predictable flexibility to bring
the project to shovel readiness considering the budgetary constraints.
In addition, staff requested acceptance of the proposed 70% site plan with the possible extended
parking area. This site plan is to be the guideline as staff progress through 95% and 100%
engineering development.
Staff requested direction on two items:
1 - Accept the following priority of “options” for the FLAP project: 1) restroom and parking area
cameras, 2) call boxes, 3) in pavement snowmelt boiler, and 4) solar panels; and,
2 - Accept overall 70% FLAP and expanded parking site plan, and provide direction for staff to
work together to finalize the plans to 95% and 100%. Any additional funding requests from the
EOTC will be considered as appropriate.
A modification from the staff recommendation was requested to 1), above, moving solar panels
from number four to number one in the priority list. As a result, the modified and approved staff
direction is as follows:
1 - Accept the following priority of “options” for the FLAP project: 1) solar panels, 2) restroom
and parking area cameras, 3) call boxes, and 4) in pavement snowmelt boiler; and,
4 5
2 - Accept overall 70% FLAP and expanded parking site plan, and provide direction for staff to
work together to finalize the plans to 95% and 100%. Any additional funding requests from the
EOTC will be considered as appropriate.
The EOTC conducted a vote by jurisdiction. The vote was as follows:
Pitkin County: 5-0
Town of Snowmass Village: 4-0
City of Aspen: 5-0
Decisions Reached:
●FLAP Project “Options”: Accepted with modification to the staff recommendation
moving solar panels from priority number 4 to number 1.
●70% FLAP and Extended Parking Site Plan: Accepted as proposed.
Brush Creek Park and Ride – Near-Term Vision
David Pesnichak - Transportation Administrator
Mr. Pesnichak explained that the near-term vision discussion is intended to be a brief
conversation of three of the key matters that affect the future of the Brush Creek Park and Ride.
The intent of the discussion is not to fully flesh out possible options or identify a staff
recommendation at this point, but rather to determine where the EOTC stands on these topics as
a whole in order to direct Staff on whether further research and discussion is warranted.
It was reviewed that the outcome from these conversations is generally anticipated to be the
following direction to staff from the three topics:
-Yes, move forward
Staff response: Pursue on the staff level to implement EOTC direction as soon as
possible.
-Yes, move forward within certain parameters (i.e. “yes, if…”)
Staff response: Pursue additional research and develop a staff recommendation that best
meets EOTC direction. This research and staff recommendation would come back to the
EOTC later for further discussion and direction.
- No, do not move forward (i.e. “hard stop”)
Staff response: Staff will not pursue this topic any further.
Long-Term Parking: Mr. Pesnichak provided context that long-term parking is currently defined
as any vehicle parked in the same space within the lot in excess of 24 hours. Per the 2005 IGA
that is still in force, “the purpose of the Park-and-ride Lot is to provide parking and shuttle
service for commuters, visitors, day skiers, special event attendees and others traveling to the
Town of Snowmass Village, Pitkin County, and/or the City of Aspen.” Instituting long-term
5 6
parking would require approval by the EOTC and written consent from CDOT. In addition, since
the charge to the EOTC is to support fixed route public transit, any implementation of long-term
parking would need to be designed to achieve that end.
A summary of comments provided during the meeting included the following:
- Require a time limit on any parking in excess of 24 hours, possibly 7 days or more.
- Limit the space where long-term parking can occur to a specific area, possibly the ‘extended’
parking area in the rear of the lot.
- Consider a fee and permit for parking in excess of 24 hours.
-Consider limitation on long-term parking during events.
- Do not allow camping in long-term parking area.
-Consider utilizing City of Aspen parking app to manage long-term parking and fee payments.
Direction Provided: Move forward considering the comments and parameters provided. Staff
will come back to the EOTC in a future meeting with a recommendation.
The EOTC conducted a vote by jurisdiction. The vote was as follows:
Pitkin County: 5-0
Town of Snowmass Village: 4-0
City of Aspen: 5-0
Small-Scale Commercial: Mr. Pesnichak provide context that small-scale commercial at the Park
and Ride has been periodically discussed as a way to encourage transit and carpool usage at the
facility. Small-scale commercial in this context has been generally considered to be food trucks
and /or farm stands.
Food trucks or farm stands have not been permitted at the Park and Ride to date since the
property is located outside the Aspen Urban Growth Boundary and as a result any commercial
activity is not contemplated within the Brush Creek Master Plan. In addition, the lease between
CDOT and the City of Aspen and RFTA does not permit any commercial without CDOT’s
written consent.
Mr. Pesnichak went on to explain that long-term the Brush Creek Master Plan and the CDOT
lease would need to be updated to allow commercial activity on the property. However, should
the Committee desire to conduct a short term experiment of small-scale commercial at the Park
and Ride, pursuing a Location and Extent review through Pitkin County could be an option if
there is a desire to test a food truck and/or farm stand before pursuing a permanent allowance for
the activity. While the probability of success of a Location and Extent application is currently
6 7
unknown, should the experimental commercial activity move forward then written authorization
from CDOT would still be necessary.
A summary of comments provided during the meeting included the following:
- Should be designed, placed and sized to best support RFTA transit and as support to Park and
Ride.
- After FLAP improvements are complete, consider allowing use of flex space adjacent to
restrooms.
-Try to minimize impact to parking.
-Desire for short-term, small experiment to see if demand exists and impact is positive for transit
riders and carpoolers.
-Concerns that any commercial use may not be compatible with the surrounding area and Park
and Ride facility.
- Need to have discussions related to land use code and comprehensive plan.
- Concerns that providing food at the Park and Ride could cause operational issues on buses (e.g.
spills).
Direction Provided: Pursue a short-term, one season experiment of small-scale commercial at
the Park and Ride comprised of one food truck and/or one farm stand to determine: 1) if the
activity will support transit ridership, 2) if demand exists for such services at this location, and
3) to examine if such activity is amicable to CDOT.
The EOTC conducted a vote by jurisdiction. The vote was as follows:
Pitkin County: 3-2
Town of Snowmass Village: 4-0
City of Aspen: 5-0
Flex Space / Information Booth: Mr. Pesnichak provided the background that at the June 2019
EOTC meeting, the decision was made to move forward with the “open” concept adjacent to the
new restroom facilities to be built as a part of the FLAP improvements. This space is intended to
be left open the majority of the time and available as a gathering area. Since a building would not
encumber it, the space could then be flexible to accommodate tents or tables during events that
require registration (e.g. running and cycling events), information (e.g. leaf peeping season at the
Maroon Bells), or security (e.g. X-Games).
At the meeting in June, there was a request for a greater conversation related to what this space
should become once the FLAP improvements are complete. The lack of time for a greater
7 8
conversation along with budgetary constraints led to the decision to go with the “open” concept
instead of a structure.
Staff provided that the EOTC has two primary near-term options: 1) continue with the “open”
concept design for several years after construction and get a sense for how it functions then
reevaluate, or 2) decide to place a structure in this space and provide direction to staff to identify
grants for this purpose.
A summary of comments provided during the meeting included the following:
- Consider with the small-scale commercial conversations to allow those activities in the flex
area.
- Look into electrical and tent tie downs within the flex area for events.
- Should small-scale commercial be successful and desirable at the Park and Ride, then consider
a permanent structure in the flex space in the future.
- Keep eyes out for funding partners for the building depending on its eventual use.
- Needs to be considered within the context of the land use code and comprehensive plan.
- Keep monitoring the space and usage at the Park and Ride to determine if enclosure would be
desirable following completion of the FLAP improvements.
Direction Provided: Do not pursue funding for an enclosure at this time. Continue with the
“open” concept design for several years after construction of FLAP improvements and get a
sense for how it functions then reevaluate.
The EOTC conducted a vote by jurisdiction. The vote was as follows:
Pitkin County: 5-0
Town of Snowmass Village: 4-0
City of Aspen: 5-0
UPDATES & FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Due to time constraints staff did not review the update items from the EOTC packet. Time was
made available for questions, comments and concerns on the updates, however none were
expressed.
8 9
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
EOTC MEETING DATE: July 16, 2020
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EOTC Strategic Plan
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator
ISSUE STATEMENT: Utilizing the information received from the EOTC retreat and accepted report
compiled by the retreat facilitator, the Transportation Administrator with vetting and feedback from the
EOTC staff and jurisdictional managers has drafted a strategic plan for EOTC consideration. In
accordance with the 2020 EOTC Work Plan, this draft Strategic Plan was to be reviewed by the EOTC at
the March 19, 2020 meeting, which was cancelled due to the COVID-19 outbreak. The July 16, 2020 and
the preceding preparation meetings are a rescheduling of the March 19 meeting intended to review the
proposed Strategic Plan. Each jurisdiction had provided preliminary feedback on the Plan in March
during the EOTC prep meetings.
Review and Adoption Note for July 16: Following the EOTC prep meetings in March with each
jurisdiction, there appeared to be a high level of agreement on the proposed Strategic Plan. In an effort to
move forward to a review of the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP) on July 16, the
preparation meetings with each jurisdiction will be set up to allow a vote approving the proposed
Strategic Plan, as drafted and attached to this memo. A resolution of approval is included with each
packet for the prep meetings for each jurisdiction to facilitate a vote for approval, if desired, ahead of the
July 16 EOTC meeting. Should any one of the EOTC jurisdictions wish to make changes to the attached
Plan or otherwise desire to have a full group discussion before voting on the Plan, time has been set aside
on the July 16 agenda for that conversation.
Regarding the attached Strategic Plan, updates have been made to the Plan from the comments received
during the prep meetings in March. An outline of the changes made based on the March comments are
described later in this memo.
BACKGROUND: As identified in the EOTC Work Plan for 2020, which was created from input
received at the 2019 retreat, the development of a strategic plan is the first step to update the EOTC
guiding documents and plans. These guiding documents and plans have not been updated since 1993. In
addition, this would be the EOTC’s first strategic plan. Below is an overview of the schedule from the
2020 EOTC Work Plan to update the EOTC’s working documents and plans. Note that due to COVID-
19, the March meeting was rescheduled to July 2020.
