HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.202202151
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
February 15, 2022
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
427 Rio Grande Place
WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
TO JOIN ONLINE:
Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting"
Enter Meeting Number: 2555 510 6278
Enter Password: 81611
Click "Join Meeting"
-- OR --
JOIN BY PHONE
Call: 1-408-418-9388
Enter Meeting Number: 2555 510 6278
Enter Password: 81611
I.WORK SESSION
I.A.Affordable Housing Strategic Plan Decision Matrix
I.B.Engineering Updates: Safety in Downtown Core;
Park & Midland Pedestrian Improvements; Roundabout
I.C.Long Term Restaurant Activation
I.D.Council Board Reports & Council Updates
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Diane Foster, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH: Sara Ott, City Manager
MEMO DATE: February 10, 2022
MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
RE: Decision Matrix: Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
Review and update the Action Plan Decision Matrix according to City Council’s
consensus opinion and review prioritization of the various action items.
Additionally, staff would like to talk with Council about setting a numeric target of
affordable housing units to be achieved within the 2022-2026 timeframe.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
City Council reviewed and made edits to the draft Affordable Housing Strategic Plan on
February 8. During that discussion there was not sufficient time to take a deeper dive
into the Action Plan Decision Matrix, the February 15 work session discussion will be
focused on that element of the plan, as well as the prioritization of the Action Items.
As a reminder:
• At the July 2021 City Council Retreat, the City Council identified three Priority
Goals; affordable housing was one of those goals.
• In August 2021 City Council adopted a Goal Resolution that included language
that specified actions to be taken to support the realization of that goal:
The City's Council will continue to evaluate, identify opportunities, plan, partner,
facilitate, and leverage existing and new resources to invest in the development and
maintenance of affordable housing. This will be accomplished through:
a. Convening a City Housing Retreat;
b. Creating an affordable housing strategic plan;
c. Completing Council directed affordable housing development projects;
d. Continuing to seek additional affordable housing development opportunities;
2
e. Leveraging and amending regulations and policies in support of affordable
housing; and
f. Supporting continuous improvement with the APCHA program, including ensuring
adequate resources.
• The December 2021 City Council Housing Retreat was focused specifically on the
affordable housing needs of the Aspen area, its workforce and community. City
Council’s ideas and direction from that Housing Retreat led to the creation of this
Affordable Housing Strategic Plan. A significant portion of the content of this plan
was developed and/or clarified during the Housing Retreat.
• The Affordable Housing Strategic Plan was presented to City Council on February
8, 2022.
• Staff intends to use feedback received on February 8 and the feedback received
on February 15 to update the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan and bring the final
version to City Council for adoption in March 2022.
DISCUSSION:
Prioritization
As presented on page 6 of the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, all of these items are
a priority, yet staff has recommended – through the graphic on page 6 and the Decision
Matrix on page 17 – that these items be ranked. This is simply because when everything
is prioritized as the most important thing, then nothing is the most important thing.
Prioritization facilitates focus.
Evidence of the power of prioritization can be found in the three Council Goal Priorities
City Council adopted by resolution in August 2021. While staff across the City continue
to deliver a high level of essential services every day, the Council Goal Priorities are an
articulation of community priorities, they provide an additional level of focus and clarity for
staff and have been the catalyst for progress in those areas in a relatively short timeframe.
The purpose of prioritization is not to eliminate any of these items, it is simply another tool
to support City Council’s collective articulation of their intent.
Questions for Council about the Action Plan Decision Matrix:
1. Does Council want a Decision Matrix in this strategic plan or would City Council
prefer simply prioritizing the Action Items?
2. Are the categories across the top of the matrix the right ones? Would a majority of
City Council like to change any of those?
3. Does Council want to change the weighting of the categories? If yes, City Council
can do this as a group in the meeting.
3
4. Does City Council want to score each item in as a group? There are 70 scores in
total. This can be done in a “lighting round” format during the meeting.
