Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.031-99 1~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ACKNOWLEDGING AND ENDORSING THE TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES TO BE INctUDED WITHIN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROCESS FOR THE ROARING FORK VALLEY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR INVESTMENT STUDY Resolution # 99 - :3 \ WHEREAS, the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (hereinafter "RFRHA") was created on December 31, 1994, through an Intergovernmental Agreement between Pitkin County, Eagle County, Garfield County, the City of Glenwood Springs, the City of Aspen, The Town of Carbondale, the Town of Basalt, and the Town of Snowmass Village. The purpose of forming RFRHA was to conduct the public purchase, management and planning of the transportation and recreational use of the Aspen Branch oqhe Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Right-of-way (hereinafter the "Property") as an asset to the people of the Roaring Fork Valley and the State of Colorado; and ,"""""" WHEREAS, On June 26,1997, the member governments ofRFRHA amended and restated the Intergovernmental Agreement as follows: a. Member government participation was modified to make Garfield County a non-voting, non-funding entity for management and planning of the Property. However, Garfield County did retain voting status on the approval of the Comprehensive Plan for the Property. b. The Colorado Department of Transportation, Great Outdoors Colorado, and the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Board were added as non-voting entities that did not participate in the funding of the management and planning of the Property. c. The underlying purpose ofRFRHA was modified to state that: i. the purchase of the Property will satisfy the mutual, immediate goal of the participating entities to retain the Property for the good of the general public use; ii. the primary use ofthe Property under the future Comprehensive Plan will be as a public transportation corridor; and iii. secondary uses of the Property can include recreational opportunities and access to adjacent public lands, provided that these r'" o secondary uses do not preclude the primary use as a public transportation corridor; and WHEREAS, an June 30, 1997, RFRHA purchased the property from Southern Pacific Transportation Company; and WHEREAS, as a part of the purchase of the property, RFRHA made a commitment to carefully evaluate the feasibility of using some or all of the property for a valleywide transit and trail system, develop a comprehensive master plan, and determine the best use for the property. This work, which is known as the Corridor Investment Study (CIS) began in October of 1997 and will be concluded by July 1, 1999; WHEREAS, at the beginning ofthe CIS process, a list of "Project Objectives" was developed by attendees of the public scoping sessions, citizen task forces, the CIS Policy Committee, and the RFRHA Board. These objectives, which are listed below, ,are being used to evaluate the study alternatives: ~ Affordability and Economic Viability Community Based Planning Environmentally Sound Flexibility Increased Transportation Choices Integrated Approach to Transportation Planning Livability Safety Trails and Recreational Resource; and WHEREAS, forty-seven (47) technology options, nineteen (19) propulsion options, sixteen (16) station options, and five (5) alignment options were developed through public and agency scoping meetings, citizen task force meetings and CIS policy committee meetings. These options were put through a series of screening processes including a "reality check" screening, and a "fatal flaw" screening. The options remaining after these two screening process were as follows: f" Remaining Technology Options: No-Build (do nothing), Improved Bus/Transportation Systems Management (TSM); Build Bus on dedicated guideway; Build Rail on a dedicated guideway. o Remaining Propulsion Options: Diesel, gasoline, hydrogen internal combustion, electric (battery), electric (overhead catenary), electric (hybrid), liquid propane gas, and natural gas. Remaining Potential Station Locations: West Glenwood Springs, Glenwood Springs, South Glenwood Springs, State Highway 133, Downtown Carbondale, Hooks Spur, Basalt High School, Emma, Willits area, Midland Avenue (Basalt), Old Snowmass, Aspen Village, Woody Creek, Brush Creek Road, and the Pitkin County Airport. .r-, Remaining Alignment Options: Alignment "A"; Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to a location north of Brush Creek road where it crosses to State Highway 82 and runs into Aspen. Alignment "B": Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to a location north of Gerbazdale where it crosses over to the State Highway 82 and runs into Aspen. Alignment "C"; Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to an area near Catherine Store (CR 100) and then cross over the State Highway 82. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to Wingo Junction and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen. Alignment "D": Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to the . area near Emma where it crosses over to State Highway 82. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to the Wingo Junction area and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen. Alignment "E"; Use the existing rail corridor from Glenwood Springs to the Sutank river crossing near State Highway 133 before Carbondale. Continue to follow State Highway 82 to the Wingo Junction area and then return to the rail corridor. This alignment option could use either Alignment "A" or "B" to cross to State Highway 82 in the upper valley and continue into Aspen; and r- WHEREAS, on December 18, 1998, after several months of technical review and study, the citizen task forces recommended to the CIS Policy .~ Committee that the following "Build" alternative be carried forward in the study with the "No-Build" and Improved Bus/TSM" alternative: Build Technology: Rail Build Alignment: Alignment "c" with a crossing at the Brush Creek area. Build Station Locations: West Glenwood Springs, Glenwood Springs, State Highway 133, Downtown Carbondale, Willits area, Midland Avenue, Brush Creek Road. Build Propulsion Options: Diesel, gasoline, hydrogen internal combustion, electric (battery), electric (overhead catenary), electric (hybrid), liquid propane gas, and natural gas. The CIS Policy Committee voted to accept the citizen task force recommendation with the condition that a decision on the crossing in the upper valley was to be deferred until both alignments and crossing could be visited in the field on January 6,1999. The RFRHA Board accepted and approved the CIS Policy Committee's recommendation; and ~ WHEREAS, on January 6, 1999, the CIS Policy Committee voted to accept the Lower Gerbazdale crossing as a part of the preferred "Build" alternative. The Preferred Build Alternative will be vigorously compared against the "No-Build" alternative and the "Improved Bus/TSM" alternative as a part of the continuing CIS process. From these three alternatives a "Locally Preferred Alternative" will be selected and adopted by RFRHA no later than July 1, 1999. A full description of all three alternatives to be considered is attached as Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado that it hereby acknowledges and endorses the three alternatives being carried forward as a part of the Roaring Fork Valley Transportation Corridor Investment Study with the following comments and observations: 1. If, through the Draft Environmental Impact Statement process, it is found that the "build alternative" on alignment "c" is too cost prohibitive or otherwise infeasible to carry forward, RFRHA should consider including the Build Alternative on alignment "A" within the Final Environmental Impact Statement. ~. r- 2. If, through the Draft Environmental Impact Statement process, it is found that the "build alternative" with the Gerbazdale crossing is too cost prohibitive or otherwise infeasible to carry forward, RFRHA should consider including the Build Alternative with a crossing north of Brush Creek Road within the Final Environmental Impact Statement. 3. All ofthe railroad right-of-way that is not used for transit improvements should be reserved for future transportation uses. Under the Build Alternative, this includes the portion of the right-of-way between Woody Creek Road and Lower Gerbazdale and the portion ofthe right-of-way between Wingo Junction and Catherine Store Bridge. r"- RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS /.:1 DAY OF ar--e.l~ ~ ~ ,1999, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. 