9 10
As shown in the graphic above, each effort builds upon each other starting with the high-level strategic
plan and coming together in a new budget framework that will evaluate and rank annual EOTC projects
and spending.
The strategic plan is intended to be a high-level guiding document that will be used to inform EOTC
direction in regards to decision making and governance, planning, the 1993 EOTC IGA, and budgeting.
Whereas the Strategic Plan is a high-level guiding document that will be used to inform overall EOTC
direction, the CVTP in step two utilizes the guidance from the Strategic Plan to identify the policy level
expenditure priorities for the EOTC in the coming years.
Whereas the strategic plan and CVTP generally identify who the EOTC is and where it wants to go, the
IGA and budget framework identify the organizational structure and budget tools to be used to get there.
Due to this relationship, it is important to first complete the strategic plan and CVTP update in order to
identify the correct organizational structure and budget tools.
This strategic plan is intended to be a living document and will continue to evolve over time. To this end,
since this will be the EOTC’s first strategic plan and there is limited time for review in 2020, the goal
leading up to the July 16 meeting is less to get to the ‘perfect’ plan and more to get to a mission
statement, vision statement, guiding principles, and key strategies that are agreeable as a starting point.
Through each step, the EOTC will utilize the strategic plan for guidance. Should issues arise that were not
adequately addressed or contemplated within the strategic plan, the EOTC will have the ability to circle
back at a future conversation to address those items. In general, the plan is expected to be reviewed and
updated as necessary, but no less than every 5 years.
As stated in the draft strategic plan (attachment 1), the purpose for this plan is as follows (See Section 4,
Page 11 of plan):
The EOTC Strategic Plan provides a framework to guide the EOTC’s decision-making,
work planning and budgeting. The Plan also includes the following: Statutory and ballot
requirements for the Transit Sales and Use Tax as well as the Mission, Vision, Guiding
Principles, and Key Strategies of the EOTC. The Guiding Principles in this Plan represent
the high-level deliverables that the EOTC strives to achieve throughout the Roaring Fork
We are Here →
10 11
Valley. The Plan also includes Key Strategies that define approaches the EOTC will utilize
to help realize the Guiding Principles. The Guiding Principles and Key Strategies inform
the annual EOTC Work Plan, which will act as the tactical actions of this Plan. Each of the
tasks completed in the annual Work Plan and money allocated by the EOTC will be
connected to the Strategic Plan. This Plan is intended to be reviewed at least every five
years and updated as necessary.
The Plan is broken into the following six sections:
1) An introduction to the EOTC, its regulatory and ballot requirements, and its history;
2) Where the EOTC is today;
3) The EOTC strengths, opportunities, and challenges as identified in the 2019 EOTC retreat;
4) How the Plan is to be used;
5) The mission, vision, guiding principles and key strategies of the EOTC; and
6) How the Plan is to be implemented.
Sections 1-3 as identified above should be familiar to the EOTC members as this material was reviewed
and discussed at the 2019 retreat. Section 3: EOTC strengths, opportunities, and challenges, is taken
directly from the final report accepted by the EOTC in October 2019 and is included within this Plan to
document the results of this discussion as a backdrop to Section 5: Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles,
and Key Strategies. Please see the explanation below regarding Section 5.
While Section 4, excerpted above, it outlines how the strategic plan is to be used while Section 6
specifically addresses how the Plan is to be implemented. This section states that:
Each year the EOTC shall adopt a work plan and budget for multiple upcoming years that
will act as the tactical actions for the implementation of this Strategic Plan. Each action
and expenditure made by the EOTC is to be connected to the promotion of the EOTC’s
Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies.
As Section 5: Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies is the heart of the document, this
section is more thoroughly explained below.
Section 5: Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies
(Page 12 of strategic plan, Attachment 1)
Mission Statement: The proposed mission statement within the draft plan updates the 2014 Mission
Statement with comments received from each jurisdiction in March, 2020 (see redline of updates later in
this memo). The original Mission Statement was adopted in 1992 and was updated in 2014. Both versions
of the Mission Statement remained substantively similar. For comparison purposes, the proposed, original
1992 and updated 2014 mission statements are as follows:
11 12
Proposed Mission Statement incorporating comments received in March, 2020:
Work collectively to reduce and manage the volume of vehicles on the road and parking
system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-range
strategy that will insure a convenient, equitable and efficient transportation system for the
Roaring Fork Valley.
Updated March 19, 2014:
Work collectively to reduce and/or manage the volume of vehicles on the road system and
continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-range strategy that
will insure a convenient and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.
From Joint Resolution 396, October 1992:
To work collectively to reduce and/or manage the volume of vehicles on the road system
and develop a comprehensive, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient and
efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.
Vision Statement: The proposed vision statement was drafted by Staff based on overarching values
expressed at the 2019 retreat in combination with the EOTC’s statutory and ballot measure requirements.
As can be seen in the proposed vision statement, these identified overarching values include:
sustainability, mobility, and the wellbeing and happiness of both residents and visitors.
The proposed Vision Statement is as follows:
We envision the Roaring Fork Valley as the embodiment of a sustainable transportation
system emphasizing mass transit and mobility that contributes to the happiness and
wellbeing of residents and visitors.
Guiding Principles and Key Strategies: Staff identified four major principle and strategy themes from the
2019 retreat, which are as follows:
- The three pillars of sustainability (environmental, economic, and social),
- Encouraging mode shift to support mass transit and mobility,
- Regional and cross-sector approach, and
- Communication and inter-governmental engagement.
These themes are broken out in the plan into guiding principles and key strategies. The guiding principles
in the plan are high-level deliverables that the EOTC strives to achieve while the key strategies define
approaches the EOTC will utilize to help work toward the guiding principles. The guiding principles and
the key strategies are then qualified with a short description.
12 13
The proposed Guiding Principles and Key Strategies are as follows:
Guiding Principles
• Environmental Sustainability
All projects will promote a balanced natural and built environment while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.
• Economic Sustainability
Efforts will strive to increase emergency and economic resiliency while
considering the financial, legal and physical practicality of each project.
• Social Sustainability
Encourage a top-line transportation experience for all residents and visitors while
striving to increase equity, proximity, reliability, and efficiency of the network to
meet the transportation needs of all people.
Key Strategies
• Multi-Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift
All decisions will support public mass transit and mobility. In addition, new
technologies that support mode shift away from private vehicles will be embraced.
• Regionalism and Cross-Sector Approach
All decisions will consider the needs of the whole Roaring Fork Valley as well as
the context of the greater regulatory and community environment, such as housing
and land use controls.
• Communication and Inter-Governmental Engagement
The EOTC will strive to communicate and engage with local stakeholders, citizens,
partner organizations, and other local and State and Federal government agencies
to support its Mission, Vision, and Guiding Principles and implement its Key
Strategies.
Update from March 2020
As many of you may recall, while the March 19 EOTC meeting was cancelled due to COVID-19, the prep
meetings prior to March 19 did occur. Feedback on the proposed Strategic Plan was garnered at these
meetings. As a refresher, below is a list of the feedback received at that time.
- Grammatical and readability corrections
Staff Response: The identified changes have been made to the proposed plan.
- Include clarification for the meaning of ‘equity’
Staff Response: A definition of ‘Equity’ widely used in transportation has been included on Page
12, as a note – “Equity refers to the fairness with which impacts (benefits and costs) are
distributed.”
13 14
- Recommendations for Mission Statement: Remove ‘and/or’ and replace with ‘and’, add ‘parking’, and
add ‘equity’.
Staff Response: The above recommendations have been made to the Mission Statement within
the attached draft. The specific changes are noted here in red – “Work collectively to reduce
and/or manage the volume of vehicles on the road and parking system and continue to develop
and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient,
equitable and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.”
BUDGETARY IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the attached 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – Proposed 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan
14 15
2020 STRATEGIC PLAN
ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC)
Final - Version March 2020
15
Attachment 1
16
2
16
Attachment 1
17
3
Contents
2020 Strategic Plan
Introduction Page 4
Where we are today Page 7
EOTC Strengths, Opportunities and Challenges Page 10
How this plan will be used Page 11
Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies Page 12
Implementation Page 13
17
Attachment 1
18
4
Introduction
2020 Strategic Plan
In 1990 the Colorado state legislature passed Colorado Revised Statute 29-2-103.5 that provides counties the
authority to levy sales and use taxes for the "for the purpose of financing, constructing, operating, or
maintaining a mass transportation system within the county." In November 1993, per the Colorado State
Statute, Pitkin County voters approved a 0.5% County Transit Sales and Use Tax for the purpose of financing,
constructing, operating and managing a mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork Valley.
In conjunction with the countywide ballot measure, Pitkin County, the Town of Snowmass Village and the
City of Aspen adopted a 1993 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) establishing the Elected Officials
Transportation Committee (EOTC), its structure, and further defining how the collected funds may be
allocated. The EOTC is therefore responsible for allocating the countywide 0.5% sales tax and a 0.5% use tax
funds in a manner that is consistent with State Statute, the 1993 ballot language and the IGA.
In addition, the IGA expanded upon the enabling legislation from State Statute and the ballot language by
adopting a Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP) as a means to guide future allocations. The IGA
includes:
Establishment of a Committee (i.e. Elected Officials Transportation Committee or EOTC) comprised of all
jurisdictions within the Transit Sales and Use Tax administration area, including Pitkin County, Town of
Snowmass Village, and the City of Aspen.
The EOTC is a recommending body only for expenditure of 0.5% Transit Sales and Use Tax.
That, for any EOTC action, all jurisdictions must have a majority vote to progress a recommendation.
That the only actions that must be approved (rather than recommended) are annual and project budgets.
Approval of annual and project budgets must be formally approved within each of the member
jurisdictions.
18
Attachment 1
19
5
Introduction
2020 Strategic Plan
Enabling Legislation Detail
C.R.S. 29-2-103.5 (Colorado Revised Statute)
provides that a county is authorized to levy a sales
and use tax "for the purpose of financing,
constructing, operating, or maintaining a mass
transportation system within the county." Local
jurisdictions "may enter into intergovernmental
agreements with any municipality or other
county ... for the purpose of providing mass
transportation services either within the county or
in a county in which the county mass
transportation system is permitted to operate."
