Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.202202281 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION February 28, 2022 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS TO JOIN ONLINE: Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting" Enter Meeting Number: 2558 954 7969 Enter Password: 81611 Click "Join Meeting" -- OR -- JOIN BY PHONE Call: 1-408-418-9388 Enter Meeting Number: 2558 954 7969 Enter Password: 81611 I.WORK SESSION I.A.Carbon - Council Goal: Organics Waste Diversion Ordinance Options I.B.Childcare Capacity Goal Update I.C.Paepcke Transit Hub Bid Update 1 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Liz Chapman, Environmental Health and Sustainability Ainsley Brosnan-Smith, Environmental Health and Sustainability THROUGH:CJ Oliver, Environmental Health and Sustainability Director Phillip Supino, Community Development Director MEETING DATE:February 28, 2022 RE:Organic Waste Diversion and Solid Waste Code Changes REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is seeking direction from Council to determine which tactics staff should pursue to reduce organic material buried in landfill and update the Solid Waste Chapter of the Municipal Code (Title 12). Staff is also seeking direction from Council about funding mechanisms for waste programming. PREVIOUS ACTIONS: Aspen City Council has taken a variety of actions since 2005 to reduce waste buried in the landfill (Exhibit A). Title 12 of the Municipal Code was last amended in 2013 to require trash and recycling space minimums in new developments. In January 2022, Council set waste diversion goals as part of the ICLEI Race to Zero commitment: Reduce organic material going to landfill by 25% by 2025 and 100% by 2050 70% total diversion of waste from landfill by 2050 BACKGROUND: Through a variety of voluntary policies, programs, and incentives, Aspen has steadily increased the amount of organic material diverted to compost from 0 to over 700 tons per year. However, this is only diverting 3-4% of organic material found in the municipal waste stream, which is far below the 37% of organic material identified in the 2015 composition study of municipal solid waste in Aspen. Staff estimates 10% of the retail food sector in Aspen are currently diverting organic material to the composting facility at the Pitkin County Solid Waste Center which is important because national studies indicate that 60-80% of a retail food businesses waste is organic. Staff from the Environmental Health and Sustainability department invites participation in waste diversion by providing free consultations, trainings, signage, and indoor collection containers to any business, homeowners association (HOA) or individual who requests assistance. Pitkin County provides all-metal bear-proof organic collection containers to any business, or HOA, free of charge when they subscribe to an organic collection service. Despite this support, participation has stagnated and demonstrates voluntary 2 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov participation is not an effective or sufficiently fast way to achieve Council’s adopted waste goals. Staff undertook an outreach effort to the retail food service sector from November 2021 through January 2022 to understand the barriers, concerns, and support for increasing participation in organic diversion (Exhibit B). The respondents to the survey indicated there was interest for the city to write legislation to increase participation, but concern about wildlife safety with increasing organics collection containers in the alleys of the downtown core. In addition to the wildlife hazard, the most common barriers cited were lack of space and the increased cost to implement a new diversion program. Several respondents suggested the city provide some financial incentives to businesses to increase participation in organic diversion programs. DISCUSSION: Title 12 (Solid Waste) of the Municipal Code needs to have several corrections and updates, as well as substantive changes to advance organic waste diversion and put the community on track to achieve Council’s goal. These corrections and changes will be part of a future discussion with Council after decisions have been made about the most significant changes presented in today’s memo. Regardless of the approach chosen, staff recommends providing a 12-month grace period between passing the new ordinance and requiring compliance. This period will allow City staff to train and equip businesses, as well as allowing time to receive needed equipment with the current constraints global supply chain. Items for Council to consider: 1) Change Title 12 to prohibit food in the landfill trash and recycling containers. a. Voluntary participation in diversion programs does not result in capturing the maximum potential of divertible materials, as is evident in the recycling rate in Aspen having plateaued over the past 10 years. b. Food waste prohibition will divert the maximum organic material and allows businesses to find other ways to reduce organic material (donation of excess, inventory control to reduce waste, self-haul organics to a compost facility, etc.). c. Educating the community and monitoring for compliance are the most straightforward when compared to mandating businesses subscribe to an organic collection service. d. Municipalities which have mandated subscription to an organic collection service have experienced contaminations levels so high that the organic loads are frequently landfilled instead of composted. 2) Provide funding for adequate staff to administer waste programming and long-term planning. (Additional $200,000/year) a. The day-to-day requirements to maintain current waste programs and the need to conduct long-term planning and analysis require two full- time staff (Senior Waste Specialist and Waste Specialist). 3 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov b. The 2005 version of Title 12 instated a full-time staff person (Environmental Ranger) to monitor downtown alleys for compliance. This position no longer exists. 3) Subsidize costs for organic collection program for program participants. (Additional $0 to $500,000) a. The retail food service listed this as a method for the city to increase participation in organic diversion. b. The additional costs of organic waste collection programs are a top concern of the retail food sector. c. If the volume of trash is reduced through organics diversion, adding organic collection can be cost neutral. However, many restaurants share dumpsters with multiple businesses and do not realize these cost savings. d. If businesses can reduce waste food through inventory control or food donation, then the cost of organic collection could be reduced or eliminated. Wildlife concerns expressed by the retail food sector during the outreach process are shared by city staff. Any increase in organic diversion activity will likely increase the number of collection containers and this will increase the attraction of wildlife (especially black bears) to the downtown core. The Aspen Police led a Bear Task Force with other city departments and have had some success in reducing wildlife hazards in Aspen over the past two years. The observations and concerns resulting from these efforts have been incorporated into staff’s suggestions in this memo. Although there is the potential for worsening bear-human conflicts by increasing organic collection, staff believes there are tactics to mitigate these impacts. These tactics will be part of the next discussion with Council when discussing specific ordinance changes and details of the program structure. Currently, waste programs, equipment and staffing are paid for with general fund monies. Most of these program and policy changes will increase city expenditures. Therefore, staff encourages Council to consider creating a dedicated funding source, which may include: -Surcharge on waste originating in Aspen and deposited at Pitkin County Solid Waste Center, -Fees related to development activities (construction and demolition), -Tax on municipal solid waste collected within Aspen. Summary of costs Program change Additional Cost to City Annual Costs to Businesses Prohibiting food waste 0 $0-$15,000 Additional staff (2 FTE)$200,000/year Varies with funding source Subsidies $0-500,000 Rebates to participating businesses 4 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov Summary of revenue options Source of Funding Considerations Surcharge on Aspen waste Requires partnership with Pitkin County New fees on development activity Not directly related to organic waste, but waste stream broadly. Solid waste diversion and fees are being considered in the residential moratorium code amendment process. Tax on municipal waste generated in Aspen Must be voter approved. Spreads the cost through the entire community. Taxes can be regressive, where the financial burden is not necessarily distributed equitably based on impact. General Fund Competes with other City programs FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS:The financial impact varies with the decision. If Council decides to pursue additional funding mechanisms, the impacts to the general fund would be lessened (Exhibit C). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Increasing local compost production not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions from the landfill, but also provides a soil amendment to improve local soils. Reducing the amount of material buried in the landfill also extends the useful life of our local landfill and converting organics into compost decreases the pollutants created within a landfill. If Council pursues additional staffing as recommended, this increases the education, monitoring, and enforcement of the wildlife safety portion of Title 12. This increase will lead to a reduction in the access wildlife have to human waste materials which could improve the health of wildlife and reduce bear-human conflict. Aspen organics buried in landfill (tons) Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions Aspen organics diverted to compost (tons Avoided emissions and sequestered metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 7303 (2019)3944/year 432 (2019)320/year 0 (2050)0/year 7735 (2050)5404/year Estimates created using the EPA WARM calculator, based on 2019 municipal solid waste figures and assuming no organic material is buried in landfill by 2050. This does not account for increased waste amounts. 5 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends changing the Solid Waste portion of the Municipal Code (Title 12) to: -Prohibit food in the landfill trash by modifying Title 12. -Convert Waste Specialist position to permanent status. -Reinstate the Environmental Ranger position within a city department. -Direct staff to develop a new funding mechanism to pay for waste programming necessary to achieve Council’s waste and climate goals. NEXT STEPS: Staff will return with a modified Solid Waste Ordinance (Title 12) for Council to consider in a few months. If Council decides to explore new funding for waste reduction and diversion programs, staff will return with options for Council to evaluate in late 2022. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Key Council Waste Reduction Efforts Exhibit B – Outreach to Retail Food Service Summary Exhibit C –Costs and Funding of Waste Programs (current and proposed) 6 EXHIBIT A Key Aspen City Council Waste Reduction Efforts 2005 – Council revised solid waste ordinance Recycling service required to be paired (and billed) with trash services Yard waste prohibited from landfill trash Increased recycling participation and amounts Complaint based enforcement (except for reporting requirements) 2010 – Council approves Rio Grande Recycle Center (RGRC) improvements Increased recycling amounts Business use contributed bulk of cardboard Seasonal yard waste collection 2010 - State grant for expanding compost operations at Pitkin County landfill Distribution of indoor collection containers for organics Purchased mixer for use at landfill compost system Compost specific hauler began offering curbside service City staff coordinated compost collection at some large restaurants 2011 – Council adds language in Municipal Code to add compost collection Distributed educational materials about compost collection 442 tons of organics collected from Aspen (2011-2014) 2012 – Council added a Waste Reduction Fee to Municipal Code Banned single use plastic bags from Aspen grocers Reduced single use bags 85% of grocery customers do not use disposable paper bags City staff have distributed over 13,000 reusable bags since 2012 Saved 1/4 of 1 day of landfill space over the last eight years 2013 – Council added Trash and Recycling Space requirements in new construction Actively enforced (part of permit process) As new developments are created, fewer dumpsters will be in the alleys When buildings have adequate space for waste containers, diversion is expected to increase 2015 – State grant (sponsored by Pitkin County) Created SCRAPS Community Compost Collection program Media campaign and branding Provided free bear-proof dumpsters for outdoor collection Compost increased to 4% of MSW over 4 years (~20% of restaurants participate) 2140 tons of organics collected from Aspen (2015-2019) Over 319 accounts for curbside compost service 7 2017 – Council and BOCC partner for Solid Waste Assessment study Waste composition results 35% of municipal waste could be recycled 40% of municipal waste could be composted Primary recommendations: Revise City and County solid waste ordinances to be in alignment Increase organics diversion in the MSW sector (compost collection) Increase C&D reduction and diversion 2019 – Council approved change to Targeted Collections at RGRC Increased yard waste amounts composted Expanded metal recycling opportunities 2020 -Council set a Tier 1 Goal re: Waste Management Develop a long-range community waste management plan to reduce waste in the highest impact landfill diversion areas Provide incentives to increase voluntary diversion of waste Consider policy changes to address wildlife conflicts, consider construction impacts, and increase landfill longevity 2022 –Council signed the Race to Zero agreement and set waste diversion goals Reduce organic material going to landfill by 25% by 2025 and 100% by 2050 70% total diversion of waste from landfill by 2050 8 22 Total Survey Participants Questions Multiple Choice Option Vote Tally Multiple Choice Option Vote Tally 1 Yes 17 Yes 5 2 Yes 15 Yes 4 No 2 No 1 Is the business you own or manage a food service establishment? Do you recycle at your business(es)? Do you live in Aspen? Do you work in Aspen? Where do you recycle? 5 Aspen Community Member Respondents Answers from 5 Aspen Community Members (not in food service)Answers from 17 food service workers Appendix I. Results from the survey, Organic Waste Diversion in Aspen . 17 Food Service Respondents 9 Those who answered "Yes" to question 2 Work 2 Cost savings.2 Home 5 It's good for the environment. 13 Around the community.2 Staff are interested in recycling. 6 Our customers like that we recycle. 5 I have curbside service.5 Write in:"I believe it's mandatory" Those who answered "No" to question 2 Yes.4 We don't have space for collection containers. 1 No 1 Other (please specify).1 Write in: We recycle but our trash service places both the trash and recycling into the same truck :( I compost at home.2 Do you separate organics from your landfill trash? Do you have curbside service, or do you take your recyclables to a center? Where do you do this? Why do you recycle? Why not? 10 3 I have curbside compost collection service at home.2 Yes 7 I have curbside compost collection service at work.1 No 10 Those who answered "Yes" to question 3 I have curbside service.2 It's good for the environment. 6 Staff are interested in composting. 1 Do you compost at your business(es)? Why do you compost? Do you have curbside service, or do you take your compost to the Pitkin County Landfill Compost Facility? What barriers get in the way of diverting organic matter from the landfill? 11 Write in: "We don’t because cost too much time and labor"Bears and other wildlife. 3 Those who answered "No" to question 3 I'm not sure how to do it. 1 It takes too much time.3 There isn't space for collection containers.3 We don't have space for collection containers. 7 Write in: "The collection containers can be unmanageable for a single person with a large load of organic material. " Staff isn't interested in composting.3 "Honestly, We used to have curbside back in Maine and it was much more visiblely used in community....just havent made the effort to sign up with a company here in the valley." It's not a law.4 Write in: "Cost prohibitive", "Cost prohibitive" Reduced greenhouse gas emissions. 3 Less material in the landfill. 4 4 Less odor in the trash. 1 What do you believe the benefits are of diverting organics from the landfill? What barriers get in the way of diverting organic matter from the landfill? Why don't you compost? 12 Bears and other wildlife. 11 It reduces my cost for trash.2 Smell.8 It can be processed into compost or feed for livestock. 5 Staff isn't sure how to do it. 5 There isn't space for collection containers.9 Yes 5 The cost for service and supplies.8 The added labor to staff. 6 Provide containers for organics collection.4 Write in:"no barriers, it's easy"Impose fees for putting organics in the trash. 2 5 Provide incentives when organics are diverted.3 Do you think the City of Aspen should support the diversion of organic waste? How do you think the City of Aspen could support organic waste diversion? What do you believe the benefits are of diverting organics from the landfill? 13 Reduced greenhouse gas emissions. 