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 April 12, 1999. , - ... I"""' ,~ EXHIBIT "A" ~ ~, ~, ~ ~, Glenwood Springs to Aspenl Pitkin County Airport ClSIDEISICP Alternative Definitions Revised Draft 1/19/99 The Glenwood Springs to Aspenl Pitkin County Airport CIS/DEISICP project has developed three alternatives to be studied in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement being prepared for the study corridor. These alternatives were developed by, and in coordination with, the Citizen Task Forces and Policy Committee following an extensive screening process: These alternatives are defined below and are subject to change. I. The No.Build Alternative This altemative assumes that only "committed" or currently approved transportation projects are constructed in the corridor between now and the year 2020. The No-Build Alternative includes the following: . Existing 4 general purpose lanes from G!enwood Springs to Basalt Construction of 2 lanes from Basalt to Buttennilk Ski Area with one southbound lane used for high occupancy vehicles mOVs) during the A.M. peak and one northbound lane used for HOVs during the P.M. peak hours per the East of Basalt to Buttermilk Ski Area Record of Decision (ROD) Construction of 2 lane parkway from Buttennilk Ski Area to the intersection of 7"' Street and Main Street in Aspen Construction of Light Rail Transit (LRT). from Rubey Park in Aspen to the Aspen! Pitkin County . Airport (bus transfer facility at the LRT tenninals) ill construction of a dedicated 2-1ane busway if the LRT is not funded by the local governments per the Entrance to Aspen ROD. Implemencation of Incremental Transportation Demand Management (TDM) in Aspen per Entrance to Aspen ROD (see Attachment land Exhibit I) Construction of Park-and-Ride lots - parking spaces include no more than: 3600 at airport, 750 at Buttennilk, 450 Glenwood Springs, 500 Carbondale, 500 El lebei, 500 Basalt. 400 Brush Creek Road per East of Basalt to Buttermilk Ski Area ROD and Encrance to Aspen ROD Construction of a new Maroon Creek Bridge per the Entrance to Aspen ROD Implementation of RFr A Transit Development Plan (TDP) dated 4/8/96 (see Exhibit 2 for summary) and TDP updates Construction of Midland A venue extension to SH 82 in Basalt, including construction of down valley sliplane Construction of a new bridge and alternative route over the Roaring Fork River in Glenwood Springs (Four Mile Connection) Placement of New Traffic Signals at Old Snowmass, Buttermilk. Elk Run (Basalt), Aspen Village, 7'h Street, 5th Street, 3'" Street, and Gannisch Street per the East of Basalt to Buttennilk Ski Area ROD and Entrance to Aspen ROD Improvements to various bicycle and pedestrian trails between Basalt and Aspen per the East of Basalt to Buttennilk. Ski Area ROD and Entrance to Aspen ROD Development of valley wide trail system . . . . . . . . . . . . The other two alternatives all assume the No-Build Alternative as a staning point. In other words, all of the No-Build Alternative improvements are constructed as well as the additional improvements described in the alternative. However, for the Rail! Build Alternative, portions of the No-Build may not be necessary. For example, some park-and-rides may be ~nnecessary or smaller than described in the No-Build Alternative. 'f" ~ o o Alternative Definitions REVISED DRAFT. ]/19/99 II. Improved Busrrransportation System Management (TSM) Alternative This alternative includes improvements above and beyond the No-Build Alternative that enhance the utility of existing and committed transportation improvements. The Improved BusrrSM Alternative includes: o Development of an optimal bus alternalive on the existing State Highway 82 alignment. This incorporates the same headways as envisionedfor the Build alternative (see attachment 2 for description) A cross-platfenu transfer at the LRT terminal (Aspenl Pitkin County Airport) or a direct connection to the dedicated 2-lane busway if the LRT is net funded by the local government(s) Constroction of Queue Bypass Lanes for buses at five signal locations to optimize bus transit in the existing State Highway 82 alignment (C.M.C., S.H. 133, EI Iebel. Two Rivers Rd.. Brosh Ck. Road) Development of an Access Control Plan to minimize conflicts with State Highway 82 traffic by limiting the number of access points to State Highway 82 from local roads Implementation of a valley"wide Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program in addition to the Incremental TDM program identified for the upper valley under the No-Build Alternative. The program would be administered by a government funded Transportation Management Association or Service Provider and provide the following services: o A carpool matching program - This would be oriented toward matching long-tenn carpoolers but would eventually be able to match people instantly so the short-tenn carpoolers could take advantage of the program. o A vanpool program - It is assumed that up 10 vanpools are needed to serve the areas not served by the improved bus system. These could serve the outlying areas of Parachute, Silt and Gypsum. It is assumed these vanpools would be publicly subsidized (to match the user cost of the bus system) and operated by a third party. o A marketing/incentive