Significant Ballot Initiatives Impacting the EOTC
1993 - The sales and use tax ballot measure further defined the purpose of the tax. Most significantly it limits
the purpose to “increasing and improving the public mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork
Valley” and requires that such mass transportation system improvements “be approved by the City of Aspen,
Pitkin County and the Town of Snowmass Village”.
2000 – Aspen, Snowmass Village, and Pitkin County residents vote to join the Roaring Fork Transportation
Authority and dedicate 48.131% of the 1986 Pitkin County-wide 1% mass transit tax and 48.04% of the 1993
Pitkin County-wide 0.5% mass transit tax to RFTA. The remainder of the 1% mass transit tax is allocated to
Aspen and Snowmass Village based on their proportional share of annual sales tax revenues to help support
their transit services. The remainder of the 0.5% mass transit tax was retained by the EOTC to fund
transportation projects and programs within the Roaring Fork Valley.
2004 – In order to secure additional funding for RFTA to improve transit and trails, voters in all existing RFTA
member jurisdictions including Pitkin County approved to increase their contribution to RFTA from
countywide Transit Sales Tax revenues. Per the 2004 ballot measure, the countywide contribution to RFTA
was increased from 48.04% to 81.04% of the 0.5% Transit Sales Tax. As a result, the remaining 18.96% of the
Transit Sales Tax collections and 100% of the Use Tax collections are available to the EOTC to fulfill the
purpose as outlined in the enabling legislation, ballot measure, as well as the IGA and Comprehensive Valley
Transportation Plan.
“Mass Transportation” is defined as “any system
which transports the general public by bus, rail, or
any other means of conveyance moving along
prescribed routes, except any railroad subject to
the federal "Railway Labor Act", 45 U.S.C. sec. 151
et seq”.
19
Attachment 1
20
6
Introduction
2020 Strategic Plan
1993 EOTC IGA Detail
The County, City and Town entered into an IGA on September 14, 1993. This IGA identifies that all three
entities must agree to expenditures and representatives from each jurisdiction are to meet regularly. This
requirement was incorporated into the IGA as a result of the ballot language.
In addition, this IGA adopts a Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP) to establish a framework for
a mass transportation strategy for “addressing mass transportation problems and issues in the Roaring Fork
Valley”, sets forth procedural steps to implement the Plan, and establishes a mutual understanding of a
process for funding the Plan and other mass transportation elements.
20
Attachment 1
21
7
Where We Are Today
2020 Strategic Plan
Historically, transit service has been a part of the Roaring Fork Valley since the mid-1970’s when the City of
Aspen ran fixed route in-city transit service and Pitkin County ran regional transit service as far down valley
as El Jebel. In 1983, the City of Aspen and Pitkin County merged their transit systems creating the Roaring
Fork Transit Agency. In 2000 the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) was established in its current
form when residents in Aspen, Snowmass Village, Pitkin County, Basalt, Eagle County, Carbondale and
Glenwood Springs voted to create RFTA. By 2018, RFTA had become the second largest transit agency in
Colorado and the largest rural transit agency in the nation with annual system ridership of 5.1 million
passenger trips spanning a 70-linear mile service area from Aspen to Rifle. Since it’s inception in 1993, the
EOTC has been a loyal supporter of RFTA. Supporting transit in the Roaring Fork Valley, and by extension
RFTA, remains central to the EOTC’s statutory, ballot, CVTP and IGA requirements.
21
Attachment 1
22
8
Where We Are Today
2020 Strategic Plan
In addition to its ardent support of RFTA, the EOTC has also made significant progress carrying out the
Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP) and supporting transit ridership in the 25+ years of the
Transit Use and Sales tax. Examples of the progress made to date include:
Participation in Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision (ROD)
Acquisition of the Denver Rio Grande right-of-way
Support for the creation of the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA)
Design and installation of the Highway 82 exclusive bus lanes
Design and construction support for the Maroon Creek Bridge and Roundabout
No-fare bus service between Aspen, Snowmass and Woody Creek
Ongoing support of RFTA
AABC pedestrian underpass
Basalt pedestrian underpass
Ongoing support for We-Cycle and X-Games bus service
Establishment of the 15-minute RFTA bus connections
Renovation of the Rubey Park bus station
Support for the purchase of RFTA Battery Electric Buses
Operation and improvement of the Brush Creek Park and Ride as well as the Dynamic Message
Sign (DMS) on Highway 82
The EOTC has demonstrated ongoing commitment to upper valley mobility with the establishment of the
Regional Transportation Administrator position in 2018. The Regional Transportation Administrator position
consolidates the administrative functions of the EOTC and provides additional staff resources that were not
previously available.
Credit: Rising Sun Photography 22
Attachment 1
23
9
The EOTC currently has two significant projects underway that have been considered for many years and are
supported by the CVTP. The two projects are: enhancements to the Brush Creek Park and Ride facility and
the Town of Snowmass Village Transit Center. While these two projects are still several years from
completion, they both continue to move forward with EOTC funds allocated in 2020 and 2022, respectively.
With progress made toward carrying out the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan, the EOTC is uniquely
situated to look to the future to address mobility in the Roaring Fork Valley. To that end, on August 7, 2019
the EOTC held a retreat with the following goals:
1.Establish a baseline understanding of the EOTC purpose, requirements, structure, funding and
operations;
2.Identify the strengths, opportunities and challenges facing the EOTC today, and
3.Create a priority list of themes, major topics, and projects to help guide the EOTC ’s next steps
and vision.
The collaborative discussions and direction amongst the EOTC members at the retreat have provided a
framework for the EOTC and staff to guide future decision-making as it looks ahead.
Based on the retreat, the top two priorities for the EOTC to focus initially on include: 1) EOTC governance and
decision-making; and 2) updating EOTC plans and governance documents. To achieve these priorities, the
EOTC agreed to develop a strategic plan as a part of their 2020 Work Plan.
The development of an EOTC strategic plan is among the first steps to move the needle in these two outcome
areas by identifying and documenting an agreed upon Mission Statement, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key
Strategies for the EOTC.
Where We Are Today
2020 Strategic Plan
23
Attachment 1
24
10
Strengths, Opportunities, and Challenges (As identified at August 2019 EOTC Retreat)
2020 Strategic Plan
During the 2019 retreat, the 14 EOTC members (one member was absent) conducted a Strengths,
Opportunities, and Challenges discussion about the EOTC and its future. Below is a summary of the results
from these conversations. It was noted that each of the opportunities and strengths may also pose
numerous challenges and opportunities for future action.
Strengths:
History of recognizing and appreciating the regional nature of transportation
The multi-jurisdictional governance, leadership, and staffing of the EOTC
History and legacy of the EOTC with enduring governing documents, history of successful action,
consensus and agreement
Existence of a stable funding source and structure for the EOTC
Opportunities:
Utilize strengths of a regional approach, a strong staff and governance structure, and EOTC historic
momentum to expand opportunities in regional thinking, projects, and strategic decision -making
Emerging technologies
Improved communication both within and outside of the EOTC
Use of multiple modalities to change behavior
Improve Airport connectivity
Take advantage of excellent Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) resources
Challenges:
Should the EOTC desire to expand to include broader regional input and/or representation, such
broadening will require difficult changes to governance and relationship-building
While expanding first/last mile transportation connectivity is critical to change people’s behavior, it can
be difficult to implement particularly outside the EOTC member jurisdictions
Behavior change is – in and of itself – difficult to accomplish
While the EOTC’s governance has been a strength and is recognized as an opportunity to accomplish
even more, the ongoing challenge of clarifying how decisions are made is an ongoing challenge
Changes to the EOTC funding starting in 2019
While the linear nature of the Roaring Fork Valley topography has enhanced the effectiveness of regional
trunk-line transit service, overcoming topographic challenges in first and last mile connectivity can be
difficult
Need for greater resiliency in emergency management
Need for greater and faster response to climate-change
24
Attachment 1
25
11
How this Plan will be Used
2020 Strategic Plan
The EOTC Strategic Plan provides a
framework to guide the EOTC’s decision-
making, work planning and budgeting.
The Plan also includes the following:
Statutory and ballot requirements for
the Transit Sales and Use Tax as well as
the Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles,
and Key Strategies of the EOTC. The
Guiding Principles in this Plan represent
the high-level deliverables that the EOTC
strives to achieve throughout the
Roaring Fork Valley. The Plan also
includes Key Strategies that define
approaches the EOTC will utilize to help
realize the Guiding Principles. The
Guiding Principles and Key Strategies
inform the annual EOTC Work Plan,
which will act as the tactical actions of
this Plan. Each of the tasks completed in
the annual Work Plan and money
allocated by the EOTC will be connected
to the Strategic Plan. This Plan is
intended to be reviewed at least every
five years and updated as necessary.
25
Attachment 1
26
12
Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies
2020 Strategic Plan
Guiding Principles
Key Strategies
Environmental Sustainability
All projects will promote a
balanced natural and built
environment while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.
Economic Sustainability
Efforts will strive to increase
emergency and economic
resiliency while considering the
financial, legal and physical
practicality of each project.
Social Sustainability
Encourage a top-line transportation
experience for all residents and
visitors while striving to increase
equity, proximity, reliability, and
efficiency of the network to meet the
transportation needs of all people.
Work collectively to reduce and manage the volume of vehicles on the road and
parking system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-
modal, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient, equitable and efficient
transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.
We envision the Roaring Fork Valley as the embodiment of a sustainable
transportation system emphasizing mass transit and mobility that contributes
to the happiness and wellbeing of residents and visitors.
Mission
Vision
Multi-Modal Network
that Encourages Mode
Shift
Regionalism and
Cross-Sector Approach
All decisions will support public mass transit and mobility. In addition, new
technologies that support mode shift away from private vehicles will be
embraced.
All decisions will consider the needs of the whole Roaring Fork Valley as well as
the context of the greater regulatory and community environment, such as
housing and land use controls.
Communication and
Inter-Governmental
Engagement
The EOTC will strive to communicate and engage with local stakeholders,
citizens, partner organizations, and other local, State and Federal government
agencies to support its Mission, Vision, and Guiding Principles and implement
its Key Strategies.