10 Subsidize the cost. 3 Less material in the landfill. 16 Other (please specify).1 Less odor in the trash. 6 It reduces my cost for trash. 4 Yes 4 It can be processed into compost or feed livestock. 12 No 1 6 Yes 15 Should there be legal requirements to divert organic waste in Aspen? Do you think the City of Aspen should support businesses in diverting organic waste? 14 No 2 7 Provide containers for organics collection.13 Impose fees for putting organics in the trash. 3 Provide incentives when organics are diverted. 10 Subsidize the cost. 14 How do you think the City of Aspen could support your business in organic waste diversion? 15 8 Yes 7 No 10 "It would be great if the City funded the Composting effort" Please include anything else youd like to share about organic waste dicersion in Aspen Should there be legal requirements to divert organic waste in Aspen? 16 Outrech Type Audience Reached Date In person visits to resturaunts with flyers for the survey and webinar in spanish and english. 67 Resturaunts month of December 2021 Food waste webinar with pannelists: compost haulers, composting businesses and PitCo Landfill 12 12/16/2021 Emailed all resuraunt contacts on file to take survey, attend webinar and notify of council meeting. Emailed contacts 3 different times. 88 11/29/21; 1/14/22; 1/27/22 17 Feedback from in person visits to Restuarants Indicated only the management would respond to the survey; interested in diverting compost interested Very positive and interested. Concerned about customer education, costs and service frequency interested cost-concerns education-concerns Very negative. Said he had composted before and it was a pain and not worth it. not-interested time-concerns very positive. Took fliers for survey interested Comments Categorized 18 Jour de fete is 100% support of this he just needs help convincing his HOA to allow him to have a been. interested property-manager- disapproval Very positive. Said he had participated in compost diversion in Crested Butte interested Butcher block manager got composting started at bumps. Big barrier for them is how to deal with space constraints in their alley will there be a community compost location for tight alleys. space-constraints He was enthusiastic to hear about this and would make sure staff fill out survey. interested Concerned about extra containers; training staff and customers; "not quite there yet" space-constraints education-concerns 19 Enthusiastic, but said there have been problems with customers contaminating trash interested education-concerns Wants to participate, but cannot because of the shared trash space with Aspen Condominums. There is not enough room for another waste container space-constraints Already composts. interested Do not compost. Don't really have a lot of waste b/c they order their food pre-washed, cut, and prepped. Up for composting, though. interested Can’t get receptacles from hauler receptacle-shortage 20 already composts and recycles interested "into it", asked me to come back when Chef was there interested Stopped compost collection due to expense cost-concerns Wants to participate but cannot affrod the extra cost cost-concerns interested Very worried about the smell, overflowing trash cans, and keeping up with sorting during busy times education-concerns time-concerns smell-concerns 21 Finds participating in compost collection easy; noted the bears cannot get into the bin; very enthusiastic interested interested and said he would post flier interested Thinks everyone should compost interested Interested, took all the fliers interested Space is their main constraint. Said the head chef was interested in composting. interested space-constraints 22 Don't compost b/c they're so small. Share a dumpster with retail in the back. Open to it for sure. space-constraints interested Don't compost anymore. Used to, but it heated up too quickly and started to smell. Also, had a colony of maggots. Open to trying it again. smell-concerns interested 23 Categories Count "Interested"20 "space-constraints"5 "education-concerns"5 "education-concerns"4 24 "cost-concerns"3 "time-concerns"2 "smell-concerns"2 "not-interested"1 "property-manager- disapproval"1 25 "receptacle-shortage"1 26 Exhibit C -Costs and Funding of Waste Programs (current and proposed) Proposed waste expenditures Costs Revenue source Notes Waste Specialist $100,000/year undetermined Currently a temporary position “Environmental Ranger”$100,000/year undetermined A previous position which was eliminated Subsidies to participants $0 to $500,000/year undetermined Current waste expenditures Senior Waste Specialist $106,000/year General Fund Rio Grande Recycle Center operations and equipment $185,000/year General Fund Education/Outreach/Advertisin g $45,000/year General Fund Anticipating a need to communicate new ordinance rules to community All other waste programming outside of recycle center $25,000/year General Fund Single use bag fee expenditures Expenditures equal revenues Reusable bags for free distribution $13,000/year Waste Reduction Fee Monies collected from these fees are restricted by ordinance and cannot be spent on on-going City of Aspen expenses. Electronic waste collection event(s) ~ $27,000/year Waste Reduction Fee Summer intern to help reduce waste at events on City of Aspen properties $15,300/year Waste Reduction Fee 27 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Shirley Ritter, Director, Kids First THRU: Sara Ott, City Manager, Diane Foster, Assistant City Manager Scott Miller, Assistant City Manager MEETING DATE:February 28, 2022 RE:City Council’s Childcare Capacity Goal update PURPOSE: The purpose of this memo is to provide an update for achieving City Council’s Critical 2-year childcare capacity goal. SUMMARY & BACKGROUND: On August 10, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution #76_Series 2021, which directed staff to increase the number of available childcare spaces. This will be accomplished through: 1. Plan, design to repurpose or build new buildings to add physical capacity to increase available childcare space. 2. Increase the recruitment and retention of qualified early childhood teachers. 3.Generate funding to support the development of new childcare spaces. This goal runs for two years, with an expected completion date of July 2023. This is a short timeframe to accomplish this overall goal, however, the next two years will include measurable steps, to show accomplishments that are achievable. The need to expand childcare capacity has been an ongoing part of Kids First’s mission. This City Council goal provides added support and a clear path to achieve this goal. In previous meetings we have provided information from the childcare needs survey conducted by the City of Aspen, Town of Basalt, and the Town of Snowmass Village. Background information that is important to provide context has to do with how childcare is regulated and what quality means for young children. This is relevant to the discussion on capacity, but not something we generally get the chance to talk about. The table below shows the total number of programs, classrooms, and desired daily capacity for children. This information was reported to Kids First by the program directors. 28 2 Name Director Colorado Shines rating Days open Ages licensed to serve Number of classrooms Desired Capacity by age children/day Aspen Country Day Laurie Frampton & Tsvetana Mawicke 4 5 days a week, school schedule, 180 days annually Preschool 2 32 Preschoolers Aspen Mountain Tots Dawn Ryan 1 4 days week, closed Fridays, 185 days annually Toddler, Preschool 2 8 Toddlers 16 Preschoolers Aspen School District Darilynn Cairncross 4 5 days a week, school schedule, 185 days annually Infant, Toddler, Preschool 5 8 Infants 8 Toddlers 45 Preschoolers Aspen Sprouts Cathy Coffee 2 5 days a week, 252 days annually Preschool 1 7 Preschoolers Camp Snowmass Sue Way 1 Seasonal - summer Early Learning Center Leslie Bixel 3 5 days a week, year-round, 240 days annually Infant, Toddler, Preschool 8 16 Infants 18 Toddlers 64 Preschoolers Growing Years Adele Matthee 4 5 days a week, year-round, 244 days annually Infant, Toddler, Preschool 5 8 Infants 16 Toddlers 30 Preschoolers Little Red Schoolhouse Christina Holloway 1 5 days a week, year-round Toddler, Preschool 2 10 Toddlers 18 Preschoolers NJS Kinder Cottage Mary Wolfer 1 Doesn’t report, Closed Mondays Preschool 1 30 Preschoolers Playgroup Aspen Kadi Kuhlenberg 1 Doesn’t report, Closed Mondays Toddler, Preschool 3 8 Toddlers 28 Preschoolers Tree House Sue Way 1 Seasonal, winter Infant, Toddler, Preschool Woody Creek Kids Christina Holloway 1 5 days a week, year-round, 160 days annually Toddler, Preschool 2 10 Toddlers 18 Preschoolers Wildwood Tine Person 4 5 days a week, year-round, 209 days annually Preschool 2 34 Preschoolers Licensing & Colorado Shines Rating Colorado licensing is considered the minimum level for safe care and programs are required to meet these rules. Colorado Shines is a voluntary rating program run by the state and includes levels one through five; all programs who meet licensing requirements are a level one. From that point, programs voluntarily work to increase quality by taking classes or earning points in several areas that are shown to indicate quality for young children. These areas include workforce and professional development, family partnerships, leadership, management, and administration, learning environment, and child health. When programs are working on their Colorado Shines rating, they work with Kids First coaches to make observations, assessments, and provide coaching to earn points in all these areas. Kids First receives funding to provide a limited number of hours to support coaching for high quality childcare and the programs receive funding for materials and professional development for the same purpose, from the state. This is an overview of how 29 3 programs earn quality ratings: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c7xCyiti7zJOE_ORzb3mDAjHf2dKdsJ8/view Number of Children in a Classroom & Waitlists To support higher quality many of our local childcare programs choose to reduce the overall group size and increase the ratio of adults to children. There are national and state standards that require a maximum group size; for example, the Colorado Preschool Program (CPP) allows no more than 16 children in a preschool group. As we’ve mentioned in the past, infant numbers are considerably lower – licensing allows 10 babies (think 6 weeks to 12 months old) in a group with 2 caregivers. Higher quality standards look more like 8 babies with 2 caregivers. If you’ve spent any time in an infant room, you know the difference is dramatic. As you can see on the chart above, we currently have 32 spots for infants. This connects directly with the waitlist information that shows165 infants on 3 waitlists! That’s about 5 times the available spaces – which translates into 16 to 17 infant classrooms We also learned that although some parents put their name on all the lists, many do not. They want specific programs, hours, location, or quality level. We also know that because waitlists are so long and difficult to predict, that many parents use unlicensed care, family care, or do not go back to work after having that baby. As mentioned previously, some parents also can work from home and care for children (still not ideal for anyone involved) however, many parents that work in jobs requiring in-person work do not have that option. This has been shown to be extremely inequitable and places an even greater burden on those who often have fewer resources and greater need. Over the last 3 weeks, staff has reached out to local childcare programs to talk about waitlists. We agree that this is a messy system, and we continue to look for a more systemic solution for families and for the programs. The need shows up every place there are families, one program in Carbondale/El Jebel area has 512 children on the waitlist. More childcare is needed in many places, and it will all have a positive outcome for families. Infant Toddler Preschool TOTAL Program 1 80 80 Program 2 109 0 16 125 Program 3 5 5 Program 4 4 3 6 13 Program 5 52 95 71 218 Program 6 32 165 98 178 473 History of the Yellow Brick as a childcare and childcare support facility During the previous work-session with council, staff was asked to bring information regarding the history and purchase by the City of Aspen, of the yellow brick building. As has been discussed, the purchase from the Aspen School District was complicated and involved a cash price as well as playing fields and other considerations. We have records that show the city paid $1,520,370 in cash for the yellow brick building in 1998. This was the result of several years of planning, budgeting, and negotiations, and used reserve funds from what is now the 152 fund for that cash price. 30 4 Prior to that year, childcare programs were housed in the yellow brick building and the city made over $209,700 worth of repairs from 1995 to 1998. In the following years the city invested over $2,250,000 in the building, including a new roof, playground replacement, new flooring, a lowered ceiling in the gym, and other ongoing repairs and maintenance. As we discussed during budget presentations, operationally we budgeted for $177,760 in revenues for 2022, while budgeting $221,730 in expenditures. This is an intentional subsidy that allows a lease cost of $11 per S.F. annual amount. This lets childcare programs occupy the space, use the common elements of the building and the playgrounds, and provides an affordable space for childcare in Aspen. The average monthly rent for one classroom in the yellow brick is $746. Updating the lease for Aspen Mountain Tots & Issuing a new RFP for space in Yellow Brick Currently staff is working with Aspen Mountain Tots to incorporate language into the yellow brick building lease that meets everyone’s needs and expectations concerning breaks and lease terms. Additionally, city staff is working to ensure a smooth transition in June for Playgroup Aspen, who plans to leave the building and discontinue operations at that time. The next step will be to distribute a request for proposals (RFP) for a new organization to operate childcare in the three rooms that are being vacated. That will be open as soon as possible with the intent to review and choose that childcare provider by early May, allowing time to complete all the steps to re-open that space this summer. The Kids First Advisory Board and staff will look for a program that most closely meets the community need for childcare and has the ability to run a successful program. DISCUSSION: This goal includes five key workplan areas with activities that will happen for the next two years. These elements are: 1. Planning and Design for a new childcare building, 2. Recruitment and Retention of early childhood workforce, 3. Funding to meet the community need for early childhood, 4. Policy, 5. Long-range Planning. 1. Planning and Design for a new childcare building: An infant childcare room at Colorado Mountain College (CMC) renovation in the classroom continues, with replacement of some floor covering, cabinets, plumbing and electrical work. Equipment and furnishing are expected later this week. o We continue to advertise and hold conversations with qualified persons to operate this program. Our hope is to work with CMC to create this room as an incubator with training and experience working with infants. The Kids First Advisory Board will approve the final selection and award a lease for the space. o We plan to open this room this spring – as soon as work is completed, an operator identified, and a childcare license is in place. 31 5 City staff has selected a design firm to begin work on the Burlingame childcare site. Staff has met to get agreement on contract details and plan to bring the contract to city council in March for contract approval. RELATED UPDATES: Aspen School District is continuing to develop their plans for a new early childhood building on the school campus. At this point, it will create new space for the current 5 classrooms of childcare they offer. Those classrooms are now housed in 3 different buildings, including a construction trailer on the site. This new building will be a great space for young children, but it will not include additional classroom space. The Town of Basalt has awarded a design contract for a new childcare building in Willits on town-owned land, as well as an agreement with Blue Lake Preschool to operate the new facility in addition to their current childcare classrooms. The Town of Snowmass Village is working with consultants to determine the childcare need specific to Snowmass Village, and the feasibility of creating additional capacity in the town. 2. Recruitment and Retention of early childhood workforce: Kids First staff are nearing implementation of a new incentive program to provide stronger support for childcare recruitment and retention. This includes individual incentives paid to staff based on their retention, education, credential level, and more quality indicators. This is an area that is especially challenging for existing childcare programs. Many are limited in their ability to enroll more children because of the difficulty of recruiting and retaining staff. Kids First has hired an early childhood intern and is providing education and experience needed for her to successfully move into a lead teacher position in a local childcare program. Kids First continues to engage with CMC with plans to use the infant room space as a learning lab to provide early childhood teachers with educational resources and hands-on experience. We think of this as a form of “incubator” to support job progression for early childhood staff, whether their goal is to be a director, early childhood teacher, or other early childhood expert. 