Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.054-93 8." i \~, "'lj~. " ~'l ~ '\\c.., RESOLUTION NO. ..2:t Series of 1993 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENDORSING THE ASPEN TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has been requested to endorse'the Aspen Transportation Implementation Plan, based on the transportation element of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP); and WHEREAS, in February, 1993 the Aspen City Council and the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County endorsed the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the planning process and development of the AACP has taken approximately two and a half years, and the Transportation Implementation Plan has taken approximately eleven months. A Transportation Implementation Committee (TIC) was formed in August 1992. Extensive Committee meetings have been held since that time, and a public Transportation Forum was held in November 1992. The first draft of the Transportation Implementation Plan was presented to City Council on March I, 1993. At that time, City Council conceptually endorsed the Plan and scheduled a series of weekly work sessions to evaluate every element of the Plan in greater detail. City Council also requested that staff and the TIC conduct an extensive public information and input-gathering program; and WHEREAS, between March 17 and April 23, 1993, City staff, Council members and TIC members attended twenty special meetings to provide information about the draft Transportation Implementation Plan and to listen to the concerns and suggestions of the public regarding the Plan; and WHEREAS, a second public Transportation Forum was held on April 20, 1993; and .\" ,/ '\. . .~, ~ ~,,' . - -... - WHEREAS, the ACRA, the Lodge Association and various neighborhood groups have formed subcommittees to continue to work with the City through the final Plan implementation and evaluation stages; and WHEREAS, four City Council work sessions were held in March, two in April, and two in May, 1993, culminating in the May 15 City Council Transportation Retreat; and WHEREAS, the second draft of the Plan was presented to City Council at a duly noticed public hearing on July 12,' 1993. The second draft incorporated the revisions requested by Council and responded to the concerns raised during the public comment period--especially regarding the originally-proposed parking control methodology. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT the Aspen City Council hereby endorses the Aspen Transportation Implementation Plan. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the9"(, day o~, 1993. 'h 7. 15~ ohn S. Bennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kath . ~.'I. . ~ ..," ~. 1\1... Ii' I' ~.. I' '\ } ,'i; .~~ ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Transportation Implementation :Plan June, 1993 .., " Prepared by the AACP Transportation Implementation Committee Molly Campbell, Chairperson J on Busch Bob Daniel Pat Fallin Brent Gardner-Smith Shellie Harper George Hart Roger Hunt Bill Lipsey Howie Mallory George Newman Mary Ryerson Chuck Torinus Bob Wade John Walla With Staff Assistance by Diane Moore, City Planning Director Randy Ready, Parking/Transportation Director Dan Blankenship, RFT A Director Bud Eylar, County Engineer Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Officer Jack Reid, Streets Director With Technical Assistance by Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. Debbie DuBord, Planning Office Manager Illustrations: Mark Henthorn, Cottle, Graybeal, Yaw Architects Joede Schoeberlein, Harry Teague Architects ~.: I~ " '-""1.0.. ~.4. ~. "'. ~"." , " ,~ .~ ~... , '<.. TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE SUMMARY OF GOALS: FUTURE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN .............. 2 PARKING ELEMENTS .............................. 3 1) Parking Control System .... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3 2) Residential Parking Permit Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 3) All-Day Parking Pass in Specific Spaces Within the Residential Parking Control Areas .................... . . .. 5 4) Preferential High Occupancy Vehicle On-Street Parking .. _ . .. 5 5) Onstreet Lodge Parking ......................... 5 6) Annual Business Vehicle Parking Stickers .............. 6 7) Increase in Loading and Service Vehicle Spaces . . . . . . . . . .. 6 8) Other Non-residential Uses in the Residential Parking Control Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ .. 6 9) East End Parking Facility ..................... _ .. 6 MARKETING AND PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR THE TRANSPORT A TION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . 1) Parking Information Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7 TRANSIT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ .. 7 1) Expansion in DownvaIley/Snowmass Service . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 2) Park-and-Ride Facilities ......................... 8 3) The UpvaIley Transit Corridor: High-Frequency Free Transit Service on Highway 82 between Aspen and the UpvaIley Park-and-Ride Lots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 4) Return to and Expansion of Full Year-Round City Transit Service ................................. 9 5) Cross-Town Shuttle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 6) Dial-A-Ride/Cab Coupon Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 HIGHW A Y 82 EASTBOUND/WESTBOUND HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . 10 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES ................ 10 1) Improved Galena Pedestrian Corridor . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . .. 10 2) Improved Bicycle Connections ..................... 11 3) Improved Sidewalks Between Commercial Core and Residential Areas .................................. 11 .' It,.. It '\" . '.'. l{. ~' ~' , . '\""'- TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE APPENDIX 1: ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN - TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 12 APPENDIX 2: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETINGS ON ASPEN TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN; MARCH-APRIL, 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16 APPENDIX 3: EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS ..... 19 - -...-- . ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Transportation Implementation Plan June, 1993 Through the Aspen Area Community Plan process, a broad spectrum of the Aspen community has voiced a consensus that the City's transportation system is increasingly at odds with their vision of the area (see Appendix 1). Again and again, the goal has been cited of moving from an auto-dominated transportation system to a balanced system limiting auto use while increasing mobility via transit, carpooling, pedestrian, and bicycle modes. This plan recognizes that there are diverse needs and conditions that must be accommodated. There is not just one user, one season, nor one solution. The steps presented below are designed to attain both transportation and environmental goals, while maintaining the economic vitality and personal mobility that allows the community to function. In addition, the de~ign of our transportation system should be attractive and appropriately sophisticated. If our system sets the standard for all its visual aspects such as signage, graphics, lighting, structures, logos, then it will become a source of pride to the valley and attract more users. To accomplish this, guidelines need to be developed which enhance the visual character. This Plan is the result of hundreds of hours of effort committed by a broad-based citizen's committee for more than nine months. It incorporates many of the comments suggested by the public at the November, 1992 Transportation Forum. The first draft of the plan was completed in February 1993. .' During the following months, City staff, council members and Transportation Implementation Committee . members attended more than twenty special meetings to provide information and to listen to the concerns .. and suggestions of the public regarding the Plan. Dozens of individual meetings and phone conversations also took place during that time period. This revised draft responds directly to the concerns raised during