Note: Equity refers to the fairness with which impacts (benefits and costs) are distributed
26
Attachment 1
27
13
Implementation
2020 Strategic Plan
Each year the EOTC shall adopt a work plan and budget for multiple
upcoming years that will act as the tactical actions for the implementation
of this Strategic Plan. Each action and expenditure made by the EOTC is to
be connected to the promotion of the EOTC’s Mission, Vision, Guiding
Principles, and Key Strategies.
27
Attachment 1
28
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
EOTC MEETING DATE: July 16, 2020
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EOTC Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan
(CVTP) Update
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator
ISSUE STATEMENT: The Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP), which identifies the
policy level priorities for expenditure of the Pitkin County ½ cent transit sales and use tax, is still in its
original form from its adoption in 1993. Following development of the EOTC Strategic Plan and
guidance from the 2019 EOTC retreat, the Transportation Administrator has drafted an updated CVTP for
EOTC consideration. In accordance with the 2020 EOTC Work Plan, an update to the CVTP is to be
considered starting in the summer of 2020 following adoption of the Strategic Plan.
BACKGROUND: Similar to the Strategic Plan, the 2020 EOTC Work Plan calls for the consideration
and update of the CVTP in the summer of 2020. The CVTP update is the second step to updating the
EOTC governing documents and builds off the guidance established with the adoption of the Strategic
Plan. Below is an overview of the schedule from the 2020 EOTC Work Plan to update the EOTC’s
working documents and plans.
Whereas the Strategic Plan is a high-level guiding document that will be used to inform overall EOTC
direction, the CVTP utilizes the guidance from the Strategic Plan to update the policy level expenditure
priorities for the EOTC in the coming years. As shown in the graphic above, each effort builds upon each
other starting with the high-level strategic plan and coming together in a new budget framework that will
evaluate and rank EOTC projects and spending on an annual basis.
Similar to the Strategic Plan, the CVTP is intended to be updated periodically in order to keep up with the
changing world of transportation and maintain its relevance.
As the committee members may recall from the 2019 retreat, the CVTP is currently attached to the 1993
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) that formed the EOTC. Should the EOTC adopt an updated version
We are Here →
28 29
of the CVTP, the current Work Plan contemplates revisiting that original IGA in 2021 at which time the
updated CVTP would be included with the IGA document, if deemed appropriate.
Memo Contents
- List of updates from the 1993 CVTP
- Proposed updated CVTP for review and consideration
- Regional Priorities explanation
- Upper Valley Priorities explanation
- Existing Road Conditions explanation
- Future Transit Line From Glenwood Springs to Aspen / Snowmass explanation
- Comparison of CVTP Priorities and Strategic Plan
Note: This matrix identifies whether each of the Regional and Upper Valley Priorities
meet the Mission Statement, Vision Statement, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies
found in the Strategic Plan. Some of the priorities cannot be determined at this time and
have been labeled as such in the matrix. This does not mean that the priority does not or
cannot meet that Strategic Plan requirement, but that it cannot be determined until a
specific project is identified.
List of Updates from the 1993 CVTP
- Added explanation of CVTP.
This will allow the CVTP map to better stand on its own by explaining what the Plan is and how
it is to be used.
- Remove transit service from Owl Creek Road and coordinate transit service from Brush Creek
Park and Ride to Snowmass with Valley service.
It has become clear over the years of implementation that Owl Creek Road is not the preferred
transit route between the Airport and Snowmass as was identified as the “C-Line” in the 1993
Plan. Instead, it is preferred to utilize Brush Creek Park and Ride as the transit hub between
Aspen and Snowmass and identify Brush Creek Road as the transit route to Snowmass.
However, the demand and need for mobility alternatives that the C-Line was understood to
address still remain. To this end, an “Upper Valley Priority” is also proposed to coordinate
ongoing transit service between Snowmass Village and the other jurisdictions commensurate with
the transit service along the Highway 82 corridor utilizing Brush Creek Park and Ride
- Categorize priorities in two simplified topics: “Regional” and “Upper Valley”. Remove
Snowmass Village and Aspen details.
The 1993 CVTP has three categories of priorities: “Snowmass Village”, “Aspen”, and “Priority
Uses for ½ cent Sales/Use Tax” in addition to identifying the “A-Line” (Aspen to Airport), “B-
Line” (Down Valley), and “C-Line” (Snowmass to Aspen). The municipalities of Snowmass and
Aspen have made significant strides in planning and implementing internal and regional
connections to transit in the past 27 years. As a result, the updated plan focusses on transit
connections between transportation hubs and jurisdictions rather than within communities. The
proposed update also eliminates the naming of the “Lines”. In addition, as regionalism was a
significant takeaway from the EOTC retreat, naming those regional priorities highlights this
feedback.
29 30
- Removal of accomplished goals and maintaining ongoing priorities.
Since 1993 many priorities have been achieved, including: 10-minute headways, longer operating
hours, restricted / paid parking, and public acquisition of Denver Rio Grande Right-of-way. Other
priorities are ongoing and remain in the Plan, including bike and pedestrian improvements,
enhanced bus routes and service, and park and ride lot improvements.
30 31
Proposed Updated Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan
31 32
Regional Priorities Explanation
At the 2019 EOTC retreat, regionalism emerged as a key theme. Due to the EOTC statutory and ballot
requirements, regionalism is within the context of supporting mass transportation within the Roaring Fork
Valley. Linked to supporting mass transportation, the EOTC Mission Statement also strives to manage the
volume of vehicles on the road and parking system. While managing the volume of vehicles is a linked
and often complementary concept to supporting mass transportation, the below regional priorities focus
on increasing transit ridership with policies that ranked high during the retreat and are often supported by
other local and / or regional planning efforts.
•Park and Ride Lot Improvements
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 1993 Comprehensive Valley Transportation
Plan, 2018 City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan
Park and ride lots are an essential and long utilized tool to provide vehicles a place to park along
Highway 82 to permit convenient carpooling and parking for transit. Within the Roaring Fork
Valley, most park and ride facilities are on land owned by the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) with management by CDOT or RFTA. CDOT manages most of the non-
BRT served park and rides in the lower valley, such as Cattle Creek, Catherine Store and Red
Hill. Meanwhile nearly all of the BRT park and rides are managed by RFTA with the exception
of the parking area of the Brush Creek Park and Ride and the Buttermilk Park and Ride. The
quality of each park and ride facility vary significantly from a simple dirt lot to fully paved
facilities with restrooms and a transit station.
As it is not feasible for transit to conveniently serve every household within the Valley, park and
ride facilities are an important component of the transit system to allow the transition from
private vehicle to transit. As a result, improving park and ride facilities within the Valley can help
increase transit ridership and hence decrease or otherwise manage the volume of vehicles within
the Valley-wide road and parking system. Improving park and rides includes making the facilities
comfortable, safe, convenient, and accessible to attract users to transit.
•First and Last Mile Solutions
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2018 Town of Snowmass Village
Comprehensive Plan, 2017 Upper Valley Mobility Report (IMS), 2018 City of Aspen Short Range
Transit Plan
Although similar to the function served by park and ride facilities, first and last mile solutions
strive to connect transit riders from their origin to transit and from transit to their final
destination. As the name implies, first and last mile solutions are generally serving those
individuals whose origin and destination are closer to the transit stop than those who would drive
a private vehicle and utilize parking at a park and ride.
While historically first and last mile solutions have been provided by bicycling and walking as
well as local transit circulator services and bike share (We-Cycle), more recent technological
advancements now mean that ride sharing and ride hailing are wrapped into the options available.
Ride sharing and ride hailing increase the theoretical geographic extent of first and last mile
32 33
connections that are competitive with personal vehicles. However, on a national level ride sharing
and ride hailing for first and last mile transit access has been met with limited success over the
years. In fact, in some studies the presence of ride sharing and ride hailing companies such as
Uber and Lyft (aka –Transportation Network Company, or TNCs) have been shown to actually
draw riders away from transit and increase overall vehicle congestion. This said, there are
opportunities to try to encourage ride sharing and ride hailing to connect to transit through the use
of physical facilities at park and rides; development of integrated apps for trip payment, ticketing
and scheduling (e.g. Mobility as a Service, or MAAS); and subsidizing ride sharing to transit as
an extension of the transit system itself.
Ride sharing and ride hailing are currently being analyzed for their ability to reduce congestion
and greenhouse gas emissions as a part of the EOTC and RFTA funded Integrated Mobility
System (IMS) study. While this study is still in progress, so far it appears that there are some
congestion and greenhouse gas emissions reductions possible from ride sharing and ride hailing
in the Upper Valley if they are better integrated as a part of the transit system.
Although ride sharing and ride hailing garner a lot of attention due to their potential, walking and
biking infrastructure should not be overlooked. Depending on the location, these infrastructure
improvements can be the most effective and equitable way to bring people of all ages, incomes
and abilities to transit and achieve those first and last mile connections. In addition, while ride
sharing and ride hailing are still in their infancy when it comes to providing first and last mile
solutions, particularly in the Valley, walking and biking infrastructure have a proven track record.
• Transit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability and Efficiency Enhancements
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, State Statute and Ballot Language for ½ Cent
Transit Sales and Use Tax, 1993 Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan, 2012 Aspen Area
Community Plan (AACP), 2018 Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan, 2017 Upper
Valley Mobility Report (IMS), 2018 City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan, CDOT
Intermountain Regional Transportation Plan 2045 (Draft)
Per State Statute and the ballot language, supporting and improving transit in the Valley is the
core function of the Pitkin County transit ½ cent sales and use tax. And over the years, the EOTC
has a long list of accomplishments related back to supporting and improving transit in the Valley.
As a result, continuing to evaluate the overall transit system within the Valley to find and execute
effective ways to improve speed, accessibility, reliability and efficiency are important to the core
function of the EOTC and expenditure of the transit sales and use tax revenue.
As opposed to the aforementioned priorities for Park and Ride Lots and First and Last Mile
improvements, this priority focusses on the main line transit system itself and the movement of
people up and down the Valley between Glenwood Springs, Aspen and Snowmass Village. In
terms of previous and ongoing studies in this area, the EOTC funded the Upper Valley Mobility
Study in 2017 that, while also analyzing the cost of rail versus bus in the Valley, also noted a
number of improvements to the existing transit system. This compilation of improvements are
now being reviewed as a part of the IMS study for their ability to reduce congestion and
greenhouse gas emissions. While this study is still ongoing, so far it appears implementation of
these broad improvements could help increase ridership and hence decrease congestion and
emissions.
