Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20250421AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 21, 2025 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen I.Work Session I.A Wheeler Opera House, 2026 Programming I.B SH 82 / West Aspen Transportation Needs Study Update I.C Transportation Coalition - Request for Funding I.D RFTA Regional Fare Pilot I.E Discussion for Council Retreat Dates I.F Discussion around Council Meeting Times & Duration Zoom Meeting Instructions Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81850423905?pwd=ZwQQkREQNa2jeQ5GsxJiHE89pdQlUo.1 Passcode:81611 Join via audio: +1 346 248 7799 US Webinar ID: 818 5042 3905 Passcode: 81611 International numbers available: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kdiw6dqLEB Council Memo_Wheeler2026Programming.docx 2025 4-21 West Aspen Transportation Needs Memo.pdf TRANSPORTATION COALITION FOR THE 21 CENTURY grant request.pdf rfta regional fare free pilot 4-21.docx 1 1 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Mike Harrington, Executive Director, Wheeler Opera House THROUGH:Diane Foster, Deputy City Manager MEMO DATE:April 14, 2025 MEETING DATE:April 21, 2025 RE:Wheeler Opera House Programming Philosophy & Strategy for 2026 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is seeking input from Council on the programming philosophy and strategy for the Wheeler Opera House in 2026. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The community response to programming at the Wheeler Opera House thus far in 2025 has been overwhelmingly positive with high engagement across a wide range of events. Along with the launch of the Wheeler Insider program designed to prioritize access and affordability for local residents, highlights of Q1 have included Jerry Seinfeld, singer- songwriter John Oates, music historian and cabaret star Michael Feinstein, the family theater production of Dog Man: The Musical, and Mexican comedian Sofia Niño de Rivera. Generally, the philosophy thus far in 2025 has been to schedule 3-4 events per week with an awareness of programmatic diversity. The costs associated with this multi-disciplinary programming philosophy vary depending on factors such as artist’s profile, size of company, time of year, and more. Generally, staff’s strategy in making offers to artists has been to balance expenses against ticket prices that result in a break-even at sell out. However, with only 500 seats in the theater there are limitations of that approach that necessitate subsidy to program the world-class artists that Aspen desires. DISCUSSION: Staff projects to present between 80 and 100 artists throughout 2026: January 2-3 events/week, including the first weekend of the New Year and Aspen Gay Ski Week. February 3-4 events/week, including President’s Day Week and an annual season with DanceAspen. March 4-5 events/week, including Aspen Laugh Festival. 2 April 1-2 events/week around community events from Aspen Film, Aspen Country Day School, and Aspen Community School. May 2-3 events/week, mostly in the Vault including Roaring Fork Rising featuring local artists. June 1-2 events/week around Food & Wine, Aspen Fringe Festival, Aspen Ideas, and June JAS. July Outdoor and community events, such as the Fourth of July, and Vault programming around the Aspen Music Festival & School’s (“AMFS”) residency in the Wheeler. August 1-2 events/week, mostly in the Vault around AMFS including the Carnegie Hall Well-Being Concert Series. September 2-3 events/week. October 1-2 events/week, including the inaugural Aspen Circus Festival and a co- production with TheatreAspen. November 1-2 events/week, including multi-generational programming around Thanksgiving. December 2-3 events/week, including an original holiday show and solid weeks of programming between December 26 and December 31. These artists and programs generally fall into 4 tiers: Tier 1 – Artist fees less than $15,000; ticket prices can range from $5-$65; calculated to break even or generate nominal profit at sell-out. 60% of projected programming. Tier 2 – Artist fees between $15,000 and $50,000; ticket prices can range from $35-$175; calculated to break even at sell-out. 30% of projected programming. Tier 3 – Artist fees between $50,000 and $100,000; ticket prices can range from $55-$295; may require subsidy, even at sell-out. 5% of projected programming. Tier 4 – Artist fees that exceed $100,000; ticket prices can range from $75-$1000; likely to require subsidy, even at sell-out. 5% of projected programming. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: A robust presenting program at the Wheeler Opera House does require an investment of funds that exceeds what has been invested in recent years. That investment, however, has the potential to generate a significant percentage of the costs back through box office ticket sales, offers opportunity for community building, and stimulates the local economy with patrons visiting restaurants, etc. around their visit to the Wheeler. Limited, strategic programming of Tier 3 and Tier 4 artists throughout the calendar year helps to strengthen the Wheeler Opera House brand, broadens visibility for all programming, and – especially for local residents who are Wheeler Insiders – offers unparalleled access to world-class artists at well below-market ticket prices in downtown Aspen. A presenting season of up to 100 events, along with a projected minimum of 125 dates of rental use, may require additional staff to support this volume and complexity of activity. 