the public comment period--especially the concerns regarding the originally-proposed parking control methodology (see Appendix 2). A number of key findings drove the development of this Plan. First of all, the Plan is designed to be equitable: all elements of the community (residents and commuters, visitors and employees) are required under this Plan to make accommodations and changes in mobility patterns enabling the area as a whole to limit personal automobile use. Secondly, this Plan is based upon the conclusion that proactive steps are needed to reduce the attractiveness of the personal automobile: "carrot" approaches such as improved transit service will not by themselves induce the substantial reductions in traffic and congestion that is the goal of the Community Plan. In addition, the Plan is designed to be implementable, as revenues generated by the Plan will cover a substantial portion of the Plan operating costs. Implementing the elements of this Plan will require the City to utilize a number of funding sources beyond the City of Aspen. The Plan is also designed to be flexible; adjustments can be made to the Plan if specific issues are identified (after Plan implementation) and need to be corrected. To successfully implement this plan, it will be critical that the alternatives be put into place before the auto restriction elements (such as paid parking) are implemented. This Plan is based upon a long history of transportation analyses conducted for Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley (see Appendix 3), including the Aspen Transit/Transportation Development Program (1986), Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element (1987), the Highway 82 Busway Plan (1988), the Roaring Fork Railroad Plan (1991), the Draft State Highway 82 East of Basalt to Aspen wi' Environmental Impact Statement (1989), the Aspen Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan (1991), and the Snowmass " to Aspen Transportation Study (1992). In addition, a number of data collection efforts were conducted '\1", in the fall of 1992 to obtain necessary up-to-date information, including an inventory of on street parking, off-street parking, and parking use in neighborhoods adjacent to the commercial core. .. SUMMARY OF GOALS: FUTURE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS WITH \, IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN "< As a whole, the Transportation Element developed through the Community Plan process will significantly improve the liveability of Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley. Key findings of the implementation analyses indicate the following: .' ".'. ~ k \~~ Overall demand for parking spaces generated by the Commercial Core are projected to drop by 800 vehicles during peak periods, which is equal to 30 percent of existing demand. Most importantly, almost all of this drop in demand (750 vehicles) will be in long-term parking such as employees; short-term parking demand will drop by only 50 vehicles. Parking availability will be increased dramatically. While onstreet parking in the commercial core is currently 95 percent full during peak periods, future peak onstreet parking utilization under the Parking Control Program will be 70 percent. At this overall level, on street spaces should be available on even the most popular block. As a result, the unnecessary traffic congestion and driver frustration caused by the search for available parking will be diminished. With reduced pressure for general public parking spaces, existing spaces can be used for increased handicapped spaces, additional truck loading spaces, and conversion to pedestrian improvements. A key benefit of this plan is the improved availability of parking for visitors and shoppers. This plan will not reduce the attractiveness of Aspen for shoppers. Experience in similar resort communities indicates the attractiveness of more convenient parking resulting from this plan will more than offset any disincentive of pay parking. Another important benefit will be the reduction of parking impacts on the residential areas near the commercial core. Commercial-core parkers in the nearby residential areas are expected to roughly total 200, a reduction of 500 vehicles (or 71 percent) from current peak winter levels. To successfully implement this plan, it will be critical that the alternatives be put into place before the auto restriction elements (such as paid parking) are implemented. This will allow auto users the time needed to make the adjustments in work, childcare and shopping schedules necessary to accommodate the loss of the instant mobility the private car provides. In addition, the participation and effectiveness of the Plan needs to be continually monitored and evaluated so that adjustments can be made to the Plan. ~ ~ ~ ~ The benefits of this Transportation Plan will extend far beyond the City limits. The reduction of traffic along Highway 82 will substantially improve the quality of life in Basalt, EI Jebel, Carbondale and throughout the highway corridor by improving air quality and reducing congestion. Rather than simply an Aspen plan, this Transportation Plan is a key part in an integrated solution to transportation problems valley-wide. This proposal promises to benefit all segments of the visitor and residential population. The transit service improvements will be provided to year-round residents, both in Aspen and the Downvalley communities, as well as for visitors. While funds are not yet available for the Highway 82 expansion project, and proposals for the Downvalley commuter train and the Aspen -- Snowmass tram have to date foundered upon their high capital requirements, the Community Plan transportation elements yield a timely and achievable means of realizing the community's transportation goals. Finally, a benefit of this plan is that it will not preclude additional future transportation improvements. I' As paid parking programs remain the single most effective generator of transit ridership, moreover, the , institution of this plan would be a very strong spur for the development of future alternative transit capital , improvements. Page 2 ;)1 . '-i. I w, . i "i,;." . C-j t"::] b c:::: ;0 ~ t"::] :::r:: '"--<: ~ t"::] t"::] ::x:: ~ a ~ ~ - ~ :<:; S2 V:l -.::::: V:l '-3 STIllIlIlIlIlIlt"::]IIIII11II11II11I11I1I1I11I11I11I11I11I11~IIII1I11I1II11I1I1I11I11I11I1I1I11I1I11I11I1~ S I m t"::] ~ ~ - :<:; V:l '-3 S MIL ST T S GALENA ST ~ C"':l a a ~ t"::] ~ ~ -.::::: t"::] S HUNT R ST . - 1I111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111~ ~III11II11I11I11II11I11I1I11I11I1I11I11I11I11I11II11II11I11IS IJ.AL~ I ( - ~ " t"::] :::r:: ~ r;, '"--<: n a ~ a '" 'l::i ~ k~ 0 t"J :<:; 0 ;0 ~ t"::] - ~ II ~r n 1 ( - SPRING Il N (C' n ""= > en 'C ~ = n e ., ~ . PARKING ELEMENTS The Commercial Core parking area is bounded by Main (inclusive), Monarch (inclusive), Durant (in- clusive), and Spring (exclusive). A total of 872 public parking spaces are available in the current unstriped configuration (including six handicapped spaces) within this area. During the winter peak period (early afternoon), approximately 95 percent of these spaces are occupied. In addition, there are 340 spaces in the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and 350 private spaces, for a total of 1,515 parking spaces in the commercial core as a whole. Drivers destined for the core area also park in on street spaces in the fringe commercial area (150 vehicles) I private spaces in the fringe area (260 spaces), and on street in nearby residential areas (700 vehicles), J) Parkin!! Control Svstem Based upon a thorough evaluation of parking control system alternatives for the commercial core (see map on the following page), the preferred alternative incorporates multi-space pay-and-display parking ticket vending machines along with an optional in-vehicle parking meter system. A maximum time limit of three hours is recommended for the commercial core, with a minimum parking fee equivalent to $1.00 per hour. The initial hours of enforcement would be from 7;00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Vehicles with valid handicap license plates would be exempt. The Pay-and-Display ("European") system requires someone parking on-street within the commercial core to walk to the nearest ticket vending machine and insert payment (coin, bill or prepaid card). The machine prints a ticket indicating transaction time and date, expiration time, and amount paid. The parking patron then returns to the vehicle to display the ticket on the dashboard. In order to .'