33 34
Some ideas that surfaced at the EOTC retreat that support this priority include: a transit circulator
service between Brush Creek Park and Ride, Aspen, Snowmass and the Airport; improving transit
queue jumps on Highway 82; and addressing bicycle and pedestrian accessibility to transit stops.
Moving forward, staff has also secured a CDOT Multi-Modal Option Fund (MMOF) grant in
early 2020 for a study of specific infrastructure improvements to help improve transit efficiency,
speed and access between the Airport and the Maroon Creek Roundabout. Should matching funds
be allocated by the EOTC for 2021, this study will help direct EOTC funds to the most effective
transit efficiency and accessibility infrastructure projects within this corridor.
• Congestion Reduction Measures
Reference to Prior Support: 2014 EOTC Mission Statement, 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2017 Upper
Valley Mobility Report (IMS), 1998 Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision (ROD), 2012 Aspen
Area Community Plan (AACP), 2018 Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan, 2018 City
of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan, CDOT Intermountain Regional Transportation Plan 2045
(Draft)
Reducing the number of vehicles on the road and parking system within the Valley is found in the
EOTC Mission Statement. Aside from the surficial motivation for this priority that current
residents would like to live in a less congested area, this goal originally stems from the
community input that is documented in the 1998 Federal Highways Administration (FHWA)
Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision (ROD). This community goal, as referenced in the ROD
and specifically in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), is to “Continue to limit Average
Annual Daily Trips (AADT) to 1993 levels at the Castle Creek Bridge, and strive to reduce peak-
hour vehicle trips to below 1993 levels.” To date, with the work of the City of Aspen, Town of
Snowmass Village, RFTA, CDOT, and the EOTC this goal has largely been achieved through
transit enhancements and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies.
The term “Congestion Reduction Measures”, however, has its origins in the Aspen Institute’s
Community Forum on Transportation and Mobility that concluded with a final report in 2017.
The recommendation of that report, the Integrated Mobility System (IMS), is now being studied
for its effectiveness at reducing congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. One of the five tenants
of the IMS are “Congestion Mitigation Measures” that specifically identifies two main strategies:
dynamic parking pricing and dynamic road pricing. Although the effectiveness study is still
ongoing, of the five tenants from the IMS these congestion reduction measures – while possibly
the most difficult to implement from a legal, technological, and political standpoint – are also
showing the greatest promise in reducing general congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. In
addition, while outside the scope of this study, it is reasonable to conclude then that these
congestion mitigation measures could have the greatest positive impact of the five IMS tenants on
transit ridership, encouraging working from home, and trip modification outside of peak travel
times.
There are a number of ways to move the needle on congestion reduction measures, however,
outside of dynamic parking pricing and road pricing. For example, the City of Aspen has shown
notable success with their TDM program without instituting dynamic road or real time dynamic
parking pricing. To this end, while dynamic paid parking and road pricing could be long-term
34 35
strategies, the congestion reduction priority in the CVTP is not intended to limit congestion
reduction measures to just these options. More broadly, this priority is intended to highlight the
analysis and use of all tools available to reduce congestion in order to maintain alignment with
the community goals from the Entrance to Aspen ROD, the AACP, and the Snowmass Village
Comprehensive Plan.
• Technologies and Innovation to Encourage Mode Shift
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2017 Upper Valley Mobility Report (IMS), 2018
City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan
The EOTC Strategic Plan and CVTP update are being developed at a time of rapid change. This
rapid change ranges, for example, from technological uncertainty and promise around
autonomous vehicles and transportation integration with Mobility as a Service (MAAS), to
societal and economic insecurity from the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic
recession. With these forces moving at the same time it is difficult to predict what new or existing
technologies may best fit within this transportation world in the future.
Over the years, the EOTC and much of the Valley has focused on rail as being the long-term
preferred transit option. This preference logically extends from the topography of the Valley
being conducive to a one main line system, general rider inclination to ride rail over buses, and
the perception that rail is the highest standard in transit. In addition, the rail banked Denver Rio
Grande Corridor extends the length of much of the Valley and can offer an alignment separated
from the Highway preventing interference from vehicle traffic. However, despite having much of
the right of way secured, the cost of such a system has so far been untenable. The EOTC studied
the cost of rail versus bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements in 2017 with the Upper Valley
Mobility Study. This Study recommended BRT improvements over rail in the Upper Valley
primarily due to the high cost of rail outweighing the potential benefits. Busses are also able to
provide service to destinations like Snowmass Village, which have grades in excess of 6% in
many locations.
Moving forward, as noted there are a number of possible new technologies such as autonomous
vehicles and buses that could help lower costs while increasing frequency and reliability of the
existing transit service. Meanwhile, electrification of the current bus based system could also
reduce long-term costs while limiting pollution and noise impacts. Similarly, there are other
existing but improving technologies such as aerial trams that could present certain benefits
comparable to rail and possibly be at a lower price. Aside from technologies that create a new or
improved travel mode however, other technologies could help with a “carrot and stick” approach
to mode shift as outlined in the Upper Valley Mobility Report from 2017. These technologies
could help enable such ideas as congestion pricing, dynamic parking pricing, and High
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane enforcement.
This priority to embrace technologies and innovations that encourage mode shift is intended to be
a recognition that the EOTC strives to consider new technologies that increase the transit modal
share whether it be as glamorous as an autonomous bus, rail or aerial tram, or as utilitarian as a
way to enforce HOV lane compliance or enact dynamic parking pricing. It also recognizes that
technologies and innovations do not solely mean something that is new to the world of
35 36
transportation, and could be an idea or application that is simply new to the Valley or
implemented in a new way.
Upper Valley Priorities Explanation
The Upper Valley Priorities are linked to the Regional Priorities. However, as the EOTC is funded by
sales and use tax revenue from within Pitkin County, the Upper Valley Priorities focus in on this
geographic region to address more specific and key local mass transit concerns.
• Bike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and Brush Creek Park and Ride
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2018 City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan
Bike and pedestrian connections to transit in the Upper Valley and a connection between the
Brush Creek Park and Ride and the AABC in particular were discussed numerous times during
the retreat. It is worth noting that equity also came out as an important theme at the retreat. By
improving bike and pedestrian access to transit, a positive influence can be made toward
transportation equity as well.
Looking specifically at a bike and pedestrian connection between the Brush Creek Park and Ride
and the AABC, a feasibility study was conducted by Pitkin County Open Space and Trails several
years ago. While this study needs to be updated, it provides a starting point moving forward
should this be identified as a priority.
In addition, during the retreat and other EOTC meetings, there appears to be a desire for better
bike and pedestrian connections to transit at both BRT and local stops between the Airport and
the Maroon Creek roundabout. As this is the most complex transit corridor in the Upper Valley
and possibly within the Roaring Fork Valley, considering the EOTC’s limited funding a detailed
cost and benefit analysis of overall accessibility through this stretch is necessary in order to
prioritize infrastructure projects. This is particularly important since this corridor a State highway
administered by CDOT. With this in mind and as noted earlier, Staff did obtain a CDOT grant to
pursue a transit efficiency and access study for this section of Highway 82 in 2021 should the
EOTC allocate matching funding.
• Airport Multi-Modal Transit Hub and Transit Circulation Enhancements
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, Airport Visioning Process, 2012 Aspen Area
Community Plan, CDOT Intermountain Regional Transportation Plan 2045 (Draft)
As an outcome of the ASE Vision process undertaken by the County in 2019 and 2020, the
following recommendation was included in the Final Report of the Airport Vision Committee in
April 2020 regarding ground transportation at the Airport.
Convenient, easy ground transportation will help reduce air pollution emissions
through multi-modal transit, seamless connectivity and a reduction of overall
number of vehicle trips to and from the airport. The Airport should act as an
36 37
important multi-modal transport center that ensures a mix of public and private
transportation. The County should improve and prioritize the accessibility and
convenience of public transportation but also recognize that that transit alone will
not fully address connectivity needs. Many passengers will continue to arrive at
the Airport by car, and the Airport needs to maintain accessibility for all travelers.
This is one among many recommendations within the Report that was forwarded to the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners, as the decision making body, for consideration. In
addition, this outcome from the ASE vision process is generally in line with the comments
provided at the 2019 EOTC retreat. At the EOTC retreat, the Committee expanded on ideas to
help facilitate circulation to and from the Airport, including a shuttle or circulator between the
Airport, Aspen, Snowmass, and Brush Creek Park and Ride that maximizes frequency and
convenience. This service would effectively work as the first and last mile connection for airline
travelers.
As many details continue to be ironed out concerning the airport design and circulation, the
policy priority that the airport be a multi-modal transit hub with convenient and desirable transit
connections to Snowmass and Aspen is consistent with the feedback received at the EOTC retreat
and through the ASE vision process.
• Multi-Modal Solution to Entrance to Aspen
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and CDOT approved the Entrance to Aspen
Record of Decision (ROD) in 1998. While this ROD includes continuing the existing two
unrestricted traffic lanes from the Maroon Creek Roundabout to 7th and Main Street in Aspen, it
would also create two dedicated transit lanes which would remove transit vehicles from general
traffic through this stretch. The ROD also identifies relocating the alignment of the highway from
the current “S-Curves” to the Marolt Open Space and abandoning the current section of Highway
between the Maroon Creek Roundabout and Cemetery Lane. Many municipal and county popular
votes have occurred over the years in relation to the Entrance to Aspen. To date, the project as
described in the 1998 ROD has not moved forward. According to the 2012 Aspen Area
Community Plan (AACP), “While the 2012 AACP acknowledges the ROD, it doesn’t address it
or any particular physical solution, because there are diverse community opinions and a lack of
clear community consensus around the issue… We are first committed to reducing traffic by
implementing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) solutions.”