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: There are no apparent environmental impacts related to this request. ALTERNATIVES: Council could choose to support more regularly scheduled Tier 3 and Tier 4 programming beyond the proposed 10%. Council could choose to avoid Tier 3 and Tier 4 artists and provide direction to only program activity that has a higher probability to recoup financially. Council could choose to eliminate the curated presenting program entirely and only focus on the Wheeler Oprea House being a venue for hire. RECOMMENDATIONS: Wheeler Staff recommends supporting the proposed scale and scope of 2026 programming with a maximum 40% target subsidy for Wheeler Presents activity across the calendar year. ATTACHMENTS: CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Jenn Ooton, Senior Project Manager Carly McGowan, PE, Senior Project Manager Lynn Rumbaugh, Interim Transportation Director THROUGH: Pete Strecker, Interim City Manager Tyler Christoff, PE, Public Works Director DATE OF MEMO: April 14, 2025 MEETING DATE: April 21, 2025 RE: Highway 82/West Aspen Transportation Needs Update REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The purpose of the work session on April 21 is to update Council on the timeline and progress of the West Aspen Transportation Needs study, which is being conducted in support of a pre-NEPA process. There is not a specific request of Council. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In the 1990s, Aspen was facing heavy traffic congestion issues, and deteriorating air quality. In response, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the City of Aspen worked together on an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that culminated in a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD would drive the implementation of transportation improvements along the Highway 82 corridor between Brush Creek and Aspen. The EIS/ROD process followed the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, or “NEPA”. The Record of Decision is a legal document between CDOT and FHWA that governs transportation infrastructure improvements and identifies mitigation for environmental impacts. It is still valid today. 1998 ROD: Preferred Alternative The set of improvements vetted through the NEPA process and approved in the ROD are referred to as the Preferred Alternative (“PA”). Over the past 25 years, CDOT, the city and other regional partners have increased transit connectivity, implemented transportation management measures including paid parking, constructed the Maroon Creek Bridge and the roundabout, and realigned Owl Creek Road. The major remaining pieces of the ROD that have not been implemented are the realignment of SH 82 and construction of a new Castle Creek Bridge. 5 The Preferred Alternative includes the following attributes, which are also depicted in Figure 1 below: - An interim solution of one general traffic lane in each direction and one designated bus lane in each direction - A light rail corridor adjacent to the roadway to accommodate the final solution of LRT - A new alignment through a portion of Marolt Open Space using an existing transportation easement held by CDOT - A cut and cover tunnel allowing for trail and wildlife connections over the transportation alignment - Conversion of Cemetery Lane to a local road only, and removal of the traffic signal at Cemetery Lane and Highway 82 - An open space corridor connecting Marolt-Thomas Open Space to the Aspen Golf Course, created by converting the abandoned portion of the highway between Cemetery Lane and the roundabout into open space. - Installation of a new traffic signal at 7th and Main Street Figure 1 Preferred Alternative, aka Modified Direct 2024 Jacobs Studies In April and August of 2024, staff from the City and Jacobs Engineering brought several studies to Council regarding the following tasks: - Feasibility of Castle Creek bridge replacement or rehabilitation, including several 3-lane options 6 - Feasibility of softening the S-curves and widening to 4-lanes - Implications of various NEPA alternatives - Analysis of different footprints - Assessment of funding and financials - Modeling of traffic impacts - Analysis of bridge sidewalk removal to improve construction phasing of a 3-lane bridge - Analysis of construction-related economic impacts from various replacement/repair options The Jacobs reports from April and August of 2024 can be found at the following link: https://aspen.gov/DocumentCenter/Index/753. Throughout the process of studying the bridge and the options, staff corresponded with CDOT for