. .. accommodate motorcycles or convertibles, the license plate number of the vehicle would need to be \ written on the ticket before it was displayed. ~ One major advantage of this system is the flexible rate structure. Flat rates can be programmed to vary by time of day or day of week. Rates can be set in increments so that parking patrons can select the time they require and pay the corresponding fee. This feature can be utilized to help encourage turnover. Parking beyond the three hour limit would not be able to be purchased in a single transaction. To further discourage "meter-feeding," the license plate numbers of suspected abusers can be recorded and citations with escalating fine amoun ts can be issued. The in-vehicle parking meter option would complement the pay-and-display system by providing a convenient alternative primarily to local residents. This option would require a commercial core parking patron to purchase or borrow an in-vehicle meter, and then to purchase a smart card embedded with a set amount of currency value (e.g., $40). The user then inserts the smart card into the in-vehicle meter and hangs the device from the rear-view mirror. The meter debits units from the smart card automatically and the user pays only for the parking time used. The same parking rate structure and time limits would apply for the in-vehicle meters as for the pay-and-display system. . Enforcement of this tandem parking control program would be accomplished by parking control officers walking along the curb checking for missing or expired receipts or for expired in-vehicle parking meters. Revenue control and system management would be facilitated by automated audit reports, recording traffic patterns and revenues on a daily basis for each vending machine. . , l , ~ I These figures are based upon an extensive survey of parking accumulation and turnover conducted in 1986,00+ and off-street parking supply counts conducted in 1992, parking accumulation surveys conducted in residential neighborhoods in 1992, an analysis of parking needs based upon commercial core land uses, and City of Aspen records of parking activity in the Rio Grande Parking Facility. Page 3 '.. Approximately 24 pay-and-display vending machines would be required if the in-vehicle parking meter ~ option is also available. The pay stations could be strategically located at northeast and southwest '" corners of each block so that each pay station could service 30-35 spaces and parking patrons would need to walk at most a half a block. The in-vehicle parking meters and smart cards would be available at City Hall or another convenient location. The visual impact of this parking control system would be minimized by the small number of pay stations required and by the avoidance of on-street striping. Signage needs will be approximately the same for this system as for the existing 90-minute timed parking system. An additional advantage is that on- street un striped spaces require less space per vehicle than striped spaces. A block-by-block analysis of available curb space indicates that striping would result in the loss of roughly 175 spaces. Both the pay-and-display vending machines and the in-vehicle meters are proven technologies that have been in use on-street primarily in Europe throughout the last decade. Implementing the system as proposed would not only maximize ease of use and convenience for parking patrons while maintaining the commercial vitality of the core, but it woulq also provide an essential travel demand management tool as part of the overall Transportation Plan to reduce the impact of traffic and parking congestion on our community. 2) Residential Parldnf! Pennit Prof!ram If the disincentive. of the paid parking program is to be achieved, and if the attractiveness of Aspen's residential areas near the commercial core is to be maintained, it is crucial that a parking control program be instituted in residential neighborhoods. Surveys indicate that up to 700 vehicles are already parked in residential areas by drivers destined for the commercial core. If commuters and visitors can .continue to drive alone into Aspen and simply park a block or two farther from their destination, this & spillover problem would multiply, and the desired traffic reductions will not materialize. A goal of this ~ transportation plan, moreover, is to effect reductions in residential parking impacts. ~ A permit-based parking control system is therefore recommended for the residentialllodging areas surrounding the commercial core with portions of the street reserved for only residential on-street parking. In light of driver's willingness to park in residential areas and walk to the commercial core,2 all residential areas south of the Roaring Fork River within a six-block walking distance of the commercial core should be included initially in the parking control program. The boundaries should be expanded as needed. Ultimately, three residential districts should be established -- West, South and East -- with distinct residential permits for each. By prohibiting residential permits for one district to be used in another, residential permit-holders will be discouraged from driving between residential districts. Thedistricts should be comprised of the following areas: ~ West District -- Area bounded by Monarch between Hallam and Durant (exclusive), Durant (inclusive), Aspen Mountain, Fourth Street, Hallam Street, Second Street, Francis Street, the bluff south of the Post Office, and Monarch between Bleeker and Hallam. South District -- Area bounded by Durant between Aspen Mountain and Dean Street (exclusive), Dean Street (inclusive) and Aspen Mountain. East District -- Area bounded by Spring Street (exclusive), the Roaring Fork River, Aspen Mountain, and Durant between the ski base area and Spring Street (exclusive). ~ ~ I.", 1\ ~' '11 '. 2 As evidenced by the effects generated by the imposition of pay parking in other communities. Page 4 i.' Each district should identify a representative to work with the Parking Department during the \, establishment and implementation of the residential parking control program. Residential permits should be distributed by the City Transportation/Parking Department to current residents providing proof (voter registration, property tax bill, lease, etcetera) of residency within the specific district. A nominal fee should be required to cover the administrative costs of the program. Residents' viSItors staying over 90 minutes can purchase a Day Parking Pass (discussed below), or park off-street. In addition, it is recommended that the residential parking program hours of enforcement coincide with the commercial core parking control program (7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.). . Evening visitors to the residential areas are therefore not subject to the parking control program. 3) Alf-Dav Parldnl! Pass in Specific Spaces Within the Residential Parldnf! Control Areas Inevitably, some drivers will want to park for more than the three hour time period allowed in the commercial core parking wne (without having the three vehicle occupants necessary for a HOV parking permit). For the overall parking plan to be successful, it is necessary to provide these persons with an opportunity to park, but at a relatively high cost. An all day parking pass valid in the Residential Parking Control Areas should be made available for any driver willing to pay a fee between $3.00 and $6.00. These passes should be displayed through the windshield, and should be color-coded for easy enforcement. This strategy is included in the Transportation Plan as an interim measure until additional off-street public parking (e.g. underground parking structure) can be developed in the commercial core and other transportation alternatives are implemented. 