The issue of congestion into and out of Aspen, primarily at the Entrance to Aspen, was a point of
conversation both at the 2019 EOTC retreat and throughout the ASE Vision process. It is worth
noting that while the Multi-Modal Transit Hub at the Airport and the Entrance to Aspen are
identified as two separate priorities in this plan due to their physical separation and development
processes, their impacts on transit and congestion are interconnected. Similarly, as is noted
regarding TDM in the AACP, since all of the priorities identified in this Plan are intended to
support transit they should all positively impact congestion levels at the Entrance to Aspen and
help facilitate the City of Aspen’s TDM efforts.
37 38
Expressing “Multi-Modal Solution to the Entrance to Aspen” priority in this Plan is intended to
acknowledge that a solution is desired and that there is general agreement that whatever the
solution is it needs to be multi-modal and include transit.
• Snowmass Village to Brush Creek Park and Ride Service Commensurate with Highway 82
Corridor Transit Service
References to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2017 Upper Valley Mobility Report, 2018
Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan
As noted previously, the “C-Line” is recommended to be removed from the updated CVTP.
According to documents circulated in 1993 promoting the original adoption of the CVTP, the
“C-Line” is described as follows: “This extends the A-Line to Snowmass, via Owl Creek. Traffic
there will be discouraged. The C-Line's separate guideway will parallel the road. Once in
Snowmass, buses will leave the guideway and follow regular roads to the Village.”
Since adoption of the CVTP in 1993, however, a number of operational and land use decisions
have been made that have effectively relocated this contemplated transit use from Owl Creek
Road to Brush Creek Road. In addition, the primary Upper Valley regional transit hub has
effectively relocated from the Airport as identified in the 1993 CVTP to the Brush Creek Park
and Ride.
Even with the evolution of transit since the adoption of the 1993 CVTP, the mobility demand and
need for a mobility alternative that the “C-Line” was understood to address still remains. To this
end, an “Upper Valley Priority” is proposed to coordinate ongoing transit service between Brush
Creek Park and Ride and Snowmass Village with the transit service along the Highway 82
corridor. While the EOTC funded a 15 minute BRT connecting service between Snowmass and
Brush Creek Park and Ride starting in 2018 and that service continues today with funding from
the passage of Ballot Measure 7A, the continuation and possible expansion of this service is
important to Upper Valley mobility.
• Electrification of Transit System
Reference to Prior Support: 2019 EOTC Retreat, 2017 Upper Valley Mobility Report, 2017
Upper Valley Mobility Study, 2018 City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan, CDOT Intermountain
Regional Transportation Plan 2045 (Draft)
During the 2019 EOTC retreat support for electrification of the transportation system, including
transit, was broadly expressed. While the EOTC supported RFTA’s purchase of electric buses in
2019, the electrified fleet remains a small portion of the overall RFTA vehicle mix. As an
expenditure priority for the purposes of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well as noise and
odor impacts, electrification of the transit system appears to be an EOTC priority.
In addition, encouraging electric vehicle charging stations at park and ride facilities will both help
promote the City, County and Town climate action goals. Further, as electric vehicles become
more commonplace, providing charging stations at these locations will also encourage and
promote transit ridership. Through efforts with We-Cycle, continuing to support e-bikes as a part
of the bike share network and specifically encouraging their placement at transit stops and park
and rides will further promote first and last mile connectivity.
38 39
Existing Roadway Conditions Explanation
The proposed CVTP includes a description of the current and the proposed near to long-term policies
regarding the configuration of Highway 82, Brush Creek Road, Owl Creek Road, and Maroon Creek
Road to Highlands. This format is consistent with the format used in the 1993 CVTP. One change, as
noted previously, has been made between the proposed CVTP and the 1993 adopted version: Owl Creek
Road is now identified as a “Rural Road” only and not as a transit route.
Future Transit Line from Glenwood Springs to Aspen / Snowmass Explanation
The 1993 CVTP includes acknowledgement that a rail line either within the Denver Rio Grande corridor
or along Highway 82 is contemplated in the future. Although the Denver Rio Grande railroad corridor is
now largely preserved and rail banked, the rail line is not in place and it is still aspirational. The proposed
CVTP includes a similar acknowledgement with one alteration to the wording, changing it from a “Future
Dedicated Rail System” to a “Future Dedicated Transit System”. This is intended to show that while it
may or may not be a rail system there is still a desire to have a dedicated transit system at some point in
the future that connects the extent of the Valley.
39 40
Comparison of CVTP Priorities and Strategic Plan
40 41
BUDGETARY IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the proposed updated Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP)
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – 1993 Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan
41 42
Attachment 1 – 1993 Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan
42 43
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
EOTC MEETING DATE: July 16, 2020
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Transportation Administrator Updates
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator
ISSUE STATEMENT: This memo is intended to keep the EOTC up to date on efforts that are within or
could affect areas within the EOTC’s purview. The updates included in this memo are as follows.
a.2020 EOTC Work Plan Review
b.Integrated Mobility Study (IMS), Phase 1
c. Dynamic Message Sign (DMS)
d.EOTC Budget Update
e. Centralized EOTC Webpage
BACKGROUND: The following updates are provided for EOTC information.
a.2020 EOTC Work Plan Review
See Attachment 1 for the 2020 EOTC Work Plan that was adopted on October 17, 2019.
This Plan brings together the following work projects facing the EOTC through 2021. The Work Plan
topics along with their status are identified below:
2020:
•Development of Strategic Plan
(Status: Originally Scheduled for March 19 EOTC to Review Staff Proposed Strategic Plan – Due
to COVID-19 this meeting was cancelled. Scheduled for Review during prep meetings prior to
July 16, 2020 EOTC meeting and at the July 16, 2020 EOTC meeting, if necessary)
•Develop Updated Decision Making Process
(Status: Progress in tandem with Strategic Plan, CVTP, IGA Update, and Updated Budget
Framework)
•Update Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP)
(Scheduled for Review on July 16, 2020)
•Pursue EOTC Budget Mitigation
(Ongoing Monitoring of Sales and Use Tax Collections. See detailed update in Section f. below)
•Brush Creek Park and Ride Development, including:
o 70% and 95% FLAP Plan Review
43 44
(70% Review at April 30, 2020 EOTC Meeting, 95% Review by August 2020, Location
and Extent Review with Pitkin County on August 18, 2020)
o Develop Vision Profile (Near-Term Vision) for Park and Ride
(Discussion at April 30, 2020 EOTC Meeting)
o Develop Operations Plan for Park and Ride
(In progress by Staff following April 30, 2020 EOTC Discussions)
o Update Cost Analysis (In progress by Staff following April 30, 2020 EOTC Discussions)
•Develop Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) Operations and Management Plan
(Bids Received, Project Under Contract in April 2020, CDOT Permitting application under
review. See detailed update in Section d. below)
•Participate in Snowmass Transit Center, Airport, and Regional Transportation Planning /
Visioning, as appropriate
(Ongoing efforts by Transportation Administrator)
The Work Plan includes the following regular meeting dates and focusses for 2020:
March 19, 2020 (Snowmass) – Focus: Strategic Plan
(Note: Meeting cancelled due to COVID-19. Meeting rescheduled for July 16, 2020. Focus to
include review of Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan or CVTP)
April 30, 2020 (PitCo) – Focus: Brush Creek P&R (70% Plans and Visioning Profile)
October 29, 2020 (Aspen) – Focus: Budget Focus
The Transportation Administrator continues to coordinate with partner organizations and agencies to
implement the adopted EOTC mission and charge. These efforts include regional coordination (e.g.
Transportation, Housing, and Job Summit that was cancelled due to COVID-19 as well as ongoing
regional communication), keeping a pulse on the Airport redevelopment, as well as ongoing efforts at
RFTA, CDOT, and IMTPR.
As the Committee is aware, the March 19 EOTC meeting was canceled due to COVID-19. This meeting
was intended to review the staff proposed EOTC Strategic Plan. As COVID-19 has altered the EOTC
schedule for 2020, Staff has developed a proposed Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Valley
Transportation Plan (CVTP) for review and adoption, if desired, during the preparation meetings or on the
EOTC meeting on July 16. In order to utilize the Committee’s time as effectively as possible, Staff is
prepared to entertain a vote for adoption at each of the preparation meetings for the proposed Strategic
Plan prior to July 16. It is Staff’s opinion, based on the feedback received on the proposed Strategic Plan
in March, that there is a high level of concurrence with the proposed Plan. As a result, should each elected
body feel that the proposed Strategic Plan is satisfactory then a vote may be taken during the preparation
meetings, which will free up time to discuss the proposed CVTP on July 16. Should sufficient progress be
made at the preparation meetings and the July 16 EOTC meeting, then an additional EOTC meeting may
not be necessary.
44 45
b.Integrated Mobility System (IMS), Phase 1
The EOTC budgeted $10,000 in 2020 to help complete Phase 1 of the IMS study. RFTA also contributed
$9,755 toward this effort. Fehr and Peers is currently under contract to complete the Phase 1 analysis this
year. The preliminary results from the IMS study which are focused on greenhouse gas emissions and
congestion impacts from each of the five tenants of the System have been incorporated into the Staff
analysis for the CVTP. The next step in the study is to utilize the findings noted above to develop an
implementation strategy. Staff and the community will then vet this strategy. This implementation
strategy will then be utilized to inform future EOTC projects and expenditures in the future.
Phase 2, which is expected to dive deeper into modeling and socio-economic impacts of the IMS is
anticipated to be conducted in 2021. The scope and funding of Phase 2 will be considered with the 2021
EOTC budget in October.
With the IMS Phase 1 study anticipated to be complete in 2020, Staff has been looking ahead to Phase 2
in 2021. To this end, Staff applied for and was awarded $30,000 from the CDOT Multi-Modal Options
Fund (MMOF) toward the anticipated $60,000 cost for Phase 2. These funds were awarded at the
maximum level of 50% of the project cost. In addition, RFTA has provided a commitment letter in the
amount of $10,000 towards Phase 2.
Once the Phase 1 study is complete, the EOTC will have the opportunity to review the remaining funding
balance as a part of the 2021 EOTC budget in October, which is estimated at $20,000 ($30,000 MMOF +
$10,000 RFTA + $20,000 EOTC = $60,000 Total est. project cost). The EOTC allocation of these
remaining funds will be necessary in order to obtain the grant and keep the IMS study moving to
completion in 2021.