clarification on several questions regarding the bridge. The letters from CDOT, which were prepared in coordination with FHWA, can be found here: https://aspen.gov/1424/Castle-Creek-Bridge. These letters generally indicate that for the city to pursue an alternative other than the PA, the city would need to engage in a new federal NEPA process. For other alternatives that were evaluated in detail in the EIS, preparation of a Supplemental EIS could be possible. Design refinements to the PA can be handled through a process called a re- evaluation, however, more substantive changes would require a new Record of Decision. In fall of 2024, Council directed staff to develop a scope to complete the pre-work for a whole new EIS process. The purpose of the pre-NEPA work is to take a fresh look at transportation problems and needs in the SH 82 corridor. This includes: - Analysis of existing conditions including safety data, infrastructure needs, existing community plan review, emergency service/redundancy study, and a Traffic Origin and Destination Study. - Public outreach targeted toward Aspen residents and people valley-wide who use the corridor, linked here: https://www.aspencommunityvoice.com/highway- 82-west-aspen-transportation-needs-study - Coordination with CDOT and FHWA on Purpose and Need elements and viability of initiating a new EIS. - Reviewing transportation needs with stakeholders, EOTC, and City Council. Pre-NEPA On-Going Work The pre-NEPA tasks listed above will inform a draft Purpose and Need statement, or P&N, which is the foundational starting point for the NEPA process. The Purpose and Need statement is an explanation to decision makers, the public and stakeholders about why the proposed project should be implemented. It is the problem statement that identifies what the project is intended to address. 7 The public comment tool is open to the public and will remain open until early June. The stakeholder meeting took place on April 2nd with a successful turnout of technical representatives from organizations throughout the valley. Council weighed in on the invitation list during the Dec 16, 2024, work session. The engineers and planners on Jacobs’ team are compiling the existing conditions data, which includes traffic, infrastructure and safety information. An overview of these items will be presented in the April 21 work session. A detailed presentation will follow in June. In May, Jacobs will be presenting to the Elected Officials Transportation Commission (EOTC) to inform the Purpose and Need development. Then, Jacobs will review input from the public comment tool, the stakeholder meeting, and the EOTC meeting to draft a new Purpose and Need statement. The draft P&N will be presented for feedback from CDOT and FHWA, who have the ultimate authority whether to rescind the existing ROD and allow a new EIS process to be initiated. Finally, in mid- to late-June, the draft P&N, and other information that can inform a decision whether to ask CDOT and FHWA to consider a new federal EIS process, will be presented to the Aspen City Council. At that point, Council will consider costs and the information gathered through the pre-NEPA work, including an “EIS Initiation Memo” that would be submitted to CDOT and FHWA if Council chooses to. March 2025 Ballot Referendum On March 4, 2025, Aspen voters approved Referendum 2. Voter approval of Referendum 2 authorizes the use of designated portions of Marolt and Thomas properties identified in the 1998 Record of Decision for purposes of realigning Colorado Highway 82. Further, as stated in the ballot language: “Voter Approval of this measure permits the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to proceed with both planning and construction activities under the current Record of Decision (ROD)…” Thus, no additional vote is required under the current City Charter if the preferred alternative is constructed and busways are utilized. Further, passage of Ref. 2 constitutes a vote for purposes of using these designated areas for purposes of realignment of Highway 82 under the Charter if a future preferred alternative or record of decisions were issued. DISCUSSION: If Council decides to pursue a new EIS at the June Council meeting, the process moving forward is outlined in Figure 2 below. 8 Figure 2 Procedural Pathway for NEPA Project If a new EIS is pursued, a public and stakeholder engagement plan would be developed to guide the outreach process. An anticipated project team structure is shown below in Figure 3. This information is still in draft form and will require final approval from CDOT and FHWA. Figure 2 Draft Project Team Structure 9 FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project fund including the 2025 budget request has a lifetime budget of $8.5 million dollars. The 2024 (and previous) allocation is $2 million. The existing appropriation for project 51578 has a remaining budget in 2024 of $431,596.69. 