4) Preferential Hil!h Occupancv Vehicle Oil-Street Parldnl! el Providing incentives for carpoolin,g.is an importan.t element in re<!ucing auto travel. .Given the parking 'lI controls recommended, the provlSlon of convement, free parking for vehIcles WIth three or more occupants would be a very strong incentive. In light of existing vehicle occupancy figures' and commuting patterns, 250 HOV spaces should be provided. HOV free parking should be designated along the following streets or in spaces designated for day pass use in residential parking control areas: ~ Monarch Street between Bleeker Street and Durant Avenue; ~ Spring Street between Durant Avenue and Main Street; ~ Rio Grande Place between .Mill Street and Main Street; and ~ Bleeker Street between Monarch Street and Mill Street. Some spaces along these streets should also be available for residential parking permits and lodging parking permits. Daily, free HOV parking permits should be made available at the parking kiosks at the Park-and-ride lots (discussed below), the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and other identified locations. 5) Onstreet Lodlle Parldnll It is necessary to accommodate the legitimate parking needs of the many lodging properties located in the residential parking control area. An appropriate number of parking permits should be provided to lodging properties at a minimal cost. Lodging properties desiring onstreet parking permits for their guests should be required to submit a simple application detailing their need for parking and the availability of offstreet parking, paying a nominal fee for each annual permit. Only parking permits adequate to meet each property's onstreet parking needs should be provided. Parking permits should be part of a flexible ~".'.. ,: ~. ~- 3 Forinstance, a surveyofvehicleoccupancyconducledduring-the 1991~92ski season indicated that approximately 175 private vehi~leswith three or more occupanLS were entering Aspen on the Castle Creek Bridge during the AM commute period. Page 5 "e.. , ''''- -' :::l - - 0 - c:: ""0 (J) - .., .., 0 ~ "0 - 0 -. 0 (J) :::l (I) . . 0. rn () '~ 0 (J) 0 ~e;. ; ~ ~ , :::l 0. ""0 ~ .., " -. :::l to " ~ (") -' - -. - '< @....' I" J ~. \, , (f) - .., (I) (I) - r / "\ ~~o. ~>~ . ~L~ ~~ I' j.. I j / f { \ '-', I ./ ~ f ~ m :::l - .., ~ :::l (") (I) /~ /( c <:~)r~~ . ~ ~ n- . ~, - ::r CD - - :l> c ..., en CD - ~ ..., $>> :l> - -' 0- 0 0 :::l < . . CD :l> - ::r "'0 ) CD 0 - "'0 CD ..., :::l 0 - "C -' eo $>> - " en CD :::0 a. CD .J a. \ m CD $>> < (,,--J en CD - - ) 0 m "C J :::l 3 a. CD "'0 :::l - $>> ..., CJ) 7\ (') -. :::l CD (Q :::l L $>> ." ..., $>> -. (') 0 .-. ~: =: ~.. ,.... ,~ '< , ~ c ~.I and enforceable" system th.at meets ~he n~s of both the Parking Department and the lodging properties. '", 6) Annual Business VehIcle Parkinf!. Stickers For some of the business establishments in the commercial core, the easy accessibility of a vehicle is necessary to their operations. To avoid placing an onerous burden upon businesses that require a vehicle for deliveries, an annual business parking sticker should be made available at a reduced fee to allow business delivery vehicles to park in residential areas and in the municipal parking garages. Businesses would be required to justify a sticker for business delivery use (other than simply commuting) and adhere to strict qualifications. Businesses would also be required to use the designated loading zones in the commercial core for deliveries. In order to meet the goals of the parking plan, a fee shall be established that discourages frivolous use of the business sticker. 7) Increase in Loadinf!. and Service Vehicle STJaces The lack of adequate loading/unloading and service vehicle spaces in specific areas of the commercial core creates an operational problem for business, as well as creating congestion caused by double- parking. Truck loading zones have already been designated in strategic locations throughout the core to expedite deliveries by truck. Additional service vehicle spaces are currently being evaluated by the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, in conjunction with the Aspen Police and Transportation Departments. In response to the need for additional short-term (15 minute) loading zone spaces for shoppers and merchants, the City is moving forward with the initial installation of 28 electronic duplex meters. Two metered spaces will be located near the southwest corners of each blockface in the commercial core, with .' four additional metered spaces located along Durant Ave. The number and location of the short-term t{ spaces will remain flexible and responsive to the changing needs for quick-turnover parking. The spaces \;c will be easy to find and consistently located relative to each blockface. The initial spaces also will be located primarily in angle parking spaces along north-south streets to discourage constant circulation around blocks in search of a space and to facilitate enforcement. 8) Other Non-residential Uses in the Residential Parkinf!. Control Area It is recognized that there are a number of non-residential land uses in the residential parking control areas, such as churches, schools, and restaurants. The legitimate parking needs of these land uses need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 9) East End Parkinf!. Facilitv Though this plan will substantially reduce parking demand in the commercial core, the provision of additional offstreet parking in the area is needed to address remaining long-term parking demand. There is interest in development of a joint facility that will serve City Market and the redevelopment of the city block bounded by Cooper, Spring, Hyman and Original (Kraut/Bell Mountain Lodge). Several illustrations that depicts the potential redevelopment of this parcel is found on the following page. This is the most appropriate location for additional public offstreet parking, as it is convenient to many employment sites as well as the ski base area. The municipal portion of the proposed underground parking facility should provide a moderate amount of public spaces. Rather than "attracting" additional auto trips into the core, these spaces should be managed to replace residential-area onstreet spaces used in the Day Parking Pass program. This facility would also serve as a summer intercept lot for traffic entering the city from Independence Pass. f., The Tran.sportation Iml?lementation.Commit~ee str~n~ly recommends that the City move forward to begin \ constructIOn on thIS Jomt pubhc-pnvate project wIthm the next two (2) years. '" Page 6 .MARKETING AND PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM A key element in instituting a successful transportation control program will be to conduct an aggres- sive marketing program. Marketing efforts should include cable TV spots, development of a press kit, and the development and distribution of brochures customized for the following groups: ~ Residents -of the Residential Parking Control area; ~ All other residents and property owners in Aspen; ~ Visitors (distributed through lodging properties and the Resort Association); ~ Downvalley commuters; and ~ Commercial Core business owners/employers. These marketing materials should clearly layout why the program is being implemented, what the parking fees are to be used for (such as increased transit), and should particularly stress the alternatives available to travellers (such as carpooling and transit service). Furthermore, efforts should be made to educate and encourage the public to form "casual carpools". 1) Parkinf! Infonnation Centers Several drive-up parking kiosks should be established to distribute information regarding the parking program, transit services, carpooling and other alternative transportation modes. Flexible kiosk locations should be established in areas associated with the Park-and-Ride facilities and/or other vehicle intensive areas. Additionally, information regarding the transportation program should be made available at other auto intensive locations (e.g. car washes, gas stations, inspection stations). \Ii .. These kiosks should be staffed daily fo~ at least .12 hours during peak seasons, and as needed in the 's.. off-seasons, and should serve the followmg functIOns: ~ Distribute information regarding the parking program, transit services, carpooling, and other alternate transportation modes; ~ Distribute daily parking permits for HOV vehicles; ~ Sell daily parking passes; ~ Provide directions and information about Aspen. These services should also be made available on a walk-up basis at the Rio Grande Parking Facility and at future parking facilities. TRANSIT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS 1) Expansion in Downvallev/Snowmass Service A key element in reducing auto use is the provision of convenient and cost-competitive public transit service. Both residents and visitors to the Roaring Fork Valley have proven to be eager to use transit; indeed, ridership is often limited only by the availability of vehicles. Analysis of existing ridership and potential demand indicates that substantial increases in service to Snowmass and Downvalley communities are a cost-effective means of achieving Community Plan goals while benefiting transportation conditions valley-wide. Up to three additional buses should be operated year-round between Aspen. and EI Jebel/Carbondale, and up to two additional buses between Aspen and Snowmass. During peak periods, '........ service would be provided approximately every 12 minutes on average to the Downvalley areas, and every J 15 minutes to Snowmass Village. .' # , . Page 7 2) Park-and-Ride Facilities ~., A key element in the transportation plan is the expansion of free, park-and-ride facilities downvalley of <, Aspen. Over the last few years, RFTA has been developing a series of park-and-ride facilities that have proven very effective in generating increased transit ridership while reducing Highway 82 traffic levels. An expansion program for these downvalley facilities should be vigorously pursued. In addition, new facilities should be developed to serve mid-valley residents bound for Aspen, and to serve residents of the Maroon Creek/Castle Creek areas. Pitkin County and CDOT should be participants in the location and funding of the park-and-ride facilities. Preliminary evaluation indicates that the most appropriate locations for new upper-valley facilities along Highway 82 is between the Buttermilk Area and the Brush Creek Road intersection. This location would potentially allow the facility to also serve as a lot for Snowmass Village, and to serve as a convenient parking point for carpools arriving from downvalley with occupants destined for both Snowmass and Aspen. Parking information centers provided as part of these facilities could also serve both Snowmass and Aspen. Final determination of the phasing and construction of park-and-ride facilities (including consideration of the Maroon/Castle Creek and the Marolt areas as alternate/additional candidate sites), will ultimately depend upon land costs and availability, and the final results of the Aspen to Snowmass transportation planning process. Evaluation of existing travel patterns, the forecast response to pay parking implementation, and park- and-ride activity in similar areas indicates that a lot with approximately 250 spaces should be provided. A parcel of 4.0 to 5.0 acres will be required, depending upon the configuration of the parcel, and this would include a transit loading area and other accessory uses. In addition, a smaller facility should be constructed in the vicinity of Maroon Creek Road and Highway .... 82. This lot would serve as a park-and-ride facility for the many residents of the Maroon cree.k/Castle ,: Creek area. It should be located within convenient walking distance to Highway 82 and provided with '. signalized access to the highway. In light of travel pattems in the area, a lot of 100 to 150 spaces " would be required. If overcrowding by drivers coming from other areas develops, a permit system limiting use to nearby residents should be considered. It is important to consider these parking facilities and the transit shuttle service that serves them as only part of a comprehensive transportation plan. These lots serve as the last opportunity for drivers destined to Aspen's commercial core to find free parking. They also serve as portions of a system of park-and-ride lots throughout the Roaring Fork Valley, serving the mid-valley area between Aspen and Lazy Glen. It is recommended that the City solicit financial support from CDOT in expediting the phasing of the park-and-ride facilities, incorporating multimodal design concepts for the intersections with Highway 82. In regard to the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highway 82, the concept of a grade- separated interchange is encouraged, but the proposed interchange system design that depicts a "modified trumpet" interchange is unacceptable. Intersections should be designed as multipurpose, multifunctional transportation facilities. The interchange design should also minimize visual impacts. The City should prioritize the development of the park-and-ride facilities since they are a key component of the Transportation Plan. 3) The Dpvallev Transii Corridor: Hif!h-Freouencv Free Transii Service on Hi?hwav 82 between Aspen and the Dpvallev Park-and-Ride Lots mi. Add!tional transit improvement~ should be implemented for the relatively con~ested and developed ff comdor between Aspen, the Airport Busmess Center, and the free, Park-and-Rlde lots. Up to three ill' ~'<.l Page 8 additional vehicles should be put into operation, initially providing free transit service every 10 minutes 'I throughout the corridor during peak periods and at most every half hour during non-peak periods. In , light of expected passenger loads, shuttle vehicles of moderate capacity should be operated. Considering , the Downvalley and Snowmass buses serving this corridor, peak-period service will be provided roughly every five minutes in each direction. In addition, all fares should be eliminated for service within this corridor. The elimination of fares substantially increases the convenience and "user-friendliness" of transit service. This step would essentially expand the existing free-fare area from its current terminus at Maroon Creek Road down valley to the Upvalley Park-and-Ride facilities. 4) Return to and Expansion of Full Year-Round Citv Transit Service As a cost-savings measure, service hours and days have been reduced on RFTA's four City Routes in the spring and fall, resulting in a reduction in service quality. The spring and fall service reductions should be eliminated and full operation (free of charge) returned year-round through additional subsidy funding. Additionally, the city transit service should be expanded to include additional areas not currently served by transit. Ridership levels on routes should be monitored frequently to identify if smaller vehicles can be effectively operated. 5) Cross-Town Shuttle RFTA has recently been experimenting with a cross-town shuttle service between the commercial core and the post office area using vans. This service should be ma(le permanent, and vehicles specifically designed for such service (and of a size in keeping with the character of the area) should be purchased. In addition to reducing short auto trips in the commercial core, this service promotes transit usage into I and out of the area by allowing passengers to run errands in town without their car. Based upon the tl. success of this shuttle to generate passenger-trips, an east-west shuttle system serving Main Street and 'l. the lodges located on the west end of Main Street and along Durant Avenue should also be considered. The Transportation Implementation Committee has approved the concept of a tracked trolley system, constructed by private interests, for the Galena Street corridor as part of the long term cross-town transportation solution. City Council supports allowing the trolley concept to proceed through the land use review and public hearing process. 6) Dial-A-Ride/Cab Coupon Prof!ram Even with the provision of a quality, free City transit system, there remains a potential transit" market segment" that the existing fixed-route service is not reaching. Considering all of the potential options, a dial-a-ride/cab coupon (or "user-side subsidy") program could be developed on a trial basis for a portion of the community to assess the concept's effectiveness. For certain potential transit markets with a low density of demand, a dial-a-ride/cab coupon can provide more transportation at a lower cost per passenger-trip than the subsidy required to operate fixed-route service. A trial cab coupon program should operate as follows: ~ Based upon the experience of other communities, ageneral public subsidy rate of 50 percent would be appropriate. A ticket-book approach is recommended, in which passengers can purchase taxi coupons for a specified fee. Initial outlets could consist of City Hall, the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and Rubey Park. Additional potential locations would include any banks or stores willing to participate. rli.'. ~! , " " '~., Page 9 (I c: C/l .-+ "'"I $l) .-+ o ::l ~ ~ . . -0 o .