As a reminder, the following components of the analysis are to take place as a part of Phase 1, which is to
be completed in the summer of 2020:
1.Review and Refinement of existing Strategies - Refine the five principle strategies outlined in
the IMS. This task would also add more definition so that the parameters of each of the
systems can be roughly identified and modeled for how effective the IMS could be at
improving mobility and managing traffic congestion (see next task).
2.Perform a High-Level Effectiveness Analysis of the IMS - The consultant will evaluate the
potential effectiveness of the Integrated Mobility System using off-the shelf tools, travel
elasticities, and similar analytical techniques. The purpose of this analysis is not an
exhaustive study of traffic implications or detailed GHG analysis, but a general picture of the
potential reduction in VMT, GHG emissions, and reduced SOV vehicle travel.
3. Identify an Implementation Framework – While the IMS provides a robust approach to
managing vehicle travel in the upper valley, some elements are more complex and could take
more time to implement than others. This framework would help identify a potential “pilot
45 46
project” that brings together two-to-three of the IMS strategies that could be simpler to get off
the ground but would still have enough synergistic benefits to reduce demand for SOV travel.
This task would involve some additional analysis of how to combine different strategies
along with working with EOTC staff to understand which strategies might be the easiest to
implement (from a practical and political standpoint). This task was originally proposed as an
in-person workshop, however, due to COVID-19 alternative methods will be examined.
The components of the Integrated Mobility System (IMS) – Upper Valley Mobility Report
c.Dynamic Message Sign (DMS)
In 2019, the EOTC reviewed and voted to move forward with the installation of a Dynamic Message Sign
(DMS) located slightly over 1 mile down valley from the Brush Creek Park and Ride on Highway 82. The
DMS is designed to provide motorists with information that encourages transit ridership from the Brush
Creek Park and Ride into Snowmass and Aspen.
In Spring and Summer of 2019 the EOTC agreed upon the budget, location, size and style of the DMS.
With this guidance, Staff advertised an RFP for the project in the fall of 2019. This RFP closed on March
11, 2020 after an extension due to a lack of response. One response was eventually received from the
advertised RFP. On March 19, 2020, the DMS Selection Committee, which is made up of transportation
staff from the City of Aspen, Town of Snowmass Village, Pitkin County and the EOTC, met to review the
received bid. The total approved budget for the project is $564,019.
The bid package was broken into two components: 1) the physical DMS itself and 2) a Travel Time
Monitoring System (TTMS). As the EOTC may recall, the TTMS is a hardware and software package
that is to be tied to the DMS to provide drivers live travel time to Aspen by both bus and private vehicle.
The total cost of both components of the project came in at $892,000 ($542,000 for the DMS and
$350,000 for the TTMS). While the total cost of both components of the project well exceeded the
allowable 2020 budget, the DMS itself came within budget and was in line with the engineers estimate.
46 47
Through the RFP process it was found that the TTMS is not a standard product and would require a
significant amount of improvisation and creativity to implement, which introduced a high level of
uncertainty to the contractors. This uncertainty both lead to decreased interest in the project and a high
price tag for the TTMS. As a result, while the cost of the DMS came within expectations and was
determined to be reasonable, the cost of the TTMS was much higher than expected.
Based on the budget amount for the DMS and the County project engineer’s opinion that the cost of the
physical DMS was reasonable, the selection committee decided to move forward with the bid received for
the installation of the DMS and related software only. Due to the unexpected high cost of the TTMS, the
selection committee decided to postpone that component of the overall project to a later date to allow
further vetting of the technology. All functions of the DMS will be operable with regard to messaging
with exception to live transit and vehicle travel times into Aspen (the TTMS). Software and hardware
packages for the DMS have been chosen so that a TTMS can be added at any time in the future should the
desire, need, and funding be identified.
With contracting, manufacturing and CDOT permitting lead times the DMS is expected to be installed
and operable prior to the winter 2020-2021 ski season. The contract with the installer, KSK, LLC, has
been signed and the permit to CDOT has been submitted and is under review.
d. EOTC Budget Update
As the EOTC is aware, HB19-1240 - Sales and Use Tax Administration - came into effect on June 1,
2019. This new State law is the result of the Supreme Court South Dakota vs. Wayfair decision that
requires all retailers, including out-of-state retailers that do not have a physical presence in Colorado, to
collect state and local sales tax at the point of delivery.
With retailers now collecting at the point of delivery, there has been less collection of use taxes and
increased collections in sales taxes. While this new law has resulted in an overall increase in sales tax
revenues at the jurisdictional level, it has significant implications to the EOTC budget and use tax
appropriations. As a reminder, EOTC sales and use tax revenues have the following distribution:
- EOTC retains 100% of funds generated by the Transit Use Tax
- EOTC retains only 18.96% from the Transit Sales Tax – the remaining 81.04% is allocated to
RFTA per the 2004 ballot measure
As a result of this distribution, the decline in use tax revenues will continue to be entirely shown in the
EOTC budget while only a portion of the increase in sales tax revenues will be reflected.
As the law went into effect June 1, 2019, Staff has been monitoring sales and use tax data to determine
the degree of sales tax increase and use tax decrease. Based on the information available at the October
17, 2019 EOTC budget meeting, between 2018 and 2020 a 63% decrease in use tax revenues and a 12.7%
increase in sales tax revenues from the 0.5% Transit Sales and Use Tax was anticipated. Overall, the
EOTC budget was expected to decline about 26% or $711,000 annually between 2018 and 2020.
47 48
With the delays in tax reporting from the State, full year 2019 sales and use tax information was first
available in February 2020. For 2019, Sales Tax revenues are up more than expected at about 22% over
2018 due to the taxation of internet sales, a strong economy, and use tax revenue shifting to sales tax.
Meanwhile, due to some large construction projects in 2019 that paid use taxes early in their project
development, in 2019 use tax revenue was actually up almost 4% over 2018. Between 2018 and 2019, the
EOTC actually saw an increase in revenues of $327,656, or 12%.
Due to the mechanics of use tax collection, however, a portion of use tax revenues reflected in 2019 will
be refunded back to the developer in subsequent years (starting in 2020). This process is to ensure that the
developer pays the actual use taxes due by allowing them to apply for a refund of overpayment. These
refunds will reflect adversely in the EOTC budget for several years to come as use tax revenues continue
to slow and refunds are applied for and processed. As of the writing of this memo, total 2020 refund
requests exceed $200,000. This amount will be negatively reflected from overall use tax revenues to the
EOTC in 2020.
Looking forward to the remainder of 2020, the original County revenue projection for sales tax was -2%.
This projection is the growth rate utilized in the currently adopted 2020 EOTC budget. At -2% sales tax
growth and considering the anticipated reductions in use tax collections, total EOTC revenue was
expected to decline by about 23% or about $635,490 annually when compared to 2018.
As of the writing of this memo, considering the impacts of COVID-19 Pitkin County Finance Department
has revised the sales tax projection for 2020 from -2% to between -13.5% and -21.6%. A mid-range
scenario of approximately -17.4% is currently considered the most likely projection, however. It is worth
noting that this is an improvement from the 2020 sales tax projection from March 2020, which was
-19.1%. While this is still an early estimate, considering the reductions already contemplated with regards
to use tax collections a -17.4% decrease in sales tax revenue would further negatively impact the EOTC
budget.
Running this preliminary scenario of -17.4% sales tax combined with the use tax reduction would
decrease EOTC revenues by -$837,814 in 2020, or -30.7%, over 2018 revenue. In terms of total revenue,
this would reduce overall EOTC revenue from $2,725,220 in 2018 and $3,052,876 in 2019 down to an
estimated $1,887,406 in 2020. In the years 2022 and beyond, revenues are estimated at a positive 3.25%
annually for both sales and use tax collections. On the plus side, because 2019 was unexpectedly strong
those revenues will help the EOTC meet ongoing and project obligations in the near term.
At this point, it appears that the EOTC will be able to meet annual ongoing and current project
obligations, albeit with decreased revenue for currently unobligated projects, services, or to accommodate
project cost increases. With these projections, the EOTC will have a balance of about $375,000 to
$500,000 annually for projects once annual operating and ongoing costs are satisfied. For comparison
purposes, the EOTC had a balance of about $1.6 million to $1.8 million annually for projects after
satisfying ongoing operation costs between 2016 and 2019.
When considering 2020 annual operating costs and all currently obligated project costs through 2024, the
EOTC is expected to have just slightly over $3 million in total unobligated funds going into 2021. So,
48 49
based on current projections, the EOTC’s unobligated fund balance should build at a rate of $375,000 to
$500,000 annually from this roughly $3 million starting point in 2021 assuming no other project or
operational commitments are made. Note: This estimate assumes ongoing X-Games support, We-Cycle
support, and ongoing funding of the No-Fare Aspen, Snowmass, Woody Creek bus service through 2024.
As was discussed at the October 17, 2019 EOTC meeting, Staff has been pursuing discussions with
RFTA to consider transferring the Aspen-Snowmass-Woody Creek No-Fare service from the EOTC to
RFTA starting in 2021. The cost of this service to RFTA is expected to be offset by the increase in
revenue as a result of the State law change in sales and use tax collections from the Pitkin County 0.5%
Transit Sales and Use Tax. In other words, while the EOTC is expected to see declining revenues from
the change in State law, RFTA is expecting to see increasing revenues from the 0.5% Transit Sales Tax
that is roughly equivalent to the cost of the No-Fare service. The cost of the No-Fare Aspen, Snowmass,
Woody Creek service is projected to be between approximately $840,000 and $940,000 annually between
2021 and 2024.
Due to high levels of budgetary uncertainty for both RFTA and the EOTC due to COVID-19 and the
ensuing recession, parsing out the specific impacts of the sales and use tax collection changes from the
economic shutdown and recovery have been very difficult, if not impossible to determine. Further, RFTA
is seeing both exceedingly high levels of revenue and expenditure uncertainty moving through 2020 and
into 2021 as the economic shutdown, public health crisis, and recession continue to affect all facets of
public transit.