Establishing a Target Metric
Staff recommends City Council establish a numeric target for new affordable housing
units to be achieved:
• During the 2022-2026 timeframe;
• Within the City of Aspen’s Urban Growth Boundary;
• Any affordable housing unit achieved either through development neutral means
or through new development;
• Units created by private sector, other public sector organizations or City of Aspen
Staff recommends a goal of 650 units. This would equate to a 20% increase in just five
years to the total units managed by APCHA or a 28% increase in the number of units
within the City of Aspen. The measure of this metric would be that the unit receives a
permanent deed restriction and certificate of occupancy.
Recommendation to avoid revisiting the entire strategic plan
It is likely tempting to revisit the whole Affordable Housing Strategic Plan and make
additional changes on February 15. Staff recommends not revisiting the entire plan. While
the strategic plan matters, the implementation of this strategic plan matters more.
While you’ve heard the oft quoted “Perfect is the enemy of good.”, Deep Patel’s article
titled “Why Perfection of is the Enemy of Done” provides sage advice:
“Focus on the process, not the final product. When you put too much emphasis on the final product, you fall into the trap of idolizing the end result. You begin to imagine it as this perfect end, which isn’t what it’s supposed to be, nor is it what will most likely take shape… The truth is, tomorrow’s idea will always be better…. So it’s not about waiting to get it perfect before you implement it, share it or release it; rather, it’s about getting a working version out the door and then refining over time.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/deeppatel/2017/06/16/why-perfection-is-the-enemy-of-done/?sh=1b5b7b184395
Note: None of the recommended edits discussed in the February 8 City Council meeting
are reflected in the attached Affordable Housing Strategic Plan. All edits will be made
after the February 15 Council meeting. Staff will return to City Council in March with the
final version for adoption.
APPENDIX 2022 – 2026 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
4
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
STRATEGIC
PLAN
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026
5
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PLAN OF ACTION
TO GENERATE & SUSTAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS
POLICY
• APCHA Compliance Actions
• APCHA Policy Actions to
improve sustainability of existing
affordable housing
NEW
DEVELOPMENT
• Complete Burlingame
Phase 3 Project
• Complete Lumberyard Project
• Partnerships
• Regional Collaboration
• Land Banking
DEVELOPMENT
NEUTRAL
HOUSING
SUSTAINABILITY &
COMPLIANCE
3,200 CURRENT UNITS IN THE APCHA HOUSING PROGRAM
• Replace Expiring Deed Restrictions with
Permanent Deed Restrictions
• Incentivize voluntary downsizing
• Other future development
neutral items
• Community Development Policy Actions
• Affordable Housing Certificates Program
• Develop Financial Resources for Construction,
Expiring Deed Restrictions
& Land Banking
• APCHA Policy Actions to increase
numbers of available units
6
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
3
INTRODUCTION
With approximately 3,200 deed restricted affordable homes in the Aspen/Pitkin County area, our affordable
housing programs are the envy of every ski town in the US.
The forethought of elected officials to begin investing in affordable housing in the 1970s and their tenacious
commitment to it since that time has resulted in a vibrant, lived-in community. Interspersed throughout the
community, these 3,200 homes have helped the Aspen community fight the adverse effects of a historic rise
in housing costs, yet we are struggling to now keep up with the market shift in utilization of many homes from
residential to commercial in the form of short term rentals.
The historic and current day support for affordable housing by Aspenites of all economic strata remains strong.
This high level of community support is evidenced by voter-supported funding of the affordable housing program
and the fierceness with which the community defends this valuable and essential asset.
Compared to our peer ski town communities, we are fortunate to have this legacy of success with the development
of affordable housing. Yet, in the present context, several intersecting factors have created a scenario that
leaves the community challenged in sustaining important aspects of our economic and social fabric, In August of
2021, the Aspen City Council established three Priority Goals, with Affordable Housing being one of those. The
adopted Goal Resolution language set out five steps to accomplish this goal, with the first being the December
2021 Aspen City Council Housing Retreat and the second being this output of that retreat, the Affordable
Housing Strategic Plan.