3. Funding to meet the community need for early childhood Staff has continued to strengthen relationships with potential funding partners, to better understand their needs related to childcare. Kids First is contracting with an organization that specializes in capital campaign planning and execution that has created a strategy for collaborative planning and fund development. This work began in February. This plan will: •Define a structure for the leadership group looking forward (clarified responsibilities, authority, expectations for participation, etc) •Develop a strategic vision for the project •Identify key messages for engaging the community •Outline a project budget and develop a strategic fund development plan to support the design/development and launch of the childcare facility •Provide the comprehensive set of information in a clear, practical and user-friendly report for the group (and community at large) 32 6 We continue to monitor federal stimulus funding that includes several supports for both existing programs, expansion of capacity for childcare, as well as workforce supports, professional development, CCCAP rates, early childhood mental health services, indoor air quality, and access to inclusive care for all children. Since January, local childcare programs were able to access stabilization grants through the Colorado Office of Early Childhood, from ARPA stimulus funding. Based on the size and Colorado Shines rating of the program, our local programs may access up to $80,000 over 9 months to help support workforce and families in a variety of ways. https://sites.google.com/state.co.us/publicsitetest/child-care-stabilization-and-sustainability- grants?authuser=0 4. Policy The Colorado legislative session is underway, and Kids First staff is participating with regional partners to provide a unified voice to support policy that has a positive outcome for young children and families. Shirley chairs the policy committee for the Rocky Mountain Early Childhood Council and is actively involved in the Rocky Mountain Preschool Coalition advocacy meetings. 5.Long-range Planning Kids First will include annual evaluation and re-assessment of the data concerning both physical space needs and enrollment capacity, as well as staff capacity. Staff will compare progress with future needs and consider our financial ability to support increased capacity and staffing operationally. We will continue to participate with regional and state partners for technical support, and opportunities to work regionally. Our goal is to support families much longer than the 2-year council goal, making quality childcare the foundation for successful learning for all young children. Kids First staff is working with Roaring Fork Leadership on a project that would gather data from families and childcare providers to create a better system for managing waitlists. The team is working toward a goal of making recommendation to Kids First for a way to make waitlists easier for childcare programs to manage, and easier for families to access childcare. They expect to report on this by May 2022. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Each of the areas listed above requires trained staff as the primary means of accomplishing this work. Capital costs as well as consultants will be required in some cases. As this goal work evolves, funding and staffing needs will be discussed with city management and City Council, project budgets will be included and discussed. NEXT STEPS: Staff will continue to share this plan and activities with Aspen City Council and follow quickly with subsequent meetings to begin discussing policy and getting direction from City Council. Key Council Dates from the Timeline: March 2022: Proposed contract for Burlingame Childcare design firm to City Council April 18, 2022:Work session or Info Only Memo to update and get direction from city council 33 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Mike Horvath, P.E., Project Manager Pete Rice, P.E., Division Manager Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer THROUGH:Scott Miller, Public Works Director MEMO DATE:February 28, 2022 RE:Paepcke Transit Hub Construction Work Session SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The city is working to improve the safety of pedestrians and provide adequate facilities to promote higher bus ridership in order to alleviate the dependency on single vehicles. Improving transit ridership is critical in maintaining historical 1993 vehicle counts and providing choice ridership at the second busiest bus stop in the city. Understanding this critical nature of providing comfortable, safe and efficient infrastructure that encourages ridership over single vehicle occupancy. Staff received considerable After consideration of the considerable amount of public feedback and evaluation of the existing conditions, Engineering and Transportation staff identified the intersection at Garmisch Street and Main Street as an area in need of improvements to increase pedestrian safety, improve bus stop infrastructure and alleviate the ponding of water. The project area is depicted below in Figure 1.The multi-modal approach brings another important goal of the Aspen Community Plan to life. Figure 1:Limit Area for Project 34 The Garmisch Street and Main Street bus stop is the second most utilized bus stop in the City of Aspen. Due to the location of the bus stop, this serves as one of the biggest conduits for pedestrians to connect to a bus stop from the northern side of Main Street. The inbound BRT stop on South Garmisch has limited bus infrastructure and pedestrian safety is a concern when crossing Main St. The intersection is the main stop for people accessing the BRT system with destinations north of Main Street. A significant amount of pedestrian traffic is created that consistently interacts with vehicles on Main St. The Main Street pedestrian crossing (at Garmisch Street) is one of the busiest non-signaled Main St. crossings in the city. Pedestrians are required to cross five lanes of traffic and visibility can be impaired by loading buses and vehicles. An additional concern for staff is the high number of kids that utilize this area due to the proximity of the Yellow Brick school. Several areas near the outbound bus stop need improved slopes to convey storm water properly. During rain events or a snowmelt period, considerable amounts of water pool near the outbound bus stop creating unsafe and uncomfortable conditions. Pedestrians need to walk through water and ice during several periods of the year making it difficult to load buses as seen in Figure 2 below. Figure 2: Drainage Issue Five phases are planned for this project as presented to Council. Phases 1 through 4 have been completed. The phases are broken out as follows: Phase 1 – Inventory Analysis (completed) 35 Phase 2 – Conceptual Engineering Planning (completed) Phase 3 – Design: 30% and 90% Design Development (completed) Phase 4 – Final Design/Construction Drawings (completed) Phase 5 - Construction Phase 1 of the project included public outreach and a survey of the project area. The Paepcke Transit Hub Project performed extensive public outreach during Fall 2019. The outreach included pop-up events at the bus stops, public City forum exhibitions, Aspen Community Voice page, and meetings with stakeholders (internal and external). The project received hundreds of comments and interviewed 20 stakeholders. Interviewed stakeholders include multiple City departments, Molly Gibson, Yellow Brick, Hotel Aspen, Red Brick, Aspen Reprographic, We-Cycle, Next Gen, ACRA, Pitkin BOCC, and local property management. Three major themes developed throughout the outreach: increase safety at Main St crossing, expand bus stop amenities, and improve pedestrian connectivity. Overall, the community and staff were overwhelmingly supportive of the project. The public outreach report can be found as Attachment A. Phases 2 through 4 included the design development into construction documents and were approved by Council in July 2019 and July 2020. The Paepcke Transit Hub project seeks to improve access, comfort and safety for users of transit, bike share, car share and pedestrian/cycling options at one of the busiest locations in Aspen. Specifically, the Paepcke Transit Hub project will: Create a safer inbound transit stop on Garmisch Street by providing a formal bus stop and supporting pedestrian connections. Create safer pedestrian crossings at intersections at or near Highway 82 and Garmisch Street by improving the geometric design of pedestrian routes, the visible site lines between vehicles and pedestrians and pedestrian crossing indications. Create a safer, more comfortable transit stop for outbound passengers at Aspen’s second busiest outbound bus stop by providing a shelter, real time transit signage, trash receptacles and other amenities. Provide power to the car and bike share stations, allowing for the installation of an electric car share vehicle and electric bikes at this key location as well as increased bike share capacity. The public outreach was considered along with staff design guidelines to develop the conceptual design transitioning into construction documents. Staff has worked diligently with RFTA, CDOT, local stakeholders, and consultant team to develop a construction level design that improves the functionality and safety for all users within the project area. The renderings for the project can be found in Attachment B of this document. The final design supported by Council during a work session in November 2020, addresses the major three themes developed in the public outreach and identified by staff. In the designs, the Main St crossing is improved by a raised island between the bus lane and vehicle lanes with a Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) as well as a western crossing with RRFB’s. This allows for increased sight of the RRFB by vehicles when buses are loading and provides a pedestrian refuge while crossing (see Figure 3 below). The design also formalizes 36 the in-bound bus stop on Garmisch with a bus pull off with pedestrian connections in every direction. A midblock crossing is proposed on Garmisch to provide predictable and consolidated pedestrian flow (see Figure 4 below). A bus shelter and improved amenities are proposed at the outbound bus stop on the north side of Main St. Improved amenities include on-demand heaters for winter use similar to other BRT stops down valley. These design elements were strongly supported by the public at all outreach events and interviews. Figure 3: Improved Main St Crossing and Bus Shelter 37 Figure 4: Bus Pullout and Other Improvements on Garmisch St New We-Cycle station pads are included on both the north and south sides of Main St, which increase the bike share program capacity in the area. Infrastructure is proposed to account for the future electrification of the stations as popularity of E-bikes increases. Two electric vehicle charging station are also proposed; one for public use and one for the Car-to-Go car share program. The utilities are to be upgraded below the new concrete bus pad at the outbound bus shelter. This should prevent that surface from construction disturbance for the foreseeable future. Both the water and storm mains are proposed to beupsized. Drainage and conveyance to the stormwater system is to be improved to prevent puddling and splashing of people waiting for the bus on the north side of Main St. City staff has worked with adjacent property owners to limit the impacts to private property. Landscaping and other property improvements have been agreed to in order curtail the effects of the project on the surrounding community while increasing the safety and functionality of the public infrastructure in the area. The Paepcke Transit Hub project was originally advertised for competitive bid in June 2021 and no bids were received at that time. The project was then advertised again for competitive bid on September 27, 2021. One bid was received and opened on January 7, 2022. Qualifying bids were received from one (1) Contractor as summarized below: Gould Construction $4,000,160 DISCUSSION: Staff has discussed the bid internally and some clarifications have been 38 requested by City Manager’s Officeas the bid submitted exceedstheallocated project budget. The Financial Impacts section provides full details for the budget, but the Discussion will evaluate the reasons for the project cost and review similar projects within the valley. . Investigating the budget shortfall requires comparing the bid to the cost estimate provided by the design consultants. This comparison demonstrates there is not one material that is creating the cost increase between the estimate and the bid. Numerous items came in more than 75% over the 2021 Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs including landscaping, storm infrastructure, concrete, traffic control, project maintenance (street sweeping, temporary bus stop, etc.), electrical, and aspects of demolition. After reviewing the Construction Cost Index on Engineering News Record which estimates national projects, overall construction is up 8.4% and building costs are up 14.9% over the last year. Both those numbers include material costs and labor. Studying specific materials, asphalt is up 19.3% and concrete is up 17.5%. Skilled experienced labor is up 2.9% over the last year, and staff has received local feedback that “skilled experience labor” is difficult to find/keep currently in the Roaring Fork Valley (RFV). This information is based on averaging 20 cities throughout the US. The RFV market is much more vulnerable to larger increases due to accessibility, labor availability and material availability, but this demonstrates the current market trends on a nation level. The current budgeting and bidding environments are higher in the RFV but are not anticipated to be reduced in the following years. The HWY 82 Resurfacing project managed by CDOT received 2 bids: one for 127% and one for 152% of the engineer’s estimate earlier in January. The Brush Creek Project presented by EOTC came in at approximately 186% of the estimate. In both cases, the state is proceeding on increasing the allocated budget. A growing concern for contractors is the reliability of labor within the valley due to housing. Contractors are hesitant to commit to a large project with the shortage of labor and specifically drivers. The Paepcke Transit Hub did not receive a bid earlier in the summer. After reaching out to four contractors in the area who could do this work, the labor shortage is a critical concern for contractors. Contractors provided a similar response to the RFTA Pedestrian Underpass project in Glenwood Springs that received zero bids. The labor shortage will be a growing concern in the valley for contractors for years to come. Material pricing, specifically concrete, is a good indicator on pricing of a project as a whole. Concrete bid prices for City projects have fluctuated per the table below over the past three years. Material costs only plays a small role in concrete unit pricing. Accessibility to the application, labor rates, complexity of concrete cross section and jointing, quantity, concrete availability, and concrete mix design all contribute to development of unit pricing. Table 1: Historic Concrete Pricing 2019 - Concrete Replacement2020 - Park Circle 2021 - Concrete Replacement 2022 - Paepcke Transit Hub 2022 - HWY 82 Resurfacing Sidewalk (SY)118.00$ 135.00$ 132.00$ 166.00$ 183.00$ Type 2 Curb & Gutter (LF)44.00$ 60.00$ 59.00$ 58.00$ 60.00$ Reinforced Concrete Pad (SY)330.00$ 200.00$ 197.00$ 510.00$ 245.00$ *8" with steel *6" without steel *8" with steel *9" with steel & curbing *10" without steel Concrete Unit Pricing per Year 39 Utilizing the Curb and Gutter prices shown in the table above,the past three years have seen a 40% increase in concrete pricing compared to the 17.5% from the Construction Cost Index for concrete. Figure 5:Concrete Pricing Lagging indicators of actual construction costs over the past 10 years would suggests that costs may stabilize but it is unlikely that they will decrease. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:Staff recommends that it is in the City’s best interests to award the construction contract to Gould Construction and the other contracts listed to their respective consultants/contractors while deferring non-top priority projects. These contracts total $4,414,028 per Table 2 below. Project Item Costs Gould Construction Bid $ 4,000,160.00 Construction Inspections $ 163,849.00 Outreach $ 45,975.00 Materials Testing $ 18,170.00 Tree Mitigation $ 4,365.00 Construction Administration $ 45,688.00 Contingency (approx. 