program for buses, carpools and vanpools: in order to attract people to alternative modes of transportation it is necessary to infonn them about the programs available and to offer them some incentives to try these modes. A marketing program is especially important in a tourist area where people are temporary workers and residents. This marketing effort would focus on a media campaign, a web site, kiosks and transportation coordinators at participating companies. The transportation coordinators would be responsible for infomting new employees about their transportation options and any incentives available to them such as an ecopass or commuter club card. o Opportunities or information for other techniques such as flex hours, and telecommuting Coordination of land use around transit stations oriented toward transit use Improvements to bicycle and pedestrian trails (this includes improved connections to approximately 25 bus stops) Development of valley wide trail system using existing trails, existing roadway shoulders, local streets, and signage Bus TransitlHOV Priority -transit vehicle priority at traffic signals by either bringing up the green phase for the transit movement earlier or extending it later than the normal phase duration Transit Management System - A transit management system that has the capability to perfonn and integrate many transit operations functions, such as computer-aided service restoration, and service monitoring Real-Time, Transit Schedule Information Dissemination - Provides accurate and efficient information to RFfA to enhance scheduling and transit planning Automated Fare Payment Systems - A more efficient way of handling fare payments which allows quicker boardings, more accurate accounting of origins and destinations anci gives RFfA the ability to implement peak period pricing more easily o o o o o o o o o o o Glenwood Springs to Aspen/ Pitkin CountY Airport ClS/DEIS/CP MK Centennial Page 2 REVISED DRAFT . 1/19/99 Alternative Definitions ,,-.,. , ,r-\ I"'" . Wildlife Warning Reflec(Qr System - Reflectors that direct the headlights of approaching vehicles at animals desiring (Q cross the road Video Surveillance - Visually monitor traffic conditions at two key locations (can alert enforcement people and provide information to web site) Traffic Signal Operation and Optimization - Modification of traffic signals to provide and respond to. real-time traffic information using acoustic detection Traffic Data Collection - Installation of one new Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor (RTMS) along State Highway 82 to provide traffic volumes, travel speeds, and occupancy Incident Management Program - Development of an incident management program that establishes . policies and procedures, agency responsibilities and communication. and identifies various technologies and strategies to decrease time to clear incidents (i.e. Courtesy Patrol) . . . . III. RaiV Build Alternative This alternative optimizes the use of rail technology in the study corridor. The study corridor follows alignment "C" between Glenwood Springs and the Aspen Airport using varying portions of the existing rail right-of-way, the State Highway 82 right-of-way, and new connecting rights-of-way. Specifically, this alignment begins at the West Glenwood interchange in Glenwood Springs, follows the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way to downtown Glenwood Springs where it connects to the existingRFRHA rail corridor. It then follows the existing rail corridor through Glenwood Springs and Carbondale to the Catherine's Store area. It then crosses the Roaring Fork River and follows the S.H. 82 alignment through EI Jebel and Basalt. After the Basalt station, the alignment follows the existing rail corridor through Snowmass Canyon to the Gerbazdale area. At Gerbazdale, the alignment crosses the Roaring Fork River using the lower Gerbazdale crossing and follows S.H. 82 to Brush Creek Road. From Brush Creek Road, the alignment follows the S.H. 82 corridor to the Aspen Airport. The Rail! Build Alternative includes: . Stations along the alignment at: . West Glewnood . EI Jebel . Downtown Glenwood . Basalt . S.H. 133 . Brush Creek Road . Downtown Carbondale . Aspen Airport (part of No-Build LRT system) Other stations may be considered at S. Glenwood and Aspen Village depending upon operating characteristics Construction or rehabilitation of a single track with passing areas Impiementation of an enhanced feeder system to bring transit users to stops along the express route. The feeder system may consist of community vans or local buses A cross-platform timed transfer at the LRT tenninal at