The City Council made clear their intent for this Affordable Housing Strategic Plan to be more than an aspirational
document; they wanted a plan that is actionable. Accordingly, this plan prioritizes a series of actions to happen in
the next five years that can have a significant and positive impact on the quantity of units and overall sustainability
of our community’s affordable housing program.
The Aspen City Council has and will continue to be committed to addressing the need for more affordable
housing – and, as they have stated clearly, “We can’t do it alone.” To solve this challenge, we will need every tool
available to us and we’ll need every partner to do their part.
Thanks to the team who came together to develop this plan (in alphabetical order):
Ben Anderson
Chris Everson
Diane Foster
Matthew Gillen
Ron LeBlanc
Scott Miller
Sara Ott
Pete Strecker
Phillip Supino
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL’S DIRECTION & IDEAS ARE MEMORIALIZED IN THIS PLAN:
Mayor Torre — Rachel Richards — Ward Hauenstein — Skippy Mesirow — John Doyle
7
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
4
City Of Aspen Affordable Housing Strategic Plan _____________________________________________________________________5
What Is The Housing Strategic Plan Goal? .......................................................................................................................5
How Will The Goals Of The Plan Be Achieved? ..............................................................................................................5
A Focus On Action ......................................................................................................................................................................6
Pillars Of The Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................................................7
Strategic Focus Areas ................................................................................................................................................................7
For Whom Is Affordable Housing Intended? ....................................................................................................................8
Where Will New Units Be Located? .....................................................................................................................................8
Livability Standards For Affordable Housing ....................................................................................................................8
Aspen Area Community Plan: Housing Policies & Policy Categories ___________________________________________9
Looking Back, Moving Forward: Where Have We Been Successful ___________________________________________10
Looking Back, Moving Forward: What Can We Do Better In The Future ____________________________________11
Council’s Support Of Outcomes ...........................................................................................................................................11
Assessing The Need For Affordable Housing In Our Community ______________________________________________12
Summary Of Already-Completed Assessments .............................................................................................................12
Addition Of Updated Data That Informs The Needs ...................................................................................................12
Community Support Of The Need For Affordable Housing .....................................................................................13
Readiness Assessment ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________14
Staffing ............................................................................................................................................................................................14
Financial Capacity on Requested Timeline ......................................................................................................................15
Swot Analysis __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________16
Action Plan Decision Matrix _____________________________________________________________________________________________________17
Actions ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________18
Replace Expiring Deed Restrictions With Permanent Deed Restrictions ...........................................................18
Complete Lumberyard Project ..............................................................................................................................................19
Complete Burlingame Phase 3 Project ............................................................................................................................20
Community Development Policy Actions ..........................................................................................................................21
Certificates Of Affordable Housing Program Enhancements .................................................................................22
Develop Financial Resources For Construction, Expiring Deed Restrictions & Land Banking .................23
Incentivize Voluntary Downsizing ........................................................................................................................................24
Partnerships .................................................................................................................................................................................25
Apcha Compliance Actions....................................................................................................................................................26
Apcha Policy Actions To Increase Number Of Available Units ...............................................................................27
Apcha Policy Actions To Improve The Sustainability Housing Inventory ............................................................28
Additional Development Neutral Program Elements..................................................................................................29
Land Banking ..............................................................................................................................................................................30
Regional Collaboration .............................................................................................................................................................31
Actions Not Currently Prioritized __________________________________________________________________________________________32
Review Process _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________33
Appendix _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________34
Appendix A: Housing Chapter Of Aspen Area Community Plan ..........................................................................35
Appendix B: Community Afordable Housing And Livability .....................................................................................41
TABLE OF CONTENTS
8
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
5
The City Council will continue to evaluate, identify opportunities, plan, partner, facilitate, and leverage
existing and new resources to invest in the development and maintenance of affordable housing. This will be
accomplished through:
(City Council Goal Resolution August 2021)
CITY OF ASPEN
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
WHAT IS THE HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL?