3%)$ 135,821.00 Total $ 4,414,028.00 Table 2: Project Costs Funding for this project is equal to $1,910,302 and it was appropriated within the 2022 Asset Management Plan Fund budget, under project 50486: Garmisch Bus Stop &Pedestrian Improvements and other funding sources. Other funding sources are discussed in detail below in Table 3. Funding Source Amount 40 Project Account $ 849,608.00 CDOT Grant Funding $ 800,392.00 Project Budget Subtotal $ 1,650,000.00 Small Lodge Fund $ 79,418.00 Utility Distribution Maintenance Fund $ 77,364.00 Electric Cable Replacement Fund $ 103,520.00 Project Budget Total $ 1,910,302.00 Table 3: Existing Project Funding The Transportation and Engineering Departments collaborated to submit Multi-Modal Operations Fund (MMOF) and Revitalizing Main Streets (RMS) grant applications for the Paepcke Transit Hub project. Both MMOF and RMS grants are awarded and managed by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). The Paepcke Transit Hub project was well- received and awarded with $650,392.00 in funding from the MMOF grant and $150,000 from the RMS grant. Specifically, the MMOF grant agreement will fund the project as follows. The Transportation Department will manage the MMOF and RMS grants. These grants decrease the net budget by $800,392, but the 2022 Asset Management Plan will require an increase in budget allowance from $1,910,302 to $4,414,028 prior to reimbursement from CDOT. The project costs are more than the estimated project budget at time of MMOF grant submittal of $1,300,784, so only 50% split of estimated cost of $1,300,784 will be implemented on the total construction cost within the MMOF grant. The MMOF grant expires in June 2023; therefore, all construction and reimbursement requests must be completed by this date in order to receive the full MMOF funding. $56,840 of construction funding is also being reimbursed by RFTA and local development. Staff will work to increase RFTA’s contribution if Council provides direction to proceed. The total reimbursement for the projects totals $857,232. These reimbursements will decrease the final money spent by the City to a total of $3,556,796 per Table 4below.Itis also important to note that only the MMOF Grant was utilized in the development of the appropriated project budget, therefore the other $206,840 of reimbursements outside of the MMOF Grant (RMS Grant, Main St Bakery, & RFTA) will offset a portion of the requested Spring Supplemental. Reimbursement Source Amount CDOT Grant (MMOF)$ 650,392.00 CDOT Grant (RMS)$ 150,000.00 CDOT Grants Subtotal $ 800,392.00 Main St Bakery $ 6,840.00 RFTA $ 50,000.00 Reimbursement Subtotal $ 857,232.00 Project Total Cost $ 4,414,028.00 Reimbursement Subtotal ($ 857,232.00) Final City Expenditure $ 3,556,796.00 Table 4: Project Reimbursement 41 The Small Lodge Fund is being utilized for right-of-way improvements adjacent to the Molly Gibson Lodge, totaling $79,418. The Molly Gibson would ultimately be responsible for the construction of these improvements without the project, therefore the use of the Small Lodge Fund per the request of the developer. The Paepcke Transit Hub will complete them as part of the project to minimize construction impacts and maximize the functionality of the corridor. The Utility Distribution Maintenance Fund will be utilized to cover all costs associated with upgrading the water main line and fire hydrant in the project area, totaling $77,364. The Electric Cable Replacement Fund will also contribute $103,520 to cover additional electrical infrastructure benefitting the electrical distribution grid. These inter-departmental contributions save the City money as separate improvements are combined under one project scope. Project Total Costs $ 4,414,028.00 Appropriated 2022 Budget including Grants ($ 1,910,302.00) Project Budget Shortfall $ 2,503,726.00 Table 5: Budget Shortfall The additional $2,503,726 listed above in Table 5 will be requested through project deferment and in the 2022 Spring Supplemental. The Engineering Department has prioritized the 2022 budgeted projects per Table 6 below. Prioritization was based on impacts to the traveling public, sustainability, safety, Council direction, and other relevant criteria. The table also includes the appropriated 2022 budgets. This demonstrates the total 2022 Engineering Capital Improvement Plan budget and the deferment amount for the projects proposed to be deferred. Priority Ranking Project / Program 2022 Budget Proposed Deferment 1 Paepcke Transit Hub $ 1,910,302.00 - 2 Downtown Core Pedestrian Safety $ 75,000.00 - 3 Spring and Cooper Street Intersection Improvements $ 295,000.00 - 4 Concrete Replacement – Including 2021 Carry Forward $ 695,614.00 $ 275,064.00 5 Hallam Street Roadway Improvements at Yellow Brick Building $ 275,000.00 $ 275,000.00 6 Red Brick Roadway Improvements $ 155,000.00 $ 155,000.00 7 Hyman Pedestrian Connectivity Improvements $ 59,000.00 $ 59,000.00 8 Ute Avenue Traffic Calming and Trail Connection $ 122,000.00 $ 122,000.00 9 ADA Pedestrian Improvements – 2022 $ 97,000.00 $ 97,000.00 10 ROW Improvement Planning $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 Total $ 3,833,916.00 $ 1,133,064.00 ** A portion of the concrete replacement fund is reappropriated to allow for Spring & Cooper/General Concrete Replacement to proceed. $420,550 from Project 4’s budget will be utilized for Project 3. Table 6: Project Prioritization 42 The Engineering Department proposes to move forward with projects 1 through 3 on the priority list while also keeping $102,000 for on-demand concrete replacement projects that arise during the season. Council approved a construction contract for projects 3 & a portion of project 4 on February 22nd and gave direction to proceed with project 2 during the February 15th work session. These projects benefit the wide-spread community and have an urgent demand. This results in deferring projects 4 through 10 on the project priority list (Table 6) until Council re-evaluates them through the budgeting process and re- appropriating their 2022 budget for the construction of the Paepcke Transit Hub project. The re-appropriated budget would total $1,133,064 per the Table 6 above. A Spring Supplemental request is proposed to cover the remaining balance of $1,382,622 calculated in Table 7 below. The Spring Supplemental would be divided evenly between the AMP Fund and the Transportation Fund. Each fund would contribute $685,331 per Table 7 below. Paepcke Transit Hub 2022 Project Budget $ 1,910,302.00 2022 Re-Appropriated Project Budget $ 1,133,064.00 Total Project Cost ($ 4,414,028.00) Project Budget Shortfall after Budget Reappropriation ($ 1,382,662.00) Splitting Project Shortfall AMP Fund $ 685,331.00 Transportation Fund $ 685,331.00 Table 7: Project Shortfall after Reappropriation With the CDOT grants, the project is under the CDOT Local Agency Project regulation. City staff and consultants will work with CDOT to deliver a satisfactory product. This also requires the City to go under contract with Gould for the bid amount of $4,000,160. The City is negotiating certain aspects of the project that will lower the overall costs, but not affect the end product or the grant funding. This decrease in the project costs is proposed to remain in the project budget as additional contingency if unforeseen field conditions require project change orders. Staff is working diligently to also increase funding from outside sources including RFTA and other grant possibilities. This funding described above is existing proposed funding without further successful efforts to decrease project costs and increase outside funding sources. It is prudent the City go under contract with Gould at this time to ensure there is adequate time for pre-construction coordination to occur prior to breaking ground. ENVIORONMENTAL IMPACTS: The project seeks to increase the usability of the entire corridor for alternative methods of transportation. The improved bus stops and amenities with greater pedestrian connections should upsurge the use and convenience for bus riders in the area. The new paver We-Cycle stations will increase the capacity of the bike share program as well as provide infrastructure for future electrification of the shared bikes. Two electrical vehicle (EV) charging stations will be installed; one for public use and one for Car- to-Go. The EV charging stations will decrease the reliance on fossil fuels and influence individuals towards the use of electrical vehicles. This proposed combination of 43 infrastructure ultimately will produce more multimodal users within the City of Aspen with less reliance and use of fossil fuel vehicles. RECOMMENDATION: Staff seeks Council direction on how to proceed with the 2022 Paepcke Transit Hub Project Construction Contract with Gould Construction and other associated contracts in the amount of $4,414,028 for implementation of Phase 5 through project deferment and a Spring Supplemental as described in the Financial Impacts section of this memo. Staff will add the contracts to the consent calendar for the Council meeting on March 8th for approval. ALTERNATIVES: Staff has explored the below alternative options: 1) The City accepts the bid as is and proceeds forward covering the budget shortfall solely through supplemental. This would result in a Spring Supplemental of $1,251,863 out of BOTH the AMP Fund and the Transportation Fund. This alternative would not include any project deferment. This could mean staff may need to cut some other projects in the AMP to afford this – from Engineering to Police to Streets to Recreation. 2) City re-advertises for bids. Most likely with this, the City will lose our current grant award of $800,000 due to the expiration date of the grant reimbursement. City staff has a current 100% completion rate for finishing projects associated with state grants. It’s not easy to receive grants in general, but if staff turns away money, staff will lower the chances for future chances at grants. Not utilizing the large grant funding received by this project will have an impact down in the future on the ability of the City to obtain grant funding. 3) City can revisit the scope of this project and proceed with certain elements of the project. This again would result in omission of the current grant award of $800K. It would also require a re-advertisement for bid process with the limited scope. This option might allow other City identified ROW projects to continue vs. being deferred by this project. 4) City can focus on the improvements incrementally, as possible, and still tackle it over a longer horizon. This gives it some momentum but allows time to consider the bigger picture too. Performing work on Main Street is a considerable operation, the more staff breaks it out, the more fees the City will have in mobilization, traffic control and most likely materials. It is key to be aware that there are not a lot of contractors in the valley who do this work. Bidding could get harder for a project if try to break it out separately as re- advertisement for bid would be necessary for each “phase”. 5) City tables this project for now for the reasons listed below. However, this option prolongs the existence of an unsafe pedestrian environment in a largely popular area and lackluster transit and bike amenities at the second busiest transit hub in town. a) The construction industry is going through a boom cycle right now and labor is in short supply. b) The supply chain problems are making projects more costly and that some of this could be transient and self-correct. 44 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENT A – Public Outreach Report ATTACHMENT B – Project Renderings 45 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report October-December 2019 Prepared By: PR STUDIO December 23, 2019 46 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Updated: December 23, 2019 REPORT CONTENTS • Outreach Summary • Major Input Themes • Reoccurring Ideas for Solutions • Attachments o Attachment 1 - Phase I Comments o Attachment 2 - Aspen Community Voice Pinned Comments Maps o Attachment 3 - Stakeholder Interview Sheets o Attachment 4 – RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey o Attachment 5 - Outreach and Publicity Log PHASE I OUTREACH SUMMARY Phase I: October-November 2019 All collected input is included in this report to focus the direction of conceptual design process in phase II. Outreach activities included pop-up events at the Paepcke Transit Hub, interviews with project neighbors and key stakeholders, Aspen Community Voice input, and comments via social media, phone and email. Key Phase I Questions: Throughout phase I, various community input activities were focused around these questions: • What physical improvements do you (the community) envision to improve the safety, function and/or experience for this transit hub? • What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? 47 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Updated: December 23, 2019 MAJOR INPUT THEMES Quantities reflect totals from Aspen Community Voice, public events, stakeholder interviews and the RFTA staff survey. • Desire for covering or shelter at outbound stop with enhanced seating, real time bus signs and better route information (~102 unique comments/mentions on shelter/covering; ~59 comments/mentions on seating) o Lack of shelter from the elements ▪ “Can we please have some sort of shelter on Main St for those waiting to go downvalley? It is totally exposed and the snow, rain and sun are brutal.” o Lack of waiting space/seating for bus riders ▪ “it can get really busy in the afternoon” ▪ “I usually see people sitting on the planters or leaning on the building” o Lack of bus route information at stops ▪ “it took me a while to figure out which bus was right” ▪ “I also see and help tons of tourists figure out the bus stop. It isn't clear to visitors which bus is coming next and which one they should take. They stop every bus and ask. A clear schedule with a BRT like screen when the next bus is coming would help everyone out.” • Main Street pedestrian crossing is distressing/feels dangerous (~95 unique comments/mentions) o Impaired site-lines/sun glare ▪ “It is very scary crossing the road with the kids as cars don't see you” o Distracted drivers/traffic speed o Path conditions (snow/ice) • Garmisch is disorganized and has conflicting user corridors (~70 unique comments/mentions) o No defined path for pedestrians dismounting the bus ▪ “people cross behind the bus and cars are turning onto Garmisch” ▪ “The majority of brt bus riders getting off at Paepcke in the mornings head to main street to go east or cross to go north and east. They first have to walk along garmisch and contend with vehicles parking at the molly gibson, then cross garmisch which causes traffic problems with vehicles entering garmisch from main.” o Inconsistent stop for inbound BRT buses on Garmisch ▪ “sometimes the bus stops by Main and sometimes it stops farther up the street” • Sidewalk connections could be improved (~41 unique comments/mentions) o Addition of sidewalk for riders dismounting on Garmisch ▪ “The lack of sidewalk (and therefore shoveled surface), creates a sheet of ice to maneuver around the bus.” o Addition of sidewalk to major destinations (Yellow Brick, Red Brick) ▪ “I would like to see a continuous sidewalk on the East side of N. Garmisch all the way from Main Street to the Red Brick. There is sidewalk part of the way…” o Addition of green space buffer between Main and Paepcke ▪ “Sidewalk on Paepcke side of Main is in bad shape, could use a green buffer between street and sidewalk, currently slush goes up onto sidewalk” 48 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Updated: December 23, 2019 REOCCURRING IDEAS FOR SOLUTIONS • Add a shelter with real time signage o Several individuals indicated that it should look like the stops at 8th Street/other BRT stops • Add more seating • Add bathrooms • Add bike racks • Add green space buffer between Main and south sidewalk • Improve bus route information and maps/wayfinding signage • Consolidate/relocate inbound bus stop(s) o Various alternate locations were noted including consolidating both stops onto either Main or Garmisch, moving the stop to Aspen Street and moving the stop further west on Main • Make crosswalk more visible/move the crosswalk/get rid of the crosswalk o Add post in middle of road/have lit up crosswalk/innovative striping • Make Garmisch Street one-way • Improve lighting • Improve road condition • Add a bus ticket machine • Add a sidewalk/designated path for those dismounting on Garmisch • One-way Garmisch Street • Add a median on Main Street • Add overpass/underpass for crossing Main Street It should be noted that approximately ten people commented that the area works fine as is and that no changes are necessary. The overwhelming majority identified ways the area could be improved. 49 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Attachment Updated: December 23, 2019 Phase I Comments Attachment 1 50 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/9/2019 Pop-up There should be a sidewalk on the park side of Garmisch. The flashing lights work well, but a stopl light at that intersection might be better. A cover for the bus stop would be good.M C W 10/9/2019 Pop-up Getting off at inbound stop is dangerous, crossing main, turning cars onto Garmisch M G 10/9/2019 Pop-up Change to no right turns to Garmish during peak (blind spot)G 10/9/2019 Pop-up Not a fan of the inbound stop. It's dangerous on Garmisch, you have to cross behind the bus G 10/9/2019 Pop-up It's hard to see the bus signs as they pull up. Crossing the street is dangerous, people don’t stop. Add a shelter and more seating. The most important thing is the crosswalk across Main.M C S 10/9/2019 Pop-up Add a traffic signal, people zoom by -or have it as a camera intersection. I'd like more lighting on Garmisch and in the west end and more seating.S 10/9/2019 Pop-up Get rid of the bench and put more seating S 10/9/2019 Pop-up More seating (+9 check marks)S 10/9/2019 Pop-up People putting their bags on the ground so we can sit S 10/9/2019 Pop-up There are people all over the place and in the grass S 10/9/2019 Pop-up It would be nice to have an awning or coverage of some kind C 10/9/2019 Pop-up Real time bus signs (+5 check marks)C 10/9/2019 Pop-up Shelter! (+10 check marks) Rain, cold in winter C 10/9/2019 Pop-up Shelter for waiting at the outbound bus stop. Garmisch gets crowded with hotel guests coming in and out. Mostly people stop for pedestrians at the crossing lights.C 10/9/2019 Pop-up Cars don't stop for pedestrians crossing Main M 10/9/2019 Pop-up I use the stoplight at Aspen instead of the flashers M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Maybe add a ped light in the middle of main Street M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Need a speed bump on Main M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Need more educations on ped lighting M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Pedestrian underpass or over pass (+3 check marks)M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Tough crossing, distracted drives, sun glare in afternoons (+3 checkmarks)M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Visitors don't understand the pedestrian lights M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Dangerous crossing Main, add bump-in for inbound local bus on Main St; Add restroom - lots of special events at Paepcke Park and people waiting for the bus. Add more public bike racks, especially on the park side M 10/9/2019 Pop-up Add cigarette butt capture and recycling 10/9/2019 Pop-up Add more formal bus bay for outbound stop Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 1 of 1051 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/9/2019 Pop-up Add skiier information signs, where to go, wayfinding signs 10/9/2019 Pop-up Buses should get priority, be on a fast track through. Minimal improvements needed, but make it better for buses. 