As the EOTC’s statutory purpose is to support mass transportation, it is Staff’s opinion that 2020 may not
be an ideal time to transfer the financial burden of the No-Fare service from the EOTC to RFTA as it
would be one more obligation on top of already extreme uncertainty. The purpose of the EOTC is to
support mass transit, and transferring the No-Fare service in 2020 to RFTA under these conditions
threatens to undermine that goal. As a result, while Staff continues to monitor the financial situation of
both RFTA and the EOTC, it is Staff’s opinion that the transfer of the No-Fare service should be
postponed until economic conditions stabilize and there can be a reasonable amount of certainty that the
No-Fare service transfer would not negatively affect overall mass transit service in the Valley.
In culmination, due to the lingering uncertainty surrounding the changes in sales and use tax collections
that went into effect in 2019 combined with the economic fallout from COVID-19 in 2020, revenue
projections at this time are notably difficult to predict. Finance and administrative staff meet regularly and
will continue to collaborate for 2021 budget development.
e. Centralized EOTC Webpage
The EOTC now has a centralized webpage. This webpage contains a short description of the EOTC, has
tabs for the annual meeting dates with links to the associated packets, a link to relevant studies, and a link
to archived EOTC packets. This webpage is intended to be a one-stop-shop for elected officials, staff and
the public to access the annual meeting schedule, packets and relevant studies. For ease of development,
the webpage is attached to the Pitkin County website. This webpage is now live and can be viewed at:
https://pitkincounty.com/1322/Elected-Officials-Transportation-Committ
49 50
BUDGETARY IMPACT:
None at this time.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 - 2020 EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule
2 – EOTC 2018, 2019 and 2020 Revenue Comparison and Projection
50 51
EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule (Adopted October 17, 2019)
2020
Action Responsible Party Timeline Expected Outcome
Development of Strategic
Plan
Initial Development: Staff
Amendment/Approval: EOTC
- Spring 2020 Mtg.
- All Year
Develop a Strategic Plan for EOTC
Develop Updated Decision
Making Policies
EOTC w/ Jurisdiction Managers
and EOTC Staff
Winter 2019/2020 Develop Updated EOTC Decision Making
Policies
Update Comprehensive
Valley Transportation Plan
(CVTP)
EOTC w/ Staff Support - Summer/Fall 2020
Mini-Retreat
- All Year
Develop Updated CVTP
Pursue EOTC Budget
Mitigation
Staff w/ EOTC Guidance - Fall 2020 Mtg.
- All Year
Determine Feasible Option to Mitigate the
Effects of Sales and Use Tax Collection
Changes.
Brush Creek PnR:
70% and 95% FLAP
Plan Review
Develop Vision
Profile
Develop Operations
Plan
Update Cost Analysis
EOTC w/ Staff Support
EOTC w/ Staff Support
Staff w/ EOTC Guidance
Staff w/ EOTC Guidance
70% Review: Spring 2020
95% Review: Fall 2020
Spring 2020
All Year
All Year
Review and Approve Brush Creek PnR
Plans for 2021 Construction.
Develop Vision for Brush Creek PnR
Develop Operations Plan Based on FLAP
Plans and Vision Discussion.
Update Cost Analysis for 2021 Budget
Cycle to Include FLAP Improvements
Develop Dynamic Message
Sign (DMS) Operations and
Management Plan
Staff Prior to DMS Installation Develop DMS Operations and
Management Plan for Ongoing
Operations.
Participate in Snowmass
Transit Center, Airport, and
Regional Transportation
Planning / Visioning
Staff and EOTC, as Appropriate All Year Participate in Transportation Related
Planning and Visioning, as Appropriate.
51
Attachment 1
52
2021
Action Responsible Party Timeline Expected Outcome
Continue / Finalize Strategic
Plan and CVTP, as
necessary
EOTC w/ Staff Support All Year, as Needed Finalize Strategic Plan and CVTP
Update EOTC IGA based on
Strategic Plan and
Incorporate Updated CVTP
Initial Development: Staff
Amendment/Approval: EOTC
All Year Update 1993 EOTC IGA Based on
Updated Strategic Plan and CVTP
Develop Budget Framework
based on Strategic Plan and
CVTP
Initial Development: Staff
Amendment/Approval: EOTC
All Year Develop Budget Framework to Guide
EOTC Spending Based on Updated
Strategic Plan and CVTP
Participate in Snowmass
Transit Center, Brush Creek
PnR Development, Airport,
and regional transportation
planning / visioning
Staff and EOTC, as Appropriate All Year Participate in Transportation Related
Planning and Visioning, as Appropriate.
2020 Work Schedule and Meeting Dates
Regular Meetings:
March 19, 2020 (Snowmass) - Strategic Plan Focus
April 30, 2020 (PitCo) - Brush Creek PnR Focus (70% Plans and Visioning)
October 29, 2020 (Aspen) - Budget Focus
Mini-Retreat:
Summer/Fall - Strategic Plan and CVTP Focus
Fall / Winter 2020:
Additional EOTC Meeting, if necessary, to complete CVTP and Strategic Plan / Release of Draft Strategic Plan and CVTP
52
Attachment 1
53
Attachment 2
2018, 2019 and 2020 Revenue Comparison and Projections
2018 and 2019 Actual Revenues 2020 Revenue Projection –
October 2019
(Current Budget)
2020 Revenue Projection –
Estimates as of June 2020
Revenue
Destination
2018
Revenue -
Actual
2019
Revenue –
Actual
Dollar
Change and
Percent
Change –
Actual
(2018 &
2019)
2020
Revenue –
Projected
(Original
-2% Sales
Tax
Decrease)
Dollar
Change and
Percent –
2018 & 2020
(Original -2%
Sales Tax
Decrease)
2020
Revenue –
Projected
(-17.4%
Sales Tax
Decrease
Projection)
Dollar
Change and
Percent –
2018 & 2020
(-17.4% Sales
Tax Decrease
Projection)
Pitkin County
0.5% Transit
Sales Tax
RFTA
(81.04%)
$4,594,862 $5,615,494 $1,020,632
22.2%
$5,503,183 $908,321
19.7%
$4,638,398 $43,536
0.94%
EOTC
(18.96%)
$1,075,007 $1,313,793 $238,786
22.2%
$1,287,517 $212,510
19.7%
$1,085,193 $10,186
0.94%
Pitkin County
0.5% Transit
Use Tax
EOTC $1,484,002 $1,542,583 $58,581
3.9%
$550,000 - $934,002
- 63%
$550,000 - $934,002
- 63%
Investment
Income
EOTC $166,211 $196,500 $30,289
18.2%
$252,213 $86,002
51.7%
$252,213 $86,002
51.7%
Total EOTC
Annual
Revenues
EOTC $2,725,220 $3,052,876 $327,656
12%
$2,089,730 -$635,490
-23.3%
$1,887,406 - $837,814
- 30.7%
53 54
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: John D. Krueger, Director of Transportation
FROM: David Pesnichak, Regional Transportation Administrator
DATE OF MEMO: June 16, 2020
MEETING DATE: July 13, 2020
RE: EOTC 2020 Strategic Plan
_______________________________________________________________________________
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Attached for your review and approval is a resolution for the adoption
of the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
• City Council participated and provided into at the EOTC retreat in August 2019.
• At the October 2019 EOTC meeting, the Committee approved the 2020 Work Plan that
included the development of an EOTC Strategic Plan based on the input received at the
August retreat.
• Council previously reviewed and provided comments on the proposed EOTC Strategic Plan
at the March 9, 2020 City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Aspen as a member of the EOTC is asked to approve the Strategic Plan by resolution.
Each other member of the EOTC is also asked to approve the Strategic Plan by resolution before the
Plan can be considered adopted.
DISCUSSION:
The current mission of the EOTC is to “work collectively to reduce and/or manage the volume of
vehicles on the road system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-
range strategy that will ensure a convenient and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork
Valley.”
Further, the requirements for the expenditure of Transit Sales and Use Tax funding from State Statute
and the voter approved ballot language require that the tax funds be utilized for “financing,
Constructing, Operating and Managing the Mass Transportation System within the Roaring Fork
Valley”.
The EOTC Strategic Plan provides a framework to guide the EOTC’s decision-making, work
planning and budgeting. The Plan also includes the following: Statutory and ballot requirements for
the Transit Sales and Use Tax as well as an updated mission statement, and new vision, guiding
principles, and key strategies of the EOTC.
The Aspen City Council provided comments at the March 9, 2020 Council meeting. These comments
have been incorporated into the attached Plan.
55
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial/budget implications to the City of Aspen.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
By encouraging mass transit and working to manage or reduce the number of vehicles on the road
system, the EOTC is having positive impacts on the environment.
RECCOMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution to adopt the 2020 EOTC Strategic
Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council can decide not to adopt the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan. Not adopting the 2020 Strategic Plan
would require it to be reviewed at the next available EOTC meeting.
PROPOSED MOTION:
“I move to approve Resolution # 047 to adopt the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan.”
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #047 Approving the 2020 Strategic Plan
56
RESOLUTION NO. 047
SERIES OF 2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
APPROVING THE 2020 EOTC STRATEGIC PLAN
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and
the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements
of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from
the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and
WHEREAS, by intergovernmental agreement dated September 14, 1993, the Parties agreed:
a. To conduct regular public meetings as the Elected Officials Transit Committee
(“EOTC”) to continue to refine and agree upon proposed projects and transportation
elements consistent with or complimentary to the Plan; and
b. That all expenditures and projects to be funded from the County-wide one-
half cent transit sales and use tax shall be agreed upon by the Parties and evidenced
by a resolution adopted by the governing body of each party; and
c. Set forth procedural steps to be taken by the parties to implement the Plan; and
d. Set forth the parties’ mutual understanding for a specific process for funding
the Plan and other mass transportation elements.
WHEREAS, at the City of Aspen Council meeting held on July 13, 2020, Council considered
and approved the attached 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado,
that the attached 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan is hereby adopted.
RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July 2020, by the City Council
for the City of Aspen, Colorado.
_________________________
Torre, Mayor
I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk, do certify that the foregoing is a true
and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a
meeting held July 13, 2020.
_________________________
Nicole Henning, City Clerk
57