To provide an action plan to support the continued availability of affordable housing that is high quality, sustain-
able, and results in a lived-in community and a healthy workforce.
HOW WILL THE GOALS OF THE PLAN BE ACHIEVED?
POLICY PROGRAMS PARTNERSHIPS
Aspen Area Community
Plan & Land Use Code
encourage, support &
require the creation of
affordable housing within
the urban growth boundary.
City Council’s policy
direction regarding land
acquisition is to consider
any and all acquisitions,
including partnerships.
The Affordable Housing Certificates Program has been
in place since 2010 – with the first project completed
in 2012. This program encourages developers to build
affordable housing by providing a credit for each
affordable housing unit built. That credit can then
be sold to another developer who can use it to fulfill
employee mitigation requirements on a separate project.
The program has included new projects, conversions
of freemarket units to deed-restricted, and historically
designated properties.
The Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority manages
the sales, rental, management & sustainability of deed
restricted affordable housing.
Development of affordable
housing through private and
public partnerships has and
will continue to provide
an alternative to the
City-as-Developer approach.
With reduced availability of
freemarket housing in the
Roaring Fork Valley, the need
for regional affordable housing
partnerships increases.
Supporting
continuous
improvement with
the APCHA program,
including ensuring
adequate resources
Convening a
City Housing
Retreat
Creating an
affordable housing
strategic plan
Completing
Council directed
affordable housing
development
projects
Continuing to
seek additional
affordable housing
development
opportunities
Leveraging
and amending
regulations
and policies
in support of
affordable
housing
9
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
6
Every member of the Aspen City Council – both before and during the December 2021 City Council Housing Retreat
– identified the importance of a specific Action Plan within the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan.
Staff has reviewed input received from City Council during the Housing Retreat and over the past few years to
develop this prioritization. Please see page 17 to see how these items were prioritized. Further detail on each action
item can be found starting on page 18.
PRIORITY
• APCHA Compliance Actions
• APCHA Policy Actions to Increase Number Of Available Units
• APCHA Policy Actions to Improve The Sustainability Housing Inventory
• Additional Development Neutral Program Elements
• Land Banking
• Regional Collaboration
HIGHEST PRIORITY
• Replace Expiring Deed Restrictions with Permanent Deed Restrictions
• Complete Lumberyard Project
• Complete Burlingame Phase 3 Project
TOP PRIORITY
• Community Development Policy Actions
• Certificates of Affordable Housing Program Enhancements
• Develop Financial Resources for Construction,
Expiring Deed Restrictions & Land Banking
• Incentivize voluntary downsizing
• Partnerships
A FOCUS ON ACTION
Marolt
10
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
7
PILLARS OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN
Increase the
quantity of
affordable
housing
Increase
quality of new
& existing
affordable
housing
Preserve
affordability
Provide
community
housing
Ensure the
sustainability
of the
program
Support the
policies
identified in the
Aspen Area
Community Plan
1 2 3 4 5 6
STRATEGIC FOCUS AREAS
SAFE & LIVED-IN COMMUNITY OF CHOICE: Ensure Aspen is an
attractive, diverse and safe city to live, work and visit year-round. This includes
opportunities to access childcare, healthcare, housing, transit, parks, recreation and
technological connectivity.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: Ensure a trusted dialogue and relationship
in the community that encourages participation, consensus building, and meaningful
engagement.
PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT: Ensure that policy decisions, programs and
projects manage impacts to the environment, climate, and public health and well-
being.
SMART CUSTOMER FOCUSED GOVERNMENT: Provide value to the
community by continuously improving services and processes based on feedback,
data, best practices, and innovation.
FISCAL HEALTH & ECONOMIC VITALITY: Promote economic
sustainability of the Aspen community by advancing a healthy, diverse local economy
while responsibly managing revenue streams, community investments, and financial
reserves.