Brush Creek Road or direct service to downtown Aspen using the LRT tracks All elements identified in the No~Build Alternative except at follows: . RFTA's TDP would not be implemented . The number of park and ride spaces required may be reduced . The LRT tenninal would be located at Brush Creek Road instead of the Airport All TSM applications identified in the TSM alternative with the following. changes: . Does not include the enhanced mainline bus system . Transit/HOV priority treatment on S.H. 82 only where feeder buses operate . Includes real-time information monitors at the train stations . Includes automated fare payment system fare machines at the train stations . . . . . . Glenwood Springs to Aspen/ Pitkin County Airport ClS/DEIS/CP MK Centennial Page 3 0. r"". o Alternative Definitions REVISED DRAFT. 1!l9/99 Attachment 1, Bus System for the No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative bus system is based on elements of the RITA Transit Development Plan (TDP) likely to be in place by 2020. These include: . Mainline bus system running between a West Glenwood Springs Park and Ride and the Aspen! Pitkin County Airport. This operates at existing headways. This system will use existing S.H. 82 except where it uses U.S. 6 and local streets to connect with West Glenwood. Transfer between the mainline bus system and the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system at the Aspen! Pitkin County Airport. The LRT system runs into Aspen. Park and ride/ transit stations will be located at: . West Glenwood (south of the Roaring Fork River) . Downtown Glenwood Springs (assumed near County Courthouse) . Carbondale (along S.H. 82 just east of the S.H. l33 intersection) . EI Jebe! . Basalt . Brush Creek Road . Aspen/ Pitkin County Airport The mainline bus will also stop at other existing stops along S.H. 82. Feeder bus service includes: . Rifle to downtown Glenwood Springs. This would add 3 up valley a.m. peak hour runs, 3 down valley p.m. peak hour runs and one mid-day round trip . GlenwoodSprings (replaces existing Glenwood Springs Trolley service). This serves Four Mile corridor, Glenwood Park, Mountain Valley neighborhood, Walmart, Grand Avenue, Midland Avenue, downtown, Hot Springs Pool, and a West Glenwood park-and-ride (park and ride assumed to be on the south side of the Colorado River). This is continuous all day, I hour service. . Town of Carbondale (continuous all day. 1 hour service). This serves downtown Carbondale, the High School, Grey Ranch, Hendrick Road. 8'" Street, and the park and ridel transit station. . El Jebel and Basalt. This serves, El Jebel. Willits Lane, Two Rivers Road, Midland A venue, the Basalt High School and the Basalt park and ride/ transit center. . Redstone to Carbondale (2 runs in the a.m. peak hour and 2 runs in the p.m. peak hour) . . . . . Other . Connect with private bus service between Sunlight and Glenwood Springs. This could be operated by RFT A and would be used for ski season only. Two a.m. peak and two p.m. peak hour runs are assumed. . Continue existing bus routes in upper valley: . Woody Creek (connects to LRT at Asven/ Pitkin County Airport) . Snowmass Village . Cemetery Lane . Hunter Creek . Construct Maroon Creek Transit Center G/enwood SprinR's to Aspen! Pitkin County Airport C/S!DE/S!CP MK Centennial Page 4 r'.. i"""""" r- Alternative Definitions REVISED DRAFT. 1/19/99 Attachment 2, Bus System for the Improved Bus/ TSM Alternative The Improved busl TSM Alternative includes development of an optimal bus alternative on the existing State Highway 82 alignment. This incorporates the same head ways as envisioned for the Build alternative. This bus system includes: . Mainline express bus system running between a West Glenwood Springs Park and Ride and the Aspen! Pitkin County Airport. This operates at the same headways as proposed for the Build Alternative (ie: if the Build Alternative runs trains every 30 minutes, the Improved busfTSM Alternative runs mainline buses every 30 minutes). If demand allows, this service could operate at shorter headways (ie: if two buses are required to meet the demand for 30 minute head ways, one bus could be operated on 15 minute headways to meet the same demand. This system will use existing S.H. 82 except where it uses U.S. 6 to connect with West Glenwood. Transfer between the mainline express bus system and the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system at the Aspen! Pitkin County Airport. The LRT system runs into Aspen Park and ride! tranSit stations for the bus service will be located at: . West Glenwood . Downtown Glenwood Springs (assumed near County Courthouse) . The S.H. 82/ Colorado