10/9/2019 Pop-up Esta bien, no problems for me 10/9/2019 Pop-up Generally everything works smoothly, but would be great if PD helped with traffic and road rage during the peak. PD should help give priority to busses and wave them through traffic. 10/9/2019 Pop-up I like the pedestrian flashers because I can cross immediately (+3 check marks) 10/9/2019 Pop-up It all works just fine for me 10/9/2019 Pop-up Need a public bathroom, but it should be invisible 10/9/2019 Pop-up Need route map nearby 10/9/2019 Pop-up Need to consolidate inbound drop offs at Paepcke Park 10/9/2019 Pop-up No change is needed. It can get crowded, but a bus shelter wont fix that. 10/9/2019 Pop-up Tourists are often confused on how to get to their destination 10/15/2019 ACV Pin Pin I - Better crossing/ designated stop for inbound BRT passengers M G 10/15/2019 ACV Pin Pin L - Shelter/heating for extended seating and winter time C S 10/15/2019 ACV Pin Pin B - Lots more seating and heating needs to be made S 10/16/2019 Pop-up (x3) People don't stop, honk and are impatient even when you can see people crossing; Bus stops in different places, better if all buses stop at Main and can cross at light; Shelter, need more seating M C S G 10/16/2019 Pop-up Add a shelter, have to hide under building when it is really busy; especially in summer, need PD enforcement of pedestrian lights and speed; people behind bus not seeing pedestians, some people don't wait and go around bus M C G 10/16/2019 Pop-up Covered space for snow/rain; Like inbound on Main better than Garmisch because it seems dangerous with traffic behind bus and people crossing; when there is a bus there traffic backs up; people on Main Street drive too fast M C G 10/16/2019 Pop-up Everything is great; Drop off on Garmish is dangerous, people coming around corner; Bus should stop closer to Hopkins; People cross behind bus; Good job to Dan Bankenship for all his work; Seems like it would be a lot of money for a shelter; water by outbound stop splashes up sometimes G 10/16/2019 Pop-up Bus stop should stop at Aspen Country Inn; Need more lighting while waiting for bus; Need more seating S 10/16/2019 Pop-up Add shelter like 8th Street for winter, it gets nasty outside; Cars come flying through on Main M C Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 2 of 1052 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/16/2019 Pop-up Bus driver occupied w/ telling riders which bus is right; Shelter would be appreciated; Crosswalk not sufficiently lit up, maybe add post in middle of road; Underpass would be awesome; Not as many visitors use this stop; Path is nicer from Rubey M C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Cars moving too fast; Proper bus stop with shade M C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Need lighting for night time, hard to read signs at night; Hard crossing Main; Add a shelter for rain M C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Una casita para la lluvia y nieve; Las personas y las coches no respecten los luces; Hay personas que no saben como usar las luces {a shelter for the rain and snow; people and cars don't respect the pedestrian lights; there are people who don't know how to use the crossing lights}M C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Cover for rain/snow; Need BRT to stop at golf course C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Heated shelter; No cigarettes C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Real time signs when bus is coming, like other stops, feels more connected; Flash lights generally work, make drivers more aware, sometimes distracted drivers C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Shelter with place to purchase ticket; Crossing is fine, people tend to stop C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Sometimes not a place to sit; Bus shelter; A lot of people coming and going C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Una casita para el nieve y la lluvia; mas asientos y luces {a shelter for the snow and rain; more seating and lights}C 10/16/2019 Pop-up Drivers have a hard time seeing flashing beacons, generally look both ways; A lot of people at 5pm; Everything is good; Good bus service M 10/16/2019 Pop-up Estas bien, hay mucho traffico; Sometimes cars don't stop for people crossing; En vierno es peligroso; don't like people Smoking marajuana {everything is good, there is a lot of traffic… in winter it is dangerous}M 10/16/2019 Pop-up Trash can not strong enough for bears; Maybe add a drinking water fountain; Travelers can't see lights, so I don't like crossing at flashers; When snow melts, there is a big puddle & we get splashed M 10/16/2019 Pop-up I get off at Rubey because the walk from Rubey is nicer 10/16/2019 Pop-up it seems like all the buses come at same time, spread apart then you could catch more constantly 10/16/2019 Pop-up Pedestrian crossing works fine; Add a bit of a bus bay 10/16/2019 Pop-up Pretty good overall; Outbound can get crowded, seating is a problem; Everyone pretty good at stopping, most people pay attention, some don't; For regulars/locals, signage is fine, every now and then tourists don't know where they're going Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 3 of 1053 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/17/2019 Email I picked up your flyer yesterday, at my usual bus stop. Here are my suggestions: -Can we please have some sort of shelter on Main St for those waiting to go downvalley? It is totally exposed and the snow, rain and sun are brutal. -Coming upvalley the BRT drops you in the middle of the street between the bus and parked cars. It is not safe how people then cross the street. Can there be a real stop on Main Street? Maybe before the bus makes its turn, or it could use the local stop and turn a block later?C G 10/17/2019 ACV South Garmisch Street should be a one-way street. As there is no traffic light, it is difficult for cars to exit from that street. It would make it easier for buses to turn onto the street (and might provide additional space for Car-to-Go or bicycle racks) and make it a bit safer for pedestrians who do not need to deal with cars pulling out from S Garmisch as they cross the street. Decreasing some of the activity with cars at that intersection would improve safety.M G 10/17/2019 ACV Provide a covered bike rack for commuters who bike from bus stop to work year round 10/21/2019 ACV Pin Pin T - Continuous sidewalk needed on both sides of Garmisch from Main Street RFTA bus stop at Paepcke to Koch Lumber Park. When I used to take my toddlers from bus stop on Main/Paepcke to Wildwood bus at Koch Lumber Park there was never a consistent safe path without having to cross Garmisch more than once. Further, when RFTA ski bus or X turns at Garmisch, it lets passengers out in middle of street near Paepcke park on Garmisch which is also not a safe cross area for massing of passengers trying to exit the front and back of bus. G W 10/21/2019 ACV Invite people to use the bus by providing lighted bus shelters on both sides of the street. Within the shelter, provide information that it is an in-bound or out-bound bus and map the stops it makes. Equally important, indicate the time the next bus will arrive - this could be digital indicating the minutes remaining before the bus arrives or if it is delayed.C 10/21/2019 ACV Pin Pin K- Shelter similar to 8th Street bus stop should be added.C 10/21/2019 ACV Make Paepcke the main Aspen RFTA and transit hub; REduce the number of large RFTA uses circulating around Aspen by replacing Rubey Park with PAepcke. 10/21/2019 ACV Pin Pin M - Not a lot get off here, maybe get rid of it. 10/21/2019 ACV Pin Pin R - Can get onto 82 from here. Should be one way into south area of town. Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 4 of 1054 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/23/2019 ACV Pin Pin O - I would like to see a continuous sidewalk on the East side of N. Garmisch all the way from Main Street to the Red Brick. There is sidewalk part of the way. Many bus riders and pedestrians take this route from the bus stop to the Red Brick and also on to the Post Office.W 10/23/2019 ACV Pin Pin H - I think you need to add a stop light at this intersection. I have seen numerous people almost get hit by vehicles. I personally was involved in an car accident at this intersection when the car I was riding in stopped on Main Street because of a flashing light and a pedestrian crossing Main Street. While the car I was riding in stopped, the car behind us did not stop and plowed into us. I was injured. If there were a stoplight, the accident would not have happened. M 10/25/2019 ACV I drive in the city every day as a limo driver and I just don't see the traffic at this bus stop to warrant all this expense. This is BS, nonsense idea 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin J - BRT riders getting off and heading south and east are often unable to get from the street where they are dropped off to the sidewalk due to snow banks, forcing them to walk in the icy street between the parked cars and the bus that just dropped them off.G W 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin S - This BRT stop is not ideal. Regardless of where the bus ends up stopping, riders are left in the middle of the road. With no access to a sidewalk, this stop is unpleasant and dangerous. G W 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin D - The majority of brt bus riders getting off at Paepcke in the mornings head to main street to go east or cross to go north and east. They first have to walk along garmisch and contend with vehicles parking at the molly gibson, then cross garmisch which causes traffic problems with vehicles entering garmisch from main. It's a shitshow. Ideal would be to have buses pull alongside paepke park to get out of the drive lane of garmisch. Paepcke park could give up some square footage to a bus pullout lane with an island for rider disembarking.G 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin G - I would like a safe crossing that gives pedestrians and cars time to cross/realize there are people crossing. This is especially important when there are icy roads. M 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin A - Enhanced seating would be welcome in this location 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin F - Consider a large pull out bus stop on main for upvalley BRT drop offs- this would eliminate the garmisch drop off problems. Then route the BRTs up Aspen St (or put the drop off on Aspen st alongside Paepcke) Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 5 of 1055 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin Q - There needs to be a bike rack at this location. Bikes end up attached to trees, etc. 10/28/2019 ACV Pin Pin U - Need to trim the branches of trees over the sidewalk on garmisch and on hopkins for pedestrians. 11/1/2019 ACV Pin Pin N - Doesn't have to be a shelter but some type of safe pull out for inbound BRT buses to drop passengers at a cross walk. 11/2/2019 AVC Q&A Why not consistency on inbound bus stops for both local and BRT G 11/6/2019 ACV Pin Pin E - I don't like to get off at this stop given we have to walk in the street and there is no sidewalk. It was one of the few unfortunate things with BRT. The old drop off was so much safer on Main St given the sidewalk. Is there anyway to have the drop off on Main right before Garmisch?M W 11/6/2019 Email When getting off the bus at the inbound stop of Paepcke Park, I had another thought today. I think to improve safety, it would be better to have a buffer between the street and the sidewalk. Right now they abut each other and I have visions of my toddler falling into the street when she runs to the crosswalk. W 11/6/2019 ACV Bus Shelter & Safer Crossing for Pedestrians - At least twice a day we use the Paepcke bus stops as we drop off our kids at the yellow brick or picking them up. It is very scary crossing the road with the kids as cars don't see you. The light helps to cross but maybe a raised cross walk? As for the down valley Paepcke Park stop, I would like to see a big covered bus shelter. We are usually waiting with multiple families with small kids as it is snowing. I little cover would help. A pull out bus stop would help keep the kids safer as they wouldn't be right on the road waiting for the bus. I also see and help tons of tourists figure out the bus stop. It isn't clear to visitors which bus is coming next and which one they should take. They stop every bus and ask. A clear schedule with a BRT like screen when the next bus is coming would help everyone out. Any update to the bus stops would be a major improvement.M C Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 6 of 1056 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 11/6/2019 ACV Pin Pin C - Consider lighting and / or an additional Main St. crosswalk on the west side of Garmisch (the side BRT riders get off on). Having lights on the other side of the street would also give drivers on main st. more time to stop when the lights start flashing (i'm thinking of the hunter street intersection near the police building)M 11/6/2019 ACV Pin Pin P - How about this as the drop off? 11/8/2019 ACV Garmisch sidewalk - The inbound Garmisch stop is dangerous - the lack of a curb makes a high step down from the bus, usually onto ice in the winter. The lack of sidewalk (and therefore shoveled surface), creates a sheet of ice to maneuver around the bus. Off loaded passengers are forced to contend with the bus pulling out (while being positioned much too close to those big tires), limited sight distance around the bus for vehicles traveling towards Main, and other in-coming buses and traffic turning in from Main (sometimes too fast that suddenly have to brake). The biggest improvement should be safety here, and include designated pedestrian route, not the free for all that exists. Winter conditions have always been treacherous, and I have fallen here before. M G W 11/8/2019 ACV We need a second bridge over Castle Creek to ease the back-up of commercial traffic and so that buses can flow in and out freely. 11/9/2019 Facebook Give people a covered warm well lit place to wait C 11/9/2019 ACV Designated bus slips - The buses should have designated stop locations along the sidewalk similar to Rubey Park (maybe just two, one for downvalley and one for local). Most people wait near the one sign at the corner and then end up walking back down a lineup of buses. This is especially confusing for non-residents. It would make for faster queueing and loading if they were clearly marked areas where each stopped. 11/9/2019 Facebook Put a boutique bus stop where the defunct gas station is. Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 7 of 1057 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 11/21/2019 Email all the city needs is a bus shelter with seating and proper signage installed at the Paepcke Park down valley bus stop. Also a sign; no parking for delivery trucks on this block. A more desperate need is to improve the Hunter street and Durant street bus stop and intersection! The continual flow of pedestrians, (which backs up traffic during rush hour), needs to be controlled with a pedestrian traffic light; like the ones on our Main Street intersections. Also a large sign Over the roadway double parking is never allowed on this block. Maybe this winter we could place a traffic cop at this intersection form 3 till 6pm. Snow and ice build up at The bus stop on the corner of Hunter and Durant needs to be removed so bus riders can disembark safely. Riders are let off at this bus stop wearing ski boots. This bus stop has very poor drainage.C S 11/30/2019 Email [See last page in attachment for full message]M C S G W 11/30/2019 ACV Yes. One way would help a lot on Garmsch. If it remains 2 way, just make it NO LEFT TURN ONTO MAIN.S G 11/30/2019 ACV [RE: "Idea: Garmisch sidewalk] By RFTA Staffer: This letter describes why it would be a safer solution if the bus stop was on Main Street prior to the turn onto Garmisch. I agree with danger and uncomfortable feeling for the exiting passengers. It is dark, wet, slick, intimidating. It would cost much less $$ to move the stop onto MainStreet. By AshleyH (original poster): I agree with RFTA Staffer. Before BRT, my express bus would stop on Main, and it was much safer. A proper stop, one way or the other (on Main before or after Garmisch, or removing parking on Garmisch to accommodate one), should be the priority. The flashing crossing across Main was a huge upgrade to this location, already.G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum crossing behind bus G W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Shelter and bike parking; Better cross walk C W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Have to jump over snow at crossings. Improve.M W Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 8 of 1058 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Main Street pedestrian crossing is distressing/feels dangerous (+7 check marks)M W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Use flashing red light @ xing- no one stops for yellow M W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum sidewalk to Red Brick W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Important!! [sidewalk to Red Brick]W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Blinking cross walk (+2 check marks)W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Pedestrian Markings W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Most of traffic going north, everyone crosses; no set bus stop W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Sidewalk connections could be inproved throughout area. (+6 check marks)W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum dangerous for walking. Add w crosswalk, (2) crossings W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum widen sidewalk on paepcke; bus pull out for inbound on main W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Need full stoplight at Main + Garmish! It's Dangerous M G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Increase radius (+1 check mark)G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Garmisch is disorganized and has conflicting user corridors (+7 check marks)G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum formalize bus stop on Garmisch G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum afraid to hit people/bus when turning right to Garmisch; hard to see on Garmisch G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum taxi drop off have to beware of bus G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum MAKE BLEEKER ST; Garmicsh to Library pedestrian G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum don't mind Garmisch; light helps a lot, add shelter and route info! w/ real time G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Shelter + Seating @ DV C S 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Desire for shelter/covering at outbound stop with more seating, real time bus signs and better route information (+10 check marks)C S 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Shelter + Seating C S 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum be careful of lighting, night sky. Shelter, add bike parking w/ cover C 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum shelter w/ actual shelter from elements, the one at 8th is open in the front C 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum make it like 8th street, so many people wait C 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Winter maintenence @ crossing (+ 2 check marks)M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum I fall all the time [@ crossing]M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum education on how to use lights, maybe different color M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum hard to reach RFB as bike rider M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum education on how to use the button M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum cut + cover underpass for Main St crossing M 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum More route info 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum separating ski buses? closer? 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Like the blinking lights Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 9 of 10 G M M G 59 Main and Garmisch/Paepcke Transit Hub Phase I Public Comments *Date *Via *Comment *M *C *S *G *W 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum No pullout (+1 check mark) 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Cost of shelter not worth it, prices go up every year. Don't wait very long at the stop 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Real time Bus signs do not work! 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Top priority is keeping the park 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Maybe bus outbound down garmish; proximity 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Children's play area 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum easy to miss lights, especially if not familiar with that 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum designate a stop G 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum more bike parking 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum no one-way, adds circulation; maybe no lefts 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum if you actually use the light it works 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Should the routes change? Maybe stop needs moved to S. of Paepcke 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum mainstreet is really busy, side streets arent as busy, move the bus stop to a side street 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum people don’t know bus stopping inbound on Main 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Busses miss me at night; busy during xgames 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum trash can and recycling 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum can we move to Aspen? 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Keep tranquillity of park; public safety is critical 12/4/2019 Dec. Forum Covered, lighted downalley bus stop like 8th St. Better sidewalk connections Use w. side of park for more bike parking inbound bis stop. Make that setreet one way toward the mountain.C W Updated: 12/23/2019 Page 10 of 1060 1 Bryana Starbuck From:Rubey Park Info <rubeyparkinfo@rfta.com> Sent:Saturday, November 30, 2019 3:50 PM To:PaepckeTransitHub@gmail.com Subject:Paepcke bus stop ideas Hello,        Recently RFTA employees received a flyer in our work mailboxes asking for our ideas to improve the stop at this bus  stop.  I saw after I looked at the webpage that the time is near the end for community comments. That the 2nd phase has  already begun.  Please consider adding my knowledge of the area of concern because I have been working as a bus  driver and Rubey Park Information specialist since 1994.  I am sorry I didn’t get involved in the debate in a more timely  manner.      I joined the project website as RFTA Staffer today, and left one suggestion and commented on a couple earlier  comments.  I would be happy to speak to anyone in the planning team.   Feel free to email my personal email at  sagpski@gmail.com or call my phone# 970‐379‐1983.   I can be reached at Rubey Park 925‐8484 Thursday, Friday and  Saturdays.    INBOUND:EASTBOUND  1.The Paepcke Park stop for City Buses on Main Street is in a safe location.  Midblock.  There should be a shelter and better signage there. 2.BRT stop on Garmisch and Main/Hopkins is not safe nor an appropriate space to drop off passengers.  It is a left over stop from the time the Snowmass Ski Buses were the only buses turning off of Main onto Garmish.  A lot of money could be spent clearing the area, changing direction of traffic, adding a sidewalk, adding a bus shelter, and so on.  There is a much simpler fix in the mix. a.Move the bus stop from Garmish after the turn,  to Main Street midblock between 1st and Garmish.  Add better signage, a bench, and/or a shelter onto the sidewalk. 1.The shelter design does not have to match the other RFTA shelters that are large and cumbersome. 2.A clever designer could create one that the neighborhood wouldn’t neigh about. b.Do not allow left turns onto Main Street from Garmisch. c.Garmish can be turned into a ONE WAY STREET in the SOUTHERN DIRECTION. d.Add a Pedestrian Light at Garmisch crossing E/W to meet the crosswalk on Main Street N/S crossing.                                                                      Alternative would be another Traffic Light added to Main Street at Garmisch.  No Please! e.There will be a few problems created for the buses that will turn after the drop off. 1.Pedestrians walking to the corner and crossing before the buses are able to make the turn, causing a backup as they wait. More Later.  Thank you.  Susan Anderson RIDE RFTA! [redacted for participant privacy] 61 2 The information contained in this e‐mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the  recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney‐client communication and/or work product and as such is  privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for  delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that  any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this  communication in error, please notify us immediately by e‐mail, and delete the original message.   62 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Attachment Updated: December 23, 2019 Aspen Community Voice Pinned Comment Maps Attachment 2 63 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 All Pinned Comments 64 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 Seating 65 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 Crossings 66 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 Drainage 67 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 Bus Shelter 68 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Aspen Community Voice “Place a Pin” Comments Updated: November 13, 2019 Other 69 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Attachment Updated: December 23, 2019 Stakeholder Interview Sheets Attachment 3 70 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Stakeholder Interviews to Date Updated: December 23, 2019 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS TO DATE Please note that interviews with various key stakeholder interviews/outreach efforts are ongoing including nearby businesses, building property managers/owners, special events, RFTA, and public safety personnel. Date Organization Name(s) 10/14/19 COA - Transportation Lynn Rumbaugh 10/14/19 COA - Transportation John Kruger 10/15/19 COA - Special Events Nancy Lesley 10/15/19 COA – Street Jerry Nye 10/15/19 Aspen RePrographic Tim Perry 10/15/19 Red Brick/Aspen Parks & Recreation Desiree Whitehead 10/17/19 COA - Environmental Liz Chapman & Sandy Doebler 10/17/19 Yellow Brick Nancy Nichols and team 10/18/19 Hotel Aspen/Molly Gibson Jeff Bay 10/21/19 COA – PD Linda Consuerga 10/21/19 COA - Parking Mitch Osur 10/21/19 Molly Gibson (Stan Clauson Associates) Stan Clauson & Britni Johnson 10/23/19 COA - Climate Action Ashley Perl & Laura Armstrong 10/23/19 COA – Parks Austin Weiss 10/28/19 WE-cycle Mirte Mallory 10/30/19 Next Gen/Bleeker Moms Kimbo Brown-Schirato 10/31/19 ACRA Diana Morrisey 11/5/19 Pitkin BOCC Kelly McNicholas Kury 11/21/19 Property Management – 100 E. Main Troy Forbes 12/12/19 100 E. Main Condominium Association Board 71 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:15:24 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Transportation Stakeholder Name: Lynn Rumbaugh Date: 10/14/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • The inbound BRT bus stop is unsafe, dropping passengers (including many children) into a busy street. The outbound bus stop is very busy and does not offer adequate seating, lighting, trash receptacles, signage or other functions. The crossing of Main is scary, even with the ped signal. If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Outbound: a transit station similar to 8th street with lighting, real time signage, bike/ski racks, adequate seating and trash. Inbound: Buses should be able to pull off the road and drop passengers in a safe, lit location with a safe crossing and enough time for turning cars to see them and slow down. What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety and the need to make transit competitive by offering proper amenities. Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • The number one thing we hear is that the inbound is unsafe. Secondarily, we receive complaints about lack of seating and trash receptacles as well as lack of real time signs on the outbound. Who else should we be talking with? • Yellow brick, Kids First, Red Brick (recreation), local employers, businesses at the outbound bus stop that are impacted by trash and lack of seating. Any final thoughts or questions? • We should sit down with RFTA staff for an in-person discussion. 72 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:12:38 PM Stakeholder Organization: City of Aspen Stakeholder Name: John D. Krueger Date: Oct 14, 2019 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • These are very busy bus stops with high usage on a daily basis. There are conflicts between buses, cars and pedestrians. A safer and more efficient intersection needs to be developed. If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • A full bus stop out of traffic on Main and Garmisch with safe pedestrian connections. The bus stops should have all amenities like snow melt, shelters, real time signage, bench, trash can and lighting. Easy access to all of the other amenities like carshare and bike share Good way finding to town and other locations. What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • A safe location for the buses and pedestrains. Remove unsafe situations and conflicts. Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • There needs to be improvements made in this area for safety reasons, ease of use by riders and pedestrians. Who else should we be talking with? • Transit users, bike share users and car share users. Also all other stake holders-neighbors, RFTA staff and business in the area. Any final thoughts or questions? • This is a good project and long overdue. There are unsafe conditions that need to be rectified. 73 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:17:12 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Special Events Stakeholder Name: Nancy Lesley & Sandy Date: 10/15/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • In spring summer fall, lots of walking and use as pedestrian, feel safer at traffic light crossing. • Events: 4th July, start of parade route, utilize entire cross section of Main St for parade • Other events that use Garmisch: Paepcke, used as vehicle re-route or head in parking utilized for staging and event prep, Arts Festival • Right hand turns heading west on Main onto Garmisch are dangerous • Straighten sidewalk on north side of Paepcke If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Move car to go location, We-Cyle re-location, public restrooms in park What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding this area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Nothing much Who else should we be talking with? • Car to Go, We-cycle, Parking (Mitch), downtown services Any final thoughts or questions? • Events utilize head in parking, porta-potties location, would have to re-work certain events, close Garmisch for Food & Wine Load In, Arts Festival closes north bound traffic on Garmisch for duration 74 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:11:27 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Streets Stakeholder Name: Jerry Nye Date: 10/15/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Snow plowing to middle on Main, sides on Garmisch If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Okay with current function, pedestrian safety is issue, look at moving stop west What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Snow removal Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • No complaints, cross walk lights out Who else should we be talking with? • Sounds like we covered all the necessary entities Any final thoughts or questions? • Not supportive of pedestrian island, two wind rows 75 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 3:55:13 PM Stakeholder Organization: Aspen Reprographic Stakeholder Name: Tim Perry Date: 10/15/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Main things we keep hearing is need for improved lighting at crosswalk and where the busses drop off • If a shelter is possible for outbound, that would be good – people stand in the courtyard while waiting, there is not enough place to sit • Wayfinding signage, people don’t know the bus system, what is this bus, need electronic real time signage If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • The safety of the crossing if that could be figured out, people push the button and wait hoping that people stop, people don’t always pay attention there Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • There are some trash problems, not as bad as it used to be Who else should we be talking with? • Yellow Brick Any final thoughts or questions? • None 76 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 3:59:29 PM Stakeholder Organization: Red Brick/City of Aspen Parks & Recreation Stakeholder Name: Desiree Whitehead Date: 10/15/2019 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Flashing lights have helped, but still room for safety improvements for traffic to stop for pedestrian crossings • Water splashes onto sidewalks • Need coverage for weather at outbound stop, like what is at 8th Street If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Adding a shelter and fixing the crossing, give people a spot wait What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Crossing at Main Street, people getting off with kids to go to Yellow Brick • Use stop for small kids, crossing Main Street is hard with a lot of kids Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Cars not making complete stops Who