11
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
8
LIVABILITY STANDARDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
•environmental sustainability •accessibility
•quality of construction •parking & storage
•unit size •open space & trails
•natural light •public transportation
WHERE WILL NEW UNITS BE LOCATED?
Third Priority:
Outside of City limits
(This is a change from prior policy)
>> To allow for closer proximity to
major medical centers
>> Partnerships with Pitkin County
>> Other regional partnerships
FOR WHOM IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING INTENDED?
Affordable Housing in the Aspen area is both workforce housing and community housing.
The Housing Vision statement in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) makes this clear:
We believe that a strong and diverse year-round community and a viable
and healthy local workforce are fundamental cornerstones for the
sustainability of the Aspen Area community.
The AACP cites the benefits of affordable housing to the Aspen community; it “helps to ensure a vital, demographically
diverse year-round community” made up of “a healthy mix of people, including singles, families and seniors.”
While affordable housing supports the community’s workforce, according to the Mission Statement in the Aspen Pitkin
County Housing Authority’s Regulations, affordable housing is also intended for retirees and people with disabilities who
have been actively employed within Pitkin County prior to retirement and/or disability.
1
2
3
Top Priority:
Within the roundabout,
including in the Core
Second Priority:
Within the
Urban Growth Boundary
Housing developments should endeavor to balance the principles of community, livability and quality against
impacts such as unreasonable levels of cost and construction activity intrusion. Housing structures should utilize
land as efficiently as possible and should seek construction efficiencies to levels that do not sacrifice livability
beyond levels that are not consistent with these goals. Architecture should be sensitive to neighborhood context
to the extent possible while achieving these goals. A myriad of design elements all combine to make a development
livable. As discussed further in Appendix B, these elements include, but are not limited to:
12
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
9
ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN (AACP):
Housing Policies & Policy Categories
The policies outlined in the Housing chapter and related housing mitigation policies in the Managing Growth for
Community & Economic Sustainability chapter are intended to meet these challenges as the community continues to
provide affordable housing. A full copy of the Housing section of the Aspen Area Community Plan, pages 38-42, can be
found in Appendix A.
At the same time, the 2012 AACP calls for further research on the physical limits to development in the form of ultimate
build-out, projected future impacts related to job generation, demographic trends, the conversion of local free market
homes and other factors. This kind of statistical analysis will help inform future decision-making and goal-setting in a more
meaningful way.
This plan emphasizes the need to spread accountability and responsibility for providing affordable housing units beyond
the City and County governmental structures, and continuing to pursue affordable housing projects on available public
land through a transparent and accountable public process.
While past plans have supported "buy-down" alternatives, there has been little comprehensive effort in this regard. A
"buy-down" program may be an expensive proposition, but this plan calls for exploring it more thoroughly. The idea is to
finally determine if the community is willing to pay the price for providing long-term affordable housing by converting
existing free market homes, and/or affordable housing, rather than building new homes.
Little Ajax
(Source: 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan)
13
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
10
LOOKING BACK, MOVING FORWARD:
Where have we been successful?
With a total of approximately 3,200 deed restricted units within the Aspen/Pitkin County area, 72% (2,303) of which are
located within Aspen City limits, this area is home to what is likely the largest affordable housing program in the nation on
a per capita basis. In the early 1970s, responding to a loss of free-market employee housing, Pitkin County and the City of
Aspen started separate housing programs. Early recognition of the problem and immediate action and sustained investment
has created a housing program that is not only the envy of every ski town, it has been the key to maintaining the soul of the
community.
In 1982 Aspen and Pitkin County
joined together to form the Aspen
Pitkin County Housing Authority.
The City and County jointly fund this
program that is now operating under
the Sixth Amended and Restated
Intergovernmental Agreement,
signed in May 2019.