51578 Project Revenues to Date: $2,000,000.00 2023 Budget Allocation (carried forward to 2024) 51578 Project Expenses to Date: $541,840.00 Jacobs Contract - Original $43,390.25 Jacobs Contract – Change Order #1 $639,829.00 Jacobs Contract – Change Order #2 $298,265.00 Jacobs Contract – Change Order #4 $30,441.00 Probolsky Contract – Polling $14,638.06 Misc Project Costs (comms, add’l traffic control, etc) $1,568,403.31 Total Expenses The cost for a new EIS will be developed by Jacobs following development of the Purpose and Need and EIS scope. The current estimate is between $2-3 million. It is anticipated that the cost would be the responsibility of the City of Aspen. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: For any construction of the Entrance to Aspen project, the project must follow National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requirements. The environmental impacts of the Preferred Alternative were heavily examined during the EIS process in the 1990s. Should the Council choose to deviate from the Preferred Alternative with an alternative solution, the environmental impacts will be required to be studied during a new or supplemental EIS process. The City of Aspen must follow this federal process that involves the greater community’s input in a similar fashion to the 1998 Record of Decision and cannot be fully decided by Aspen City Council alone. If Council chooses to pursue implementation of the Preferred Alternative, a re-evaluation of the EIS/ROD would be required by the NEPA process, which would involve reassessing the PA/s environmental impacts. ALTERNATIVES: In June, Council can choose whether to pursue a new EIS. Other alternatives include moving forward with the Preferred Alternative through a NEPA Re-Evaluation or the “do nothing” option. 10 RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend the “do nothing” alternative. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 11 12 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor Richards and Aspen City Council FROM:Lynn Rumbaugh, TDM-cp, Interim Director of Transportation THROUGH:Tyler Christoff, P.E., Deputy City Manager MEETING DATE: April 21, 2025 RE: RFTA Fare Free Pilot – Request for Financial Support REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This memo and subsequent April 21 presentation will provide Council with background on a RFTA pilot of fare free regional service that is proposed for fall of 2025. Staff requests Council direction as to RFTA’s request for financial support to offset fare revenue losses during the pilot. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen has been a leader in Transportation Demand Management (TDM) for many years, offering a wide variety of transportation services to residents, commuters and visitors. Aspen offers most services including fixed route and micro transit free of fare to reduce barriers to usage. Where services have not been fare-free, the City has worked to keep costs low and/or offer options to reduce fares. Examples include: partnering with WE-cycle to reduce a low-fare system to fare free employer partnerships wherein the City assists with reducing employee bus pass costs On a regional level, City Council’s current transportation goal includes the exploration of regional zero fares for bus trips that begin or end in Aspen. The RFTA Board has also been interested in this concept, directing its staff to consider fare free options as part of 13 2 its climate action planning efforts. At its April meeting the RFTA Board, which includes City Council representation, directed staff to move forward with an off-season fare free pilot, preferably in fall of 2025. The Board also directed staff to seek funding partners to recover the projected $550,000.00 loss in fare revenue. To move forward with a fall pilot, funding partnerships need to be in place no later than May 15. The City of Aspen and the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) have been identified as key partners. Should additional partners be necessary or funding be unavailable, RFTA will likely need to delay the pilot to spring of 2026. While RFTA is not requesting a specific dollar amount, a partnership based on Council’s goal of providing fare-free trips for riders who begin or end in Aspen would equal 41% of the total based on 2024 data, or $225,500.00. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Funding for a free fare pilot is not currently included in Transportation’s 2025 budget but may be addressed by a fall supplemental request. Transportation (141) fund revenues are generated by city sales tax, lodging tax, use tax, mass transit tax and transfers from the Parking fund. Although the 141 fund is currently healthy, it is important to note the following information when considering new requests. The 141 fund balance has been trending downward in recent years due to increasing operational costs of fixed route transit services. At the same time, the fund will be impacted by a number of items in coming years including: major bus replacement cycles in 2029 and 2031, where diesel buses will be replaced with electric purchase of two new electric buses for Lumber Yard service in 2028 operation of Lumber Yard transit service beginning in 2029 14 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Supporting fare-free transit to increase ridership is a specific Council goal aimed reducing vehicle miles traveled and air pollution. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval a one-time supplemental request to assist RFTA in piloting fare-free services as this directly responds to one of Council’s top goals. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: RFTA Zero Fare Pilot Program Agenda Summary Item 15 4 ATTACHEMENT A RFTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING “PRESENTATION/ACTION” AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM # 6. A. Meeting Date:April 10, 2025 Subject:Zero Fare Pilot Program Strategic Outcome: 1.0 ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY 5.0 SATISFIED CUSTOMERS 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Strategic Objective: 1.3 Increase alternative mode splits throughout the region 1.5 Identify and reduce barriers to riding transit and accessing trails 5.2 Transit services are financially accessible for diverse user groups 5.4 Deliver easy-to-use, modern and reliable services 5.9 Actively engage with the community to gather feedback and suggestions for improving services 6.3 RFTA will prioritize energy-efficient strategies to reduce GHG emissions and advance projects that enhance existing services with a responsible budget 6.4 Provide alternative and innovative travel solutions to help slow the growth of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in region Presented By:David Johnson, Director of Sustainability and Legislative Affairs Staff Recommendation: Launch a new Zero Fare Pilot Program in the Fall 2025 season for 62 days from Monday September 22nd thru Sunday November 23rd. Program implementation will be contingent upon finding a financial partner to help offset the estimated loss in fare and pass revenues. The preliminary estimate is approximately $550,000 of fare revenues. 16 5 Executive Summary: This Zero Fare Pilot Program is a climate action strategy to offset regional greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to mode shift by boosting ridership on regional routes without adding service. This program directly aligns with the RFTA Board of Director’s 2025 Environmental Sustainability OKR to “implement fare reductions to increase ridership.” This innovative program will demonstrate RFTA’s commitment to environmental sustainability, while also testing how free fares may impact transit ridership. There will be zero fare on all system routes, all days of the week, in all directions, excluding the Maroon Bells route. The most affected routes will be the existing routes with fares: VelociRFTA BRT, Valley/Local and the Grand Hogback. If RFTA were to experience a 40% increase in ridership due to the free-fare pilot, then the estimated ridership increase is approximately 100,000, based on the experience of peer transit agencies implementing fare-free service during the roughly three-month summer season. The estimated revenue loss from fare and pass sales is approximately $550,000. Program implementation is contingent upon finding a financial partner to help offset the fare/pass revenue loss. Background/Discussion: During the Climate Action Plan planning process, Staff learned that while RFTA emits greenhouse gases from operating its fleet and facilities (scope 1 and 2 emissions), RFTA offsets regional GHG emissions by transferring vehicle trips from private automobiles to transit. Staff purposefully chose the Fall 2025 season for a zero-fare pilot program because ridership is often lower in the fall off-season and there is passenger capacity on all routes. Pilot program success will be measured by comparing ridership and passenger capacity to Fall 2024, and lessons learned will inform future planning decisions. Staff will begin evaluating the pilot program in late November and will create a findings report in early 2026. Lessons learned will be used to inform future program planning. This interdepartmental project has been in the design phase for several months. Due diligence has included data analytics, a revenue and ridership impact model and interviewing transit agency peers that have conducted similar programs. For example, during the three-month Zero-Fare for Clean Air Program, Vail Transit observed a 38% average monthly ridership increase. 17 6 Governance Policy: Board Job Governance Policy 2.1.2.D.states, “….The public shall be provided an opportunity to comment on proposed “major” service reductions and to any changes in fares at least 30 days prior to implementation of them. Major Service changes are defined as Other Changes that RFTA staff may deem significant.” Fiscal Implications: A high-end estimated decrease of $550,000 in fare and pass revenue during the 62-day period from September 22nd through November 23rd. However, RFTA would seek financial partners to help backfill the lost fare revenues. Exhibits/Attachments:1. Attachment 1: Zero Fare Pilot Program Presentation 18