-+ (l) ::l .-+ $l) -0 (l) c. (l) C/l .-+ "'"I . ~ '...'. ~ ~ \, - 3 "0 "'"I o < (l) 3 (l) ::l .-+ C/l .... o "'"I G) $l) - (l) ::l $l) (f) .-+ "'"I (l) (l) .-+ un ~ \~ D d .,1 · ~ Residents of Aspen would be allowed to use these coupons to pay taxi fares for any taxi trip within Aspen's city limits. For services outside the city, passengers would either have to pay full fare, or would transfer to an RFTA bus. Over time, a pattern of regular cab coupon passengers will develop. The cab operator would be encouraged to group these trips into a shared ride arrangement, providing a further discount to passengers willing to share a ride. In this way, total vehicle-miles of travel (and therefore PMIO emissions) can be reduced by this program. The primary advantage provided by a user-side subsidy program is its attractiveness to a transit "market segment" not currently using the fixed-route service, including persons of higher income than the typical existing transit rider, and persons making occasional trips. In addition, parking needs in the commercial core would be reduced. By developing shared rides, total pollution emissions can also be reduced. Based upon the results of the pilot program, the user-side subsidy program could easily be expanded to cover other sections of the city. . Similarly, a pilot dial-a-ride program should be implemented. A subcommittee should be formed to rigorously evaluate the feasibility of a dial-a-ride program, including the concept of a public-private partnership with local cab companies. ffiGHWAY 82 EASTBOUND/WESTBOUND ffiGH OCCUPANCY VEffiCLE LANES The preferred alternative in the Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement for SH 82 between Basalt and Buttermilk includes High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes between Buttermilk and Gerbazdale. . Furthermore, considering the traffic reductions that will result from implementation of this plan, 'episodic ~I traffic congestion at the entrance to Aspen will continue to occur during both winter and summer. The \\" proposed High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes along eastbound and westbound Highway 82 between the Castle Creek Bridge and Shale Bluffs should be evaluated as part of the SH 82 EIS between Buttermilk and Aspen as a cost-effective means of promoting both transit ridership and carpooling. A signalized pre-emption system to allow transit priority at bridges, with the longer term. goal of constructing bridges with HOV lanes, should be considered. It is acknowledged that the HOV lane construction will need to be phased due to funding constraints. The City should continue its involvement with the Snowmass to Aspen Transportation Plan and all three jurisdictions should aggressively seek all available funding from CDOT to expedite the completion of the EIS process and the construction of highway improvements that promote transportation alternatives. Furthermore, this plan recognizes the critical importance of superior transit service linking Aspen with the airport area as the probable first phase of an Aspen to Snowmass fixed guideway system. The Snowmass to Aspen Transportation Plan Decision Makers are in consensus about the need to aggressively explore the feasibility of such a system. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES 1) Imvroved Galena Pedestrian Corridor Substantial improvements to the pedestrian facilities along Galena Street should be made between Main Street and Cooper Street. Through the conversion of angled parking spaces to parallel spaces and the construction of pedestrian improvements at the intersections, this important connection between the Mall 'I and the Rio Grande area can change from an "auto-dominated" to a "pedestrian-dominated" environ- ~. ment. An illustration that depicts potential improvements to Galena Street is found on the following 1\ page. " Page lO c: 1. (J) 1\\ ..... '\:< ~ !:l) ..... 0 :J . . en 3 c: to to - CD ~ en -' 0. CD ::E !:l) - . 7\ v' " ''<" -0 ~ 0 ...... CD () ..... ~ 'i1 !:l) - ....10. <0 <0 V) () 0 3 "0 - . CD 11 ..... ~ \1 " 0 " :J (I 2) Imvroved Bicvcle Connections Over much of the year, bicycling is an attractive travel alternative, particularly for Aspen residents. Bicycle facility improvements should be constructed along Highway 82 and other arterials, as well as within the offstreet trails system. The provision of bicycle storage facilities at the park-and-ride lots should also be encouraged. Bicycle storage racks should also be made available throughout the commercial core. 3) Improved Sidewalks Between Commercial Core and Residential Areas Finally, there is a strong need for improved pedestrian connections between the commercial core and the residential portions of Aspen. It is unrealistic to expect Aspen residents (as well as some lodging guests) to walk to the commercial core if they are forced to walk in the road. The unattractiveness of pedestrian travel is only made worse by snow on the road, which often requires walking in the travel lane. The recent recommendations of the Neighborhood Advisory Committee regarding the implementation of the Aspen Pedestrian and Bikeway System Plan are endorsed. Specifically, the following improvements should be pursued: * Construction of the north/south routes (sidewalks and trails) and this includes Smuggler sidewalk, Neal Street sidewalk, Lone Pine sidewalk, and Lone Pine/Art Museum trail; * The river trail system (easement acquisition, design and construction); and * Completion of the Main Street sidewalks. Ii . The ~mug!;ler ~idewalk project is currently underway with a Fall, 1993 completion date. An illustration '\1, of thiS project IS found on the followmg page. dml~.pl:an.6_93 J.'.. ~ Page II . APPENDIX 1 Transportation ActWn Plan. . Intent , The community liCCks to provide a balanced, integrated trnnSpOrtatioo system forresidenl:S, . visitors, and commuters that red~ coogestion and pollution. Philosophy The plan recognizes that reducing depen- dency on the automobile requires offering alterna- tives both for automobile use arid storage and other means of trnnSpOrt. The well documented displace- ment of a latge portion of the community's resi- dent work force has created a need to both amelio- rate the effects of increasing commuter transit li:uo the city and to reduce further displacement. The growth of the commuter culture fostered by the displacement has degraded both the air quality and quality of life for both residents and visitors as ey must compete for fewer parldng spaces and ntend with the kind of traffic delays .that both visitors and residents sought to escape in coming here. Cities and towns that have not taken positive action to plan for these effects have suffered enormous environmental and social costs. Aspen cannot build its way out of traffic problems anymore than Los Angeles was able to'solve its problems with ever larger and wider freeways. Avoiding the diler.una of more cars needing more highways and more highways attracting more cars means limiting vehicle trips into Aspen; imple- menting an efficient valley wide mass transit system; altering land use patterns; and moving people within and around the City of Aspen without automobiles. A comprehensive parking management system within Aspen is one compo- nent for creating a vehicle limited, less congested downtown. But such a plan will be ineffective unlesS it is accompanied by a downtown shuttle, frequent ~t service, enhaI1cect peaestrlan . walkways. improved bikeways. and accessible, practical car storage facilities such as itttercCpt 10lS and garages at the outskirts of the city and metro area. AltOOugh all of these stepS must be accom- plished together since none standing alone will meet the desires andneeds of the community, as a practical matter, the community does not have the resources to implement all of the required compo- nents at once. Careful phasing of the plan will be required to build community support for the entire . concept and to avoid creating new im\>alances. The community will need to take a long range view of the problem and reject remedies that do not CODttibute to a comprehensive set of solutions. Aspen has risen to that sort of challenge in the past and we are confident that the communitY will put its future filSt in making the hard choices required by the tranSpOrtation problems facing us. Policies . Implement a valley wide mass transit system. . Seek to balance public and