Importantly, and unlike some other
western ski resort communities, the
Aspen community has consistently
supported affordable housing
through both the 1% Housing Real
Estate Transfer Tax and 45% of the
.45% Housing and Day Care Sales
Tax. These funds have supported
the City in the role of developer —
although private sector companies
are hired to build the units— and
have also allowed the City to join
with private sector developers to
build new affordable housing units.
The aforementioned housing policies
implemented through the Land Use
Code, such as the Affordable Housing
Credits Program and the Growth
Management Quota System, have also
resulted in new affordable housing unit
generation.
COMPLETED PUBLIC PROJECTS: 2000 - 2021
YEAR FACILITY UNITS OWN/RENT
2000 Snyder 15 Own
2001 7th and Main 12 Own
2002 Truscott II 87 Rent
2005 Annie Mitchell 39 Own
2006 Little Ajax 14 Own
2007 Burlingame Ranch I 91 Own
2015 Burlingame Ranch II 86 Own
2020 802 West Main 10 Rent
2020 517 Park Circle 11 Rent
2021 488 Castle Creek 24 Rent
TOTAL COMPLETED 389 257 Own/ 132 Rent
TOTAL FTEs 840
FTEs: Number of full time employees housed
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL DATA (WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN)
YEAR 2000 2010 2020
TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 4,354 5,929 6,197
% CHANGE 2000-2010 // 36.2% 2010-2020 // 4.5%
OCCUPIED HOUSEHOLDS 2,903 3,516 3,540
% CHANGE 2000-2010 // 21.1%% 2010-2020 // 0.7%
VACANT HOUSEHOLDS 1,451 2,413 2,657
% CHANGE 2000-2010 // 66.4% 2010-2020 // 10.1%
% OF VACANT UNITS
(free market and affordable combined)33%41%43%
Source: Colorado State
Demographer’s Office compiled
decennial US Census Data from
2000-2020; and APCHA data
derived from HomeTrek.
Deed Restricted APCHA
Units in COA (Source: APCHA)Total: 2,303
Free-Market Units Total from
Census less APCHA units Total: 3,894
% of Vacant Free-Market Units
(assuming 100% of APCHA units are occupied)68%
14
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
11
LOOKING BACK, MOVING FORWARD:
What can we do better in the future
At its December 2021 City Council Housing Retreat, the Council identified what has been done well
and what could be done better in the future:
YEAR FACILITY UNITS OWN/RENT
*2022 Burlingame Ranch III 79 Own
**2024-2035 Lumberyard 310 2/3 Rent, 1/3 Own
TOTAL In Process 389 177 Own, 212 Rent
TOTAL FTEs 780
* Currently under construction
** Currently in planning, subject to change
COUNCIL’S SUPPORT OF OUTCOMES
When the City is the developer in an affordable housing project, the City Council has a significant role in the
design and development of that project. During the December 2021 City of Aspen Housing Retreat, the City
Council put forward the following statements in support of successful project outcomes:
PUBLIC PROJECTS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS
Maintain the
quality of the
community through
sustainability and
have the courage
and political will
to preserve the
community
Ensure community
understanding of
why certain actions
are being taken and
help the community
to understand the
20-year outcomes.
Better
organize and
articulate
priorities
Make improvements
to existing programs,
including better use
of existing housing
stock and utilizing
unused bedrooms
already built
Preservation
and restoration
of existing
housing
Adding
housing
without
construction
when possible
Developing
voluntary
programming
around retirees
and seniors still in
housing by creating
a better situation
for them; provide
incentives to
downsize
Staff will be supported with the resources when they are needed
City Council will take full ownership if we don’t succeed
City Council will not change direction
Council members commit to expressing concerns to staff ahead of time
Trust and have patience with staff
Lead with a public service heart
Burlingame
15
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
12
ASSESSING THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY
SUMMARY OF ALREADY-COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS
2012 NEEDS ASSESSMENT: In 2012, staff prepared a strategic review
of affordable housing document for a joint City/County housing work
session which occurred in September of 2012. The 2012 strategic
review hypothesized that from 2012 to 2022, over 650 new housing
units would be needed to overcome the forces of job growth,
gentrification, and retirement.