Mountain Collage (CMC) intersection . Carbondale Oust north of the S.H. 133 intersection) . EI lebel . Basalt . Brush Creek Road The mainline express bus will not stop at other existing stops along S.H. 82 . Feeder bus service operates at the same headways as the mainline express bus service except as noted. This service includes: . Rifle to downtown Glenwood Springs. This would add 3 upvalley a.m. peak hour runs, 3 down valley p.m. peak hour runs and one mid-day round trip. . West Glenwood Springs service. This would operate between a west Glenwood park and ride and a downtown Glenwood transit station. . Glenwood Springs service. This serves Buffalo Valley, Four Mile corridor, Glenwood Park, Mountain Valley neighborhood, a transit station at Walmart, Grand A venue, Midland Avenue, and the downtown Glenwood transit station. . Town of Carbondale service. This serves downtown Carbondale, the High School, Grey Ranch, Hendrick Road, 8th Street, and the park and ridel transit station. . Redstone to Carbondale service (2 runs in the a.m. peak hour and 2 runs in the p.m. peak hour) . El lebel! Basalt Service. This serves Blue Lakes, theEl lebel park and ride! transit station, Willits Lane area, the. Basalt park and ride! transit station, Basalt High School, and downtown Basalt. . Basalt to Brush Creek Road service. This runs along S.H. 82 providing local service between the Basalt park and ride! transit station and the Brush Creek Road park and ridel transit station. . . . . Glenwood Springs to Aspen/ Pitkin CountY Airport ClS/DEIS/CP MK Centennial Page 5 r'\ r, r--. Alternative Definitions REVISED DRAFT. II I 9/99 . Other . Connect with private bus service between Sunlight and Glenwood Springs. This could be operated by RFTA and would be used for ski season only. Two a.m. peak and two p.m. peak hour runs are assumed. . Feeder bus service is not operated between C.M.C. souih of Glenwood and Carbondale. The Glenwood to Carbondale segment is serviced by the park and ride station at CMC and Glenwood feeder bus service operating north of CMC. .. Continue existing bus routes in upper valley: . Woody Creek (this connects with the Brush Creek Road park and ride! transit station) . Snowmass Village . Cemetery Lane . Hunter Creek . Construct Maroon Creek Transit Center Glenwood Springs to Aspen! Pitkin CountY Airport ClS/DEIS/CP MK Centennial Page 6 Alternative Definitions REVISED DRAFT. 1/19/99 ~\. Attachment 3, Feeder Bus System for the Build Alternative ,.-..,\ r- The Build Alternative includes development of a feeder bus system to serve the mainline rail stations. This feeder bus system incorporates the same service and head ways as envisioned for the mainline rail system and includes the following service: . Rifle to downtown Glenwood Springs. This would add 3 upvalley a.m. peak hour runs. 3 down valley p.m. peak hour runs and one mid-day round trip West Glenwood Springs service. This would operate between a west Glenwood park and ride and a downtown Glenwood transit station. Glenwood Springs service. This serves Four Mile corridor, Glenwood Park, Mountain Valley neighborhood, and Walman on the south, and uses Main Street and Midland A venue to serve downtown Glenwood and the downtown Glenwood transit station. Glenwood Springs to Carbondale service. Provides local service along S.H. 82 between the downtown Glenwood Springs transit station and the Carbondale park and ride/ transit station. Town of Carbondale service. This serves downtown Carbondale, the High School, Grey Ranch, the downtown Carbondale transit station, and the S.H. 133 park and ride. Redstone to Carbondale service. This includes 2 runs in the a.m. peak hour and 2 runs in the p.m. peak hour. El Jebel/ Basalt Service. This serves Blue Lakes, the EI Jebel park and ride/ transit station, Willits Lane area, the Basalt park and ridel transit station, the Basalt High School, and downtown Basalt. Basalt to Brush Creek Road service. This runs along S.H. 82 providing local service between the Basalt park and ridel transit station and the Brush Creek Road park and ride/ transit station. Other . Connect with private bus service between Sunlight and Glenwood Springs. This could be operated by RFfA and would be used for ski season only. Two a.m. peak and two p.m. peak hour runs are assumed. . Continue existing bus routes in upper valley: . , Woody Creek (this connects with the Brush Creek Road park and ride/ t(ansit . station) . Snowmass Village . Cemetery Lane . Hunter Creek . Construct Maroon Creek Transit Center . . . . . . . . C:,'-MyFiles\projects\jn157324\screening\alrdet7. wpd. Glenwood Springs to Aspenl Pitkin CountY Airport ClSIDElSICP MK Centennial Page 7