else should we be talking with? • Sarah Roy, COA, Red Brick Any final thoughts or questions? • None 77 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:14:26 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Environmental Health Stakeholder Name: Liz Chapman Date: 10/17/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Felt safe, frequent user, pedestrian, bike and vehicle user of intersection, rapid flash beacon makes feel safety, keep RFB, does not like no sidewalk on Garmisch, Garmisch bus stop needs to be formalized and pedestrian connections, would like to see road width remain the same, Outbound bus stop: not as important as Garmisch, but would appreciate upgrades, bus route posters do not help people from out of town, real time sign needed (useful information), ticket purchasing kiask If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Bus lane on incoming bus, not to stop traffic, creates dangerous situation for crossing peds What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Poorly lit at Garmisch stop Who else should we be talking with? • Taxi drivers, most frequent drivers Any final thoughts or questions? • Mobility pickup/drop off • Trash, recycle bins at both stops • No compost at this stage due to contamination 78 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:05:17 PM Stakeholder Organization: Kids First Stakeholder Name: Cecelia Martin, Trevor Brown, Adley Kent, Baily Ostertaz, Nancy Nichols Date: 10/17/2019 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Nancy – I ride the BRT every day and getting off the bus on Garmisch is not safe, crossing behind the bus to get to Main Street • Crossing Main Street especially in winter, road is slick, can never know for sure if a car is going to stop • Make a cut out like on 8th Street, have buses turn down Aspen St and people can cross at stoplight instead of RFB, less worry about crossing Main Street • Cecelia – would like same idea as 8th Street for here, place for bus to pull off, ride bike into town and, one lane will stop and the other doesn’t stop, safety is definitely the priority • Not a lot of cars see the flashing lights, maybe something can be improved about that or get rid of it all together, motorists treat it as more of a suggestion • Adley – at the outbound bus stop, waiting bus riders congest the sidewalk and make it awkward; pedestrians can’t get through • Trevor - at Garmisch to Main Street, stop left turns onto Garmisch, people pulling out of hotel cause congestion, add a center median on Main to prevent left turns, carve out space for the buses to stop • If the BRTs were to turn on Aspen, they might have to get rid of parking, but would be worth it • When the weather isn’t ideal, I feel bad trespassing, typically have to shelter under the building, people prefer the shade of the tree, Business did fence off garden area • Seating is important too, people often use the ledge while waiting • Improve street lighting for night, worried that bus won’t see me waiting • Perhaps underpass/overpass If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Safety, figuring out how you can cross the street and not get hit, people might not walk to the light • Like the look of 8th Street stop, people have shade/shelter for both inbound and outbound What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Same thing with parents, getting on and off the bus with kids and it’s not safe Who else should we be talking with? • A lot of post office workers use stop 79 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:05:17 PM Any final thoughts or questions? • Not attached to that corner as the pickup spot, open to other locations 80 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:01:52 PM Stakeholder Organization: Molly Gibson/Hotel Aspen (HayMax Hotels) Stakeholder Name: Jeff Bay Date: 10/18/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Transit hub is very busy, consistently people waiting for pickup • Dangerous crossing across Main Street even with flashing light, cars don’t pay attention or don’t see people crossing • Busy crosswalk for bus riders and hotel guests, staff • When a bus is picking up ppl westbound, it blocks ability for cars to see pedestrians • No designated stop on Garmisch, sometimes blocks guests in and out • People making right turn go around bus, often close calls • Identifying designated BRT cutout on Main Street side for inbound, blocks traffic • Other BRT stops have under pass/overpass, this BRT stop is busier • People would cross there even if there weren’t a flashing light • Maybe a crosswalk on west side, but would rather resources go to existing crosswalk, maybe lights in roadway like in Boulder • Current position of WE-cycle station is permanent and convenient with existing crossing • Hard to hit crossing light while on bike • Because hotels on other street, a lot of users not from town, don’t have familiarity, should design for lowest common denominator • Add shelter with message of bus times • Larger, clearer display for routes – which bus should I take?: See Aspen city routes • Poster sized/kiosk display with popular destinations (Bells, arc, ski shuttles, Snowmass, Buttermilk, Highlands) consolidate those stops at one stop, explain the routes • Shelter would be great, people stand on grass, cigarettes and trash – somewhere for people to sit, get out of the rain with proper trash receptacles • When buses turn right from Main, when someone wants to turn left it gets cluttered/crowded • Add curb cut on Main Street • Buses stopping in the middle of the street on Garmisch just isn’t the right solution, popular drop off, but people do get on there in winter time • Would be great to have ticket machine • Can ACRA contribute informational kiosk that is tourist oriented • Signage should be in Spanish too If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Crosswalk, somebody will get hit there – it is not an if, but when. Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding this area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • How do I get to…? • What bus do I take to get to …? • Information about transit, WE-cycle • Loading zone for downtown town 81 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:01:52 PM Who else should we be talking with? • Medical/dental office • School to different activities Any final thoughts or questions? • Financial contributions/special entitlements for hotel 82 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:13:31 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA PD Stakeholder Name: Linda Consuegra Date: 10/21/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Formalizing bus stop on Garmisch important, pretty good overall, usage of RFB key, more lighting, /familiar citizens & well marked If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Have a location for inbound BRT stop and pedestrian connection to Main What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Garmisch stop and pedestrian connectivity to Main St crossing Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Rear end accidents Who else should we be talking with? • Talk with PABST as designs come in Any final thoughts or questions? • North bound traffic on Garmisch hard to turn left onto Main, like one-way idea 83 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:16:27 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Parking / Downtown Service Stakeholder Name: Mitch Osur Date: 10/21/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Biggest compliant: when buses are parked, cannot see RFB on north side of street, no drop-off location and pedestrian conveyance If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Bus shelter on north side, drainage and wind an issue What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Convenience for bus users • No route maps and confused tourists Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Parking in bus lane on north side of Main St after 3 PM Who else should we be talking with? • ACRA Any final thoughts or questions? • Concerns about removing head in parking at Paepcke Park with change to parallel, fear of push back from citizens about removal of parking, one-way southbound interesting idea • Busy hotel area with need for parking, Molly Gibson parking 84 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 3:48:26 PM Stakeholder Organization: Molly Gibson Land Planner / Stan Clauson Associates Stakeholder Name: Stan Clauson and Date: 10/21/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Buses stop mostly by alley • Changing to parallel parking on Molly Gibson side o 3 spaces - 2 loading and 1 handicap (closest to alley w/ flush curb) o ADA curb on alley side alley • No designated space for pedestrians • Perhaps a bus stop further up the street for more formal bus stop, step out onto paved surface, a bit further from Main Street, not many people stand there and wait • Sidewalk on Paepcke side of Main is in bad shape, could use a green buffer between street and sidewalk, currently slush goes up onto sidewalk • Molly Gibson is adding green space on Main Street side and sidewalk buffer (maybe) • Add shelter for outbound • If stops can be consolidated, BRT should use Main Street stop and bus can go up Aspen • Crossing generally works fine, perhaps some PD enforcement at RFB, maybe a little bit of education about ped lights, people don’t always pay attention • Look should be similar to 8th Street with real time bus signs would be amazing • Transit hub area does need improvement, but generally works the way it is today • Left turn right turns, perhaps medians at this intersection, no left turn pocket on to Garmisch. There is a conflict with people turning onto Garmisch, especially when bus is stopped and people are walking in all directions • If Garmisch was one way, could cause more circulation and speed, and would impact flow of guests If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Sidewalk to walk on What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Wider, detached sidewalk • Encourage awareness • Better lighting • Led lighting connected with RFB specifically at crosswalk Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding this area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Out of town visitors ask for recommendations on what to do • How hard is it to get from A to B? • Creating public space • WE-cycle on both sides of street • Could be better signage, particularly in winter for ski destinations, better wayfinding • Is it possible to move Highlands stop? • Ski circuit bus? 85 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 3:48:26 PM Who else should we be talking with? • Clarks • Write water engineer – did work on stormwater and conditions Any final thoughts or questions? • Make it known that flashing signals can be used by bike riders and are allowed to use on bike; • Keep that ped signal available • Buttons placed for ADA purposed, not labeled with directions of use • What’s the right signage for these buttons? • MG looking to submit building permit application in March, 6-9 mo. Processing time fall 2020- spring 2021 • Hotel Aspen starting work with utility work, spring 2020 hotel aspen • Any attempt to move 3 parking spaces by MG would be incredibly problematic 86 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:06:53 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Environmental Health Stakeholder Name: Ashley Pearl & Laura Armstrong Date: 10/23/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Downvalley bus is fine, nice to have shelter, decent buffer • Crossing is decent, RFB is great • Inbound BRT must be formalized, inbound local needs separation, no way finding If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Ped connections, ped safety • Garmisch south of Main is scary for bikes and ped, with no connectivity to Hopkins bike/ped way • Big misconnection What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Sidewalk along park and opposite side Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • No Who else should we be talking with? • Parent group that influenced sidewalk on Hallam Any final thoughts or questions? • EV charging on Garmisch near park, not high priority since one is being installed on 1st • Check in with Ron on capacity of transformer, check in with Laura 87 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:07:45 PM Stakeholder Organization: COA Parks Stakeholder Name: Austin Weiss Date: 10/23/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Garmisch not ideal for bus stop with existing infrastructure, need shelter on north side of Main • All aspects need to be looked at (Car-to-Go, We-cycle, etc.) • Sidewalk makes sense on Garmisch (both sides of Garmisch) • Need Bike parking If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Protective of Paepcke Park, don’t want to change that space drastically Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • No real complaints Who else should we be talking with? • Open Space Board once we have conceptual design • Chat with landscaping architects about sidewalk on northside of park Any final thoughts or questions? • Bus pullout in park: large encroachment with pullout and sidewalk • One-way Garmisch: extension to park, challenging though • Parallel Parking on West side of Paepcke: no heart burn over that, parking user stand point: no issue • Bike lockers utilized? 88 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:04:14 PM Stakeholder Organization: WE-cycle Stakeholder Name: Mirte Mallory Date: 10/28/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Scary intersection for both pedestrians and cyclists • Stations on both sides of street is good because riders don’t have to cross street, bikes don’t have to be returned to opposite side • Two stations important for safety • Crosswalk very narrow corridor but large intersection because crosswalk is accessed via sidewalk, feels like you have to mount sidewalk with bike – on both sides, isn’t biker friendly • Whole intersection could be treated as slow zone, as is traffic moves fast through intersection • How could Garmisch quadrant be treated as own, slower intersection space • Cars come up fast up to crosswalk, distance between stop bar and crosswalk is close • Need lights at Molly Gibson side before crosswalk • Could there be visual demarcation before crosswalk, painting treatments to slow traffic – art, vibrant demarcation – like in front of Gondola plaza @ Durant • Slowing things down is really important • Consider parking • Bus shelters, important onboarding location, no shelter from elements, people gather under building or tree, people linger/wait • Off boarding on Garmisch, people get off and dispersing • Stopping by crossing and site lines, maybe better if crossing pushed west? • Where car-to-go and Paepcke parking is important, but important to consider site lines • Buses turning right, cars backing up • Parallel parking • Bike racks needed - bikes are attached to trees, banisters, need to encourage bike riding • Bike storage on outbound side, more on north side – should be on both sides If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Bus shelter with real time signage, more places to sit, bike racks, a creative, colorful dynamically painted intersection that appropriates that quadrant between Paepcke as pedestrian bike crossing and they have priority there, alignment of pedestrian crosswalk, elevated crosswalk (speed table) What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety generally, Safety of the intersection Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Will share online portal 89 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:04:14 PM Who else should we be talking with? • Transit users, Pitkin OST Any final thoughts or questions? • Put something at intersection for people to leave comments, dry erase board, chalk • Kids first 90 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:09:17 PM Stakeholder Organization: Bleeker Moms Stakeholder Name: Kimbo Date: 10/30/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Lot of teachers use bus stop • Guandlet, wondering if people stop • Can’t see flasher b/c of bus (outbound station) • Scary with kids, no hang out, want bus shelter, kids be contained • Kids use to ski from school • Needs better signage, routage information, glass signage at Ruby (mini ruby with buses staging/stationing) • Move bus stops for ski buses down the road, separate • Real time with bus capacity If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Overall user experience, treat it similar to 8th St What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • See below Who else should we be talking with? • Teachers: use for bus transportation around town • Next Gen Any final thoughts or questions? • Cross walk on Main should have flashers, especially at night • Make life easier for commuters that make town go around 91 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 4:00:46 PM Stakeholder Organization: ACRA Stakeholder Name: Diana Morissey Date: 10/31/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Busy stop with a lot of foot traffic across Main • Can get dangerous crossing 82 • A dozen or so pedestrians at a time crossing, going in all different directions • Generally flashing lights work, but sometimes people don’t stop • Sometimes people don’t know what flashing lights mean or how to use them If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Where the BRT stops on Garmisch, most people it seems go to cross Main and it seems disorganized What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • It seems like most visitors start their trip or ask about directions from Rubey Park – not so much from other stops in town Who else should we be talking with? • Food and Wine, Ruggerfest, Arts Festival • PD BBQ Any final thoughts or questions? • None 92 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Version: 11/11/2019 3:57:34 PM Stakeholder Organization: Pitkin County BOCC Stakeholder Name: Kelly McNicholas Kury Date: 11/5/19 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Winter time concerns, crossing gets icy • Sidewalk in front of Paepcke Park • Pretty wide stretch of road, have to cross quickly • Timing – significant waiting period for buses • There is nowhere warm to wait - two young kids when it’s cold, windy. I have to figure out where to wait; No place to get shelter • Paepcke Park could be rejuvenated more – very active during events • Maybe add a few picnic tables with number of people that gather • Food trucks by park • Opportunity for real time signage, better wayfinding • Should align with other bus stops • Key destinations, a lot of tourists, not sure which bus to get on • Can get dark in winter, but lighting is not a stand out issue • Getting cars to recognize pedestrian at night • Kiddos in grass & trees and people taking shelter in the grass and trees If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you make at this transit hub and why? • Snow free path across Main St., deicing, shoveling What is the single most important thing you would like the design and engineering team to consider? • Safety Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding this area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • None specifically • People help others cross street, get off bus Who else should we be talking with? • Admin at Yellow and Red Brick Any final thoughts or questions? • “When getting off the bus at the inbound stop of Paepcke Park, I had another thought today. I think to improve safety, it would be better to have a buffer between the street and the sidewalk. Right now they abut each other and I have visions of my toddler falling into the street when she runs to the crosswalk.” 