private transportation both within and without the Aspen Metro Area by increasing the number of available transportation choices. . Create a less congested downtown core. . Encourage the continued education and marketing of transportation alternatives within . the Aspen metro area. . Insure the consistency between the AACP and the Aspen-to-Snowmass transportation plan. . , . .' , \... l!.'".". @ " \~ . . TransportationAction Plan . Sbort-Tetm t 992 t 993 o L update ~ inventoty of existing public parldng spaces within the commercial core of Aspen. o 2. Detennine the number of underutilized private parlcing spaces within the . commercial core and create a plan for more efficient utilization of these spaces for public use. Q 3.. Pursue full utilization of the Oty parking garage with 24 hour operation of the garage. Q 4. Utilize additional slgnage that effectively promotes use of~ parking garage by visitors and residents. . Q S. Review all parking pCrmit policies. aiming towards a more restrictive use of special parking penults. Q 6. Provide free day parlcing in the city parlcing garageior High Occupancy Vehicles that . contain three (3) or more persons in the vehicle. Q 7. Insure that the fees for the Aspen parking garage are reasonable and affordable: the fees (on an hourly basis) should be less than those collected for the "pay for parking" spaces located within the commercial core. Q 8. Insure that vehicle parking/storage souctures are provided in association with transit service to move people throughout the City of Aspen. . Q 9. Inc= the paIkIng fine With an annual review. Q 10. Designate speCIfic p"mng zooes within the Oty of Aspen with time limitations for seiviceldelivety vehicles. Q lL Develop a comprehensive seryice vehicle loading and unloading policy and service vehicle management plan. Q 12. Create a parking department within city govemmel)t to oversee the management and operations of the parlcing garage(s) and the overall parking system. :. 1....- I =g J o 13. The Oty and County p&Z's shall bold work sessions to discuss and develop airport and rental car policies. If necessary. this plan shall be amended to incorporate . these policies. Q 14. Pursue the consouction ofa public parking facility beneath the Kraut propenylBuckhom Lodge/Bell Mountain LodgelCity Market site; this was recommended as P!1.2$e II in the 1987 Transportation Element Q 15. Reduce the number of on-street parlcing spaces within the commercial core by phasing out a portion of the parking spaces in conjunction with parking and transit alternatives. Q 16. Implement !I "pay for parking" system within the commercial core of Aspen which includes the area from Spring St to Monarch SL and from Main SL to Durant Ave. The lodging areas shall be provioed with parlcing permits and exempted from paid parking. The "pay for parking" areas ',g' Transportation Action Plan . should be enforced from 7 am to 6 pm. seven days per week The pay for parking spaces should be limited to ninety (9<;1) minutes and the parking fee should initially be one (1) dollar per hour. Q 17. EstlIhll<h uesident~system which restriclSparldng in the residential nclghbothoods adja~ to the commercial core to residents through a signage and a permit system (administrative fee only). TIlls shall be established simultaneously with the ~pay for parlcing" system in the commercial core. a 18. Study and consider the establishment of 811 alley easement for Setviceldelivery vehicles eJ'::clusively located at the north end of W~Pm. 19. Develop intercept lots at Brush Creek Road! State Highway 82. Buttermilk and/or other appropriate locations. which would be free . to the users of the lot and secured. Provide frequent, effective and free tranSit service between the lot and me aty of Aspen. o 20. Create a long term car storage facility! impound facility at Brush Creek/State Highway 82 or the Airport Business Center. o 21. Request that the U.S. Postal Service provide mall delivery outside of the metro area and establish a postal sub-station at the Airport Business Center. Short-Tenn I 992 I 993 o 22_ Continue and enhance bus service between Aspenand Glenwood Springs. o 23.. Implement a rre:quent, cross-town shuttle utilizing the Galena Street Coni dor with termination points at the Post Office and the base of Aspen Mountain; consider . expanding the shuttle service to other areas within the aty. Encourage the continued pursuit of the trolley option. o 24. Implement the one-half cent sales tax incre= for.mass tranSPortation funding currently provided by State law. o 25. Increase the frequency, setvice, and length of hours of bus. service throughout the Aspen Area. I~'T~I g \ Q 26. EStablish a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on State Highway 82 between Brush Creek Road and the at)' of Aspen. o 27. Evaluate the utilization of a bus{transit conidor along 0\\1 Creek Road. o 28. Endorse the continued worle of the Roaring Fork Forum Transportation Task Force in their effortS to develop an integrated valley- wide tranSportation system. o 29. Recognize the Rio Grande nght-<lf-way as a multi-use transportation conidor. o 30. Designate the Rio Grande property as a terminus for transportation activities. This does not preclude the use of other properties for tranSpOrtation activities. o 31. Create a separate fund which would enable the use of the fees collected for parking "cash-in-lieu" fees and "pay for parking fees" to be utilized for transit/pedestrian! ~ . TransportatWn Action Plan . $.', \{. "l, .K, 0; 'co:. (ii' tR," 0' ~. 'i!",-, . paOOng al~ves within the Oty of ' Aspen. o 32. Establish a designated trlI11Si.t corridor between the Town of Snowmass Village imd the City of Aspen (at such time the corridor is designated the map shall be amended). o 33. Evaluate the establishment of the Dial-A- Ride concept within the Aspen metro area. A dial-a-nde program is a door to door service, scheduled by a dispatCher to make the best use of the vehicles. o 34. Designate all existing tranSit corridors as such. (i.e.. Highway 82, Rio Grande R.O.W.) Short-Term 1 992 I 993 o 35. Implement the recommendations in the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan in a phased capital improvement program. o 36.. Design8.te Galena Street as a priorlty for . capital improvements for enhanoement as the transit and pedestrian corridor within the Oty of .Aspen. . I. ~~-T=l jim , o 37. Improve, widen and maintain designated bike and pedestrian shoulders on both sides of Cemetery Lane. o 38. Study. fund and implement improvements to improve safety for bicyclists on. Castle Creek, Maroon Creek and Brush Creek Roads. a 39. Pave the shoulders along State Highway 82 from the GitY limits to Difficult Campground. a 4(). Obtain bike and pedestrian easements through the Meadowood Subdivision and other landowners for the purpose of creating a trail connection between the Health & Human Services property and the School Campusllselin Park area. ",11'. ,~ ill '! ""< . II.. '\'!', . . APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS PUBLIC MEETINGS ON ASPEN TRANSPORTATION PLAN MARCH-APRIL 1993 Between March 17 and April 23, city staff, council members and TIC members attended twenty special meetings to provide information about the draft Transportation Plan and to listen to the concerns and suggestions of the public regarding the plan. Dozens of individual meetings and phone conversations also took place (and will continue to occur). Beyond these intensive public information and input gathering efforts, both the ACRA and the Lodge Association .have formed subcommittees to continue to work with the city through the final plan implementation and evaluation stages. similarly, meetings will continue to be held with neighborhood associations and any other groups that .would like to participate in the final planning, implementation and evaluation phases. In order for this plan to be successful' in reaching its ambitious goals, the City must continue to remain aware of and responsive to the changing needs of all elements of the community. This summary outlines the themes of the public input received regarding the various components of the plan. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND GOALS OF THE PLAN: with very rare exceptions, there was consensus that parking and traffic congestion is a problem that must be dealt with. However, many people expressed their skepticism about the extent of the air quality problem, and many of those same people suggested that the city should resist any EPA-mandated mitigation measures. Prefacing each presentation with an explanation of the plan's genesis in the broad-based AACP process helped to clear up some of the misunderstanding about "Why are we doing this?" But, it is fair to assume that a great deal of skepticism and lack of trust in government, at all levels, still persists. A small number of merchants disagreed that Aspen has problems with traffic and parking. They maintained that congested streets is a sign of prosperity, and that no action should be taken to reduce auto impacts. Overall, there was widespread agreement about the existence of severe problems related to parking and traffic congestion, as well as about the need for the city to "DO SOMETHING."However, many people were very concerned that the City would only implement paid parking, without putting viable transportation alternatives in place. /' . '.. \:1 ""Ii ,@,.,',,',., ~W ~ ~ . . TRANSIT SERVICE AND TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES: These elements of the plan evoked relatively little emotion or discussion at the public meetings. There was a great deal of' support expressed for transit improvements, cross-town shuttle service (both Galena st. and east-west), and pedestrian/bikeway improvements. On the other hand, many people doubted the effectiveness of HOV lanes (especially without 4-lane bridges), and several Downvalley commuters disagreed with a park-and-ride lot at Brush Creek Road. Most of those who expressed opinions regarding a park-and-ride location wanted the facilities constructed close 'to town and were very concerned' about the convenience of the shuttle service. The need for service at most every ten minutes was clearly expressed. There was some interest expressed in the FAB's proposal to discontinue the fares on all RFTA buses. However, questions about how to equitably finance such a proposal consistently arose at the meetings where the proposal was discussed. Several people advocated the implementation of various transportation modes as the solution to the traffic and parking problems. Valley-wide rail systems and upper-valley fixed guideway approaches were most-often mentioned. PARKING ELEMENTS: Most of the discussions, phone conversations, correspondence, suggestion forms, letters to the editor, etc. focused on parking- -specifically the concept of paid parking. Even more to the point, it is safe to say that most of the opposition expressed to date about this draft plan has centered on the proposed parking card concept. The single' most-often expressed criticism was the perceived complexity of the parking card system. Many people maintained that the parking cards would be too difficult to obtain or to understand. Particular concerns were raised about the difficulties foreseen in communicating with the large numbers of visitors, especially summer visitors. Local residents also objected to the inconvenience of having to prepurchase the cards from local merchants, even if multiple cards could be purchased at once. still other concerns were raised about the perceived probability of fraudulent or counterfeit cards, the cumbersome usage and enforcement logistics, and the potential for widespread littering. A significant number of people suggested that the City abandon the parking card concept in favor of parking meters or a pay and display system. . ~.i \~ . ~.".. il ~- '. . Nearly every group raised concerns about accommodating their own parking needs economically and conveniently. Realtors were especially vocal about their need for nearby parking due to the number of trips necessary on any given day. There was a great. deal of support expre.ssed for the superblock garage concept and for better marketing to increase utilization of the Rio Grande Parking Plaza. In fact, many people advocated the construction of more public parking spaces instead of implementing paid parking or any other transportation demand management systems. Others said that the city only needed to intensify parking enforcement and fine collection, rather than implement paid parking. There was a great deal of concern about the lack of convenient transit serving the schools, institutions, and businesses along the Maroon/Castle Creek Corridors. The inconvenience of RFTA service was coupled with frustrations about the traffic congestion at the Maroon Creek Rd. traffic signal. Many parents working in the core were anxious about the cost and inconvenience that paid parking might add to their already-tight budgets and schedules. School district representatives and parents also raised the problems related to transporting skis, hockey skates, hockey sticks, etc. on school' buses, as well as the lack of coordination between recreation programs and school bus programs. One very common request of merchants was for increasing the number of short-term parking spaces to accommodate loading, unloading and other quick "drop-Off" activities in the core. Questions and concerns regarding funding and phasing were raised at nearly every public meeting. Likewise, complaints that implementing this plan would worsen.the rift between "Upvalley and Downvalley" were voiced on several occasions. Furthermore, any summary of the comments from the public meetings would be remiss if it did not mention that issues related to the safety and capacity of SH82 were brought up at nearly every event. Some people alleged that the Aspen Transportation Plan was nothing more than a means of obstructing the widening of the highway. . ~.; .. 'l, .' ~* ,i. \",- .... APPENDIX 3 , Existing Conditions Driving the Development of The Aspen Area Community Plan Transportation Plan Transportation has become one of the key issues affecting the Aspen community. The effects of our auto-dominated transportation patterns are manifested every day throughout the area. Indicators of these problems include the following: . Winter average weekday traffic volumes (1992) across the Castle Creek Bridge are approximately 26,000 two-way vehicle trips. . Overall, 2,400 cars are parking in and around the Aspen commercial core on a peak day. Parking "spillover" problems generate approximately 700 vehicles parking in the residential areas around the commercial core. . The lack of available parking for visitors and shoppers has been identified as a serious problem by many retailers. . Traffic levels, combined with street sanding, have. created levels of airborne small particulate matter that exceed national health standards. . The enjoyment and safety of walking and bicycling throughout Aspen are degraded by the concentrations of traffic. . Surveys of both visitors and residents have consistently identified transportation issues as major detriments to the area. Existing conditions, moreover, are expected to only worsen over t\1e coming years. As one indicator, traffic volumes crossing Castle Creek are forecast to increase to 43,200 average daily trips by the Year 2015. A number of trends have converged over the last few years to focus concern on the issue of appropriate transportation policy in the Upper Roaring Fork Valley: . The loss of affordable housing in the Upper Valley has dramatically increased commuter travel along Highway 82. The continued forecast growth in employment in the Aspen area is expected to further this trend. . The growth in competing resort areas, along with increasing pressures on both traveller's time.and money, have made the destination resort market much more competitive over recent years. For Aspen to retain its pre-eminent position, the quality of experience provided must rise above that of newer resort areas. . The passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have increased Federal pressure on communities to address transportation-related air quality problems. . National economic problems have reduced the potential for State or Federal funding of capital-intensive transportation solutions. More and more, the community must rely on its own resources to effect transportation solutions. A strong consensus has emerged from the Community Plan process that these trends must be addressed if the community is to avoid substantial degradation from increases in traffic. Put simply, efforts to control auto use in the Aspen area must be made if the community is to retain the liveability and attractiveness that draws visitors and residents alike.