2019 NEEDS ASSESSMENT: The 2019 Greater Roaring Fork Regional
Housing Study suggested that the need for affordable housing units
in the Aspen-Snowmass area was greater than previously anticipated
and growing. A copy of that report can be found at: apcha.org/
DocumentCenter/View/1197/Final-ReportGreater-Roaring-Fork-
Regional-Housing-Study20190417?bidId=
2019 GREATER ROARING FORK
REGIONAL HOUSING STUDY
UNITS
NEEDED
2017 2027
< 60% AMI 483 481
61-80% AMI 1401 2101
81-100% AMI 766 1204
101-120% AMI 663 861
121-140% AMI 420 245
141-160% AMI 227 327
>160% AMI 0 0
TOTAL NEED 3,960 5,219
ADDITION OF UPDATED DATA THAT INFORMS THE NEED
To prepare for the City’s Lumberyard affordable housing development, in 2021 the City of Aspen commissioned the
Lumberyard Demographic and Market Assessment which found that the Roaring Fork Valley is losing households in
APCHA income categories 1 (up to 50% AMI) and 2 (51-85% AMI) and that most of the job growth in Aspen and Pitkin
County is in APCHA income categories 2 (51-85% AMI) and 3 (86-130% AMI).
The 2021 Lumberyard Demographic and Market Assessment goes on to suggest that rental units should be created
primarily in APCHA income category 2 (38%), followed closely by category 3 (33%) and then category 1 (22%), and with
a few rental units in category 4 (7%). The 2021 study also suggests that ownership units should be created primarily in
APCHA income category 3 (34%), followed by categories 4 (26%) and 2 (23%) while providing some units in category 5
(17%).
A similar income mix should be considered for the 79 units at Burlingame Ranch Phase III which will be available for sale in
in the Fall of 2022.
16
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
13
COMMUNITY SUPPORT OF THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
One needs only to read one of the two daily newspapers or listen to the local NPR broadcast to understand the need for
additional affordable housing in our community, as well as for its preservation. These observations are well supported by
longitudinal empirical data.
The recently published results of the 2021 Pitkin County Community Survey also highlighted the community
interest in affordable housing: “Respondents were asked to identify County services and initiatives provided
by the County that they thought should receive the most emphasis, from County leaders, over the next two
years. Forty-nine percent (49.4%) of respondents selected the County’s efforts to address affordable housing,
including quality and quantity, as one of the most important services for the County to provide.”
>>> https://civicclerk.blob.core.windows.net/stream/PITKINCOCO/ca4b2f6d-8481-4c26-98a4-b27638d5d0bc.
pdf?sv=2015-12-11&sr=b&sig=gCFmloI5R0e4y3Q2O0MoRhm3W%2FvCIJKeV1r1Iqx2mfY%3D&st=2022-01-
17T20%3A25%3A08Z&se=2023-01-17T20%3A30%3A08Z&sp=r&rscc=no-cache&rsct=application%2Fpdf
The 2018 City of Aspen Resident Survey cited “Ensuring the availability of adequate workforce housing at a
reasonable cost to rent/purchase” as an essential area for the City government to take action, falling just behind
protecting the quality and quantity of water in the Roaring Fork River.
>>> https://www.cityofaspen.com/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/500
Similar results are seen in the 2016 Resident Survey, where “Ensuring the availability of adequate workforce
housing at a reasonable cost to rent/purchase” again fell just behind Roaring Fork River water quality and
quantity concerns, but tied with “Managing traffic in town more effectively” for third place.
>>> https://www.cityofaspen.com/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/53
The 2015 Resident Survey did not include a Roaring Fork River question. In this survey, “Ensuring the availability
of adequate workforce housing at a reasonable cost to rent/purchase.” was the top response.