93 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Guide Version: 11/21/2019 11:21:58 AM Stakeholder Organization: 100 E. Main Property Manager (Romero Group) Stakeholder Name: Troy Forbes Date: 11/21/2019 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • We’ve been at 100 E. Main for almost 2 years. We have terminated our contract for the end of the year, but still there through the end of the month, not involved after Dec. 31 • The traffic for bus stop has been a concern, there is only a small bench, building planter area 4x4 wood, there is a commercial sign to be installed early December • People waiting for the bus hang out on the planter, go into the lobby • Our team tries to keep the area cleaned off, trash and cigarette butts accumulate • Have had to get bikes removed. They get left there, stuck by side of building, latched to the trees. Have talked with PD. • Talked about getting a bike rack, added a small one by alley, needed to get a ROW permit for bike rack elsewhere • People waiting on the bus sprawl across the property, often 7-8 people hovering or in the lobby • Have told ownership that something built might help prevent lobby goers or the trampling of grass, bushed damaged from people • Property owners seem very supportive of bus stop enclosure that could shelter people during weather • My big question – what are the plans for the space with the limited area? If you could wave a magic wand, what changes would you/ownership make at this transit hub and why? • Would like to see the traffic that is waiting for the bus to be contained in a place that makes sense for them to be and out of the lobby, off of the planter - a nice, clean looking place • There is a dental office, has complaints about smoking and crowding • Keep people from sprawling out • We’ve had to keep an eye out for wear on property including planter painting, shrub damage • A solution for bikes, that goes with keeping everything contained Are there and common questions or comments you and your colleagues receive regarding t his area? What are you hearing people in the community say? • Crowding, people coming into the lobby • When it gets cold, people have tendency to go into lobby – restrooms get used (now locked), have talked about increasing security, but it is not as big of deal now that they’re locked. Have added no loitering signs to remind people that lobby is not a bus stop waiting area – have to clean that lobby from weather days • Similar concerns with summer • With special events, doctor’s offices are on normal business hours, entrance to lobby is locked outside of business hours • Have had conversations about adding more signs • Increased trash with special events • Making sure there is regular cleaning of the area 94 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Guide Version: 11/21/2019 11:21:58 AM Who else should we be talking with? • Dr. Paula Kadison • Dr. John Miller, Dentist • Janey and Moan (sp?) – front desk • Penthouse resident, Kimberly Paige • Board meeting Dec. 12, 10AM at library Any final thoughts or questions? • The crossing is big deal, helps people cross the street 95 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS [INTERNAL] Stakeholder Interview Guide Version: 12/23/2019 5:36:46 PM Stakeholder Organization: 100 East Main Street Condominium Association Stakeholder Names: Ben Wolff (Frias), Mike D (Frias), Troy (Romero), Dr. John Miller, Tiffany, Paula, Pam, Tom Date: December 12, 2019 Tell me about your observations about this area along Paepcke Park on Main Street and Garmisch specifically safety, function and/or experience. • Important that our sign is able to be seen • Trees out front are legacy • Tiffany part of development team • Hight traffic area - people want to come in and use restroom, or seek shelter, especially when weather is bad • Association pays to clean the lobby, keep up grounds • People on the association’s property creates liability, people sitting on planters, walking on grass; limited growth in planters. I don’t think people want to sit there, but they have no alternative. Give people an alternative place to sit. • Limited clean up from RFTA. Cigarette butts, water, glass would be on the ground if association didn’t help with the clean-up. • Most people use trash can when available, often full or over flowing 96 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Attachment Updated: December 23, 2019 RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey Responses Attachment 4 97 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey Responses Updated: December 23, 2019 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB RFTA STAFF SURVEY 42 responses Survey and Engagement Themes Quantities: 27 unique mentions - Main Street crossing 29 unique mentions - Covering or shelter at outbound stop 27 unique mentions - Seating 29 unique mentions - Garmisch is disorganized Question 1 - Please check mark the level of importance for each potential area for improvement: No improvement needed Somewhat important to examine Critical to improve Main Street crossing 15 votes 12 votes 12 votes Bus route signage 10 votes 14 votes 15 votes Signage for Tourists (skiing information, Maroon Bells, etc.) 7 votes 15 votes 18 votes Street lighting 14 votes 12 votes 14 votes Seating 10 votes 14 votes 13 votes Shelter at outbound bus stop 10 votes 12 votes 18 votes Designated Bus Stop at inbound bus stop on Garmisch 12 votes 10 votes 18 votes Road Condition 10 votes 10 votes 19 votes Other... 1 vote - 10 votes Other: 9 responses • Moving curb on SW corner of Main & Garmisch to make inbound right turns safer • Double yellow line at Garmisch/Main • Dropping people off on Garmisch is unsafe, too dark -need more lights • Crossing signal is blocked by bus outbound, Cars turn right in front of bus as leaving • Buttermilk Crossing • Bus pull off area so buses are not blocking road • Winter days very slippery at Main/Garmisch • A reflection mirror at Rubey so the MV & Cemetary can see if cars are coming from the bus side (Big blind spot) • I know this is not a transit hub issue - X-games info for out of towners. We lose huge tracts of time with tourists who don't know about fares, etc 98 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey Responses Updated: December 23, 2019 Question 2: What problems do you and other RFTA staff most often see? (check all that apply) • People are lost/need directions (29 votes) • Cars don’t see pedestrians (22 votes) • Pedestrian crossings aren’t safe on Main Street (20 votes) • Pedestrian crossings aren’t safe on Garmisch Street (16 votes) • People are getting on the wrong bus (18 votes) • Other… Other: 13 responses • Too dark - need lights • Because too many Aspen Drivers have their head up their ass • They don't wave you down • No light at Gamisch • Ear buds and Cell phones - Honking loud horn does not help! • People are getting on the wrong bus, Huge issue with Garmisch, especially for someone with disablility • People asking for bus info • Pedestrians don't look, just walk out into the street or don't use visible signaling device or gestures at night • People not paying attention and using cell phones • People are confused about where to board on inbound bus to Rubey • People trying to sneak rides beyond the intercept lot down valley • Pedestrians don't yield even when lights are flashing • People walk in front of moving traffic 99 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey Responses Updated: December 23, 2019 Question 3 - What questions are drivers/RFTA staff asked the most at these stops? (check all that apply) • How do I get to _________? (27 votes) • Is this the bus for ________? (29 votes) • How much is bus fare? (11 votes) • What time is the next bus? (25 votes) • How do I buy bus tickets? (8 votes) • Other… Other: 5 responses • Too dark – need lights • You’re late! • Is this free? • When is BRT? • BC & Hwy 82 100 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I RFTA Supervisory Staff Survey Responses Updated: December 23, 2019 Question 4 – If you could wave a magic wand, what changes might you make at this transit hub and why? 20 responses • Make the crossing and right run safer for inbound buses on the run from Main onto Garmisch • Street corner. 3 points of service; BRT goes right on Garmisch ends at parking area (ice, cars backing out, car pulling out onto Main, More lighting, signage. On Main it's a sticky wicket. Make Main one lane? with bus lane taller pedestrian flashing signs so buse s don't block view. Put flashing lights in middle of road. CDOT would love that - as usual it's a conundrum of many in Aspen. • Nice shelter across from park on Main St. Outbound, like at 8th Street • Shelter, more seats, maybe a button people press that activ ates a light as bus request • We desperately need to improve communication with the Hispanics! Spanish language signs/materials are desperately needed! • There is no such thing with magic so why speculate or dream? • Information Booth at Paepcke Park. Bus pullou t on Main. Safer drop off on Garmisch - Molly Gibson parking creates many issues often blocking bus ability to drop off. Ice needs cleaned off in this area. Drop off at curb rather than in street is essential. Crosswalks with crossing lights and street lig hts. • The north side flashing light is not visible to outbound motorists when buses are stopped on the north side. Shelter • Better supervisiors, they need to do their job better so the drivers can do their job better • Inbound BRT Garmisch/Paepke Park stop on Main St. instead on Garmisch with cross walk - Just like 8th Street • Gosh. The mind reels. Option paralysis. • Make all the pedestrians, bikes, automobiles vanish and leave the hub for buses only! • More room to tun when turning south onto Garmisch. To miss the curb in an ?, you have to often wait while blocking traffic on Main to let a car coming out of Garmisch move into traffic while you block their view. That curb needs to be moved while also eliminating parking there where we are often blocked by limos and delivery trucks. • More comfortable seats for the drivers • A bus stop sign at the corner of Hopkins & Garmisch (inbound). Most people expect to be picked up/dropped off at Molly Gibson alley. This is a bad spot for buses to stop because sometimes there are 3 buses there at the same time, building up traffic on Main. • All the stuff above, but info for rides most important! • I think RFTA/Aspen should come up with some instructional videos for the whole bus system throughout the valley. Then people can just go onli ne and watch a tutorial video for how our system works and have individual videos for specific routes and destinations and other videos with tips on how to board, pay and etc. Put it all online and teach the public before they ride, how to ride. • OK • I like Aspen the way it is, don't change anything! • Little information at Paepke outbound...Buttermilk doesn't pick up here. Maybe flashing light for people to cross at Garmisch. Move light pole to North 4' and take away first parking space. 101 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Input Report Attachment Updated: December 23, 2019 Public and Stakeholder Outreach and Publicity Log Attachment 5 102 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Outreach and Publicity Log Updated: December 31, 2019 Date Activity Reach October-November Individual Stakeholder Meeting Interviewees 30 participants to date 10/9/19 Pop-up Event at outbound stop (English and Spanish) ~45+ 10/10/19 Pop-up Event at Paepcke (English and Spanish) ~15+ 10/11/19 Aspen Community Voice Page Launched 342 Total Visits 20 Engaged Visitors 122 Informed Visitors 260 Aware Visitors 10/14/19 Press Release - Aspen Community Voice Hosts Two New Public Input Initiatives 10/15/19 Media Hit – Staff Report, Aspen Daily News, “City seeking input on Paepcke Park transit, Galena Plaza redesign” 10/16/19 Pop-up Event at Paepcke (English and Spanish) ~20+ 10/16/19 Pop-up Event at outbound stop (English and Spanish) ~50+ 10/21/19 Aspen Community Voice email to all registered users 11/1/19 Email to COA Community Development NotifyMe Newsletter 11/8/19 Boosted Facebook Post 2,474 Reached 105 Engagements 2 comments 11/8/19 Instagram and Twitter Posts 11/13/19 RFTA supervisory staff survey (English and Spanish) 42 responses 11/18/19-12/4/19 Publicity for Feedback Forum event including newspaper ads, email blasts, social media post and flyers 11/29/19 Media Hit – Staff Report, Aspen Daily News, “City of Aspen hosting feedback forum at the Limelight” 103 Paepcke Transit Hub Improvements - Phase I Public and Stakeholder Outreach and Publicity Log Updated: December 31, 2019 12/2/19 Event Reminder Release - City of Aspen Feedback Forum at the Limelight 12/3/19 Media Hit – Carolyn Sackariason, Aspen Times, “City of Aspen trying to get a grip on outreach efforts” 12/4/19 Joint Open House at Limelight, 2 sessions 100+ participants 12/5/19 Media Hit – Alycin Bektesh, Aspen Daily News, “Attendees deem Aspen’s feedback frenzy a success” 12/12/19 100 W. Main Board Meeting 9 participants Approximate Commenting Participants to Date: 333+ participants 104 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS 105 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS july 2021OVERALL SITE PLAN not to scaleN1Larger Curb Radius for Bus Turning Movements 2 Permeable Paver Parallel Parking for the Molly Gibson 3 Mid-Block Crosswalk 4 Bus Pull off 5 Permeable Paver Parallel Parking 6 WeCycle Bike Parking Station 7 Car To Go Parking Space w/ EV Charging Station 8 New Detached Sidewalk 9 Improved Bus Stop Drop Off 10 Improved Crosswalk 11 New Bus Stop Shelter 12 Bike Parking (Public) 13 New Crosswalk 14 Drainage Improvements 15 Bike Parking (Public) 16 Restroom Enclosure 17 Raised Refuge Island 1 2 3 4 5 16 5 7 8 8 8 9 10 17 10 10 11 12 13 14 6 6 12 molly gibson lodge hotel aspen main street/hwy 82 paepcke park sardy house120 e main110 e main e hopkins ave garmisch streetn aspen street106 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS not to scaleNGARMISCH STREET ENLARGEMENT 1 Larger Curb Radius for Bus Turning Movements 2 Permeable Paver Parallel Parking for the Molly Gibson 3 Mid-Block Crosswalk 4 Bus Pull off 5 Permeable Paver Angled Parking 6 WeCycle Bike Parking Station 7 Car To Go Parking Space w/ EV Charging Station 8 New Sidewalk 9 Bike Racks (Public) 10 Restroom Enclosure 12 3 4 5 8 10 8 8 9 57 6 garmisch street main street/hwy 82e hopkins avepaepcke park molly gibson lodge 107 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS not to scaleN7WeCycle Bike Parking Station 8 New Detached Sidewalk 9 Improved Bus Drop Off w/ Wider Sidewalk 10 Improved Crosswalk 11 New Bus Stop Shelter 12 Bike Parking (Public) 13 New Crosswalk 14 Proposed Drainage Improvements 15 Raised Refuge Island MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS 8 8 10 13 10 12 12 11 7 15 1414 9garmisch streetmain street/hwy 82 paepcke park sardy house 120 e main110 e main 108 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS MAIN & GARMISCH BUS STOP 10 New Raised Refuge Island 11 New Raised Island for Signage 12 WeCycle Bike Parking Station 14 Proposed Drainage Improvements a Exterior Benches to match Aspen BRT Station Standard b Shelter Benches to match Aspen BRT Station Standard c Rain Garden d Concrete Apron e Real Time Bus Arrival Signage f RFTA Bus Route Map g Smokers Tower h COA Standard Bear Proof Trash and Recycling Receptacles i 45” Tall Laptop/Leaning Rail w/ Outlets j Built in Ski/Snowboard Rack e 14 14 d d f f j e c a a 12 10 10 11 bb b a a a g ah h ii c c 109 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS GARMISCH BUS PULL OFF 110 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS GARMISCH STREET 111 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS GARMISCH & MAIN STREET 112 july 2021 PAEPCKE TRANSIT HUB IMPROVEMENTS MAIN & GARMISCH DROP OFF 113