>>> https://www.cityofaspen.com/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/52
Burlingame Ranch
2021 Pitkin
County
Community
Survey
2018 City
of Aspen
Resident
Survey
2016
Resident
Survey
2015
Resident
Survey
17
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
14
READINESS ASSESSMENT
STAFFING
Department & City’s Affordable Housing Development Fund
Currently, the City of Aspen has one full time employee in the Capital Asset Department dedicated to the planning
process for new affordable housing developments. Other full-time staff members from the Capital Asset Department
provide construction management support during City-developed projects.
Collaboration with staff from other departments is often leveraged during the planning process and may include
staff from the City Manager’s and City Attorney’s offices, Finance, Community Development, Engineering, Building,
Transportation, Parks, Utilities, Environmental Health and the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority.
Funds from the City’s Affordable Housing Development Fund are otherwise typically used to staff projects as needed with
third party professional and/or technical consultants on a project-by-project basis.
Community Development
Community Development has several staff members who focus on the development, implementation, and refinement of
policies that support affordable housing development. During the 2022 Moratorium, Community Development staff will
be working directly on new policies to support City Council’s affordable housing goals. As part of this work, significant
analysis will be conducted that will support improvements to affordable housing efforts beyond the period of the
Moratorium.
APCHA
Compliance: APCHA has two primary staff members who work part time on compliance, namely the Compliance, Policy
& Systems Manager and APCHA’s outside attorney. APCHA’s Executive Director and Deputy Director also participate in
compliance efforts.
Qualifications: Two Qualification Specialists at APCHA ensure that the people who rent or purchase APCHA deed
restricted property meet the requirements as defined in APCHA Regulations.
APCHA Housing Sustainability: General upkeep of rental and ownership properties.
• Rental housing sustainability for city-owned properties (Truscott, Aspen County Inn and Marolt), is managed by
APCHA’s two-member Property Management Team and four-member Maintenance Team.
• Housing sustainability for individual ownership units is a topic the APCHA Board began to address in April 2021,
supported by the Assistant City Manager, APCHA Executive Director, Deputy Director and the Compliance,
Systems and Policy Manager.
• Housing sustainability by Home Owners Associations of condominium and other multi-family developments is a
topic the APCHA Board would like to address in the future. APCHA staff will propose hiring a HOA Specialist
in the future to support this effort as well as to help HOAs of APCHA deed restricted properties with capital
reserve planning.
City Manager’s Office
The City Manager’s Office will be hiring a full time Housing Policy Analyst in the spring of 2022. Additionally, the City’s
Assistant City Manager works part-time on housing topics.
18
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
15
FINANCIAL CAPACITY ON REQUESTED TIMELINE
Since 2000, over $240 million in dedicated revenues has been invested into the
ongoing operation and expansion of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority
affordable housing inventory. This includes the development of the completed
projects listed above as well as funds invested in upkeep and operation of existing
City-owned facilities.
Funds from this revenue stream are also budgeted annually toward the operation
of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA), and those funds are
also matched by Pitkin County. (The table to the right does not include such Pitkin
County funds.)
Funds have also been invested in land banking opportunities for future housing
developments.
Year Housing Fund
Revenues
2000 $5,302,335
2001 $4,845,133
2002 $4,751,964
2003 $8,543,109
2004 $8,090,180
2005 $12,773,154
2006 $14,000,177
2007 $14,075,761
2008 $12,001,447
2009 $8,373,748
2010 $8,321,575
2011 $9,752,953
2012 $8,986,581
2013 $9,584,101
2014 $11,590,103
2015 $13,039,396
2016 $10,084,871
2017 $13,422,231
2018 $13,042,701
2019 $13,784,319
2020 $21,009,309
2021 EST $38,147,667
2000-2021 $243,808,166
Truscott
19
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
16
A SWOT Analysis tool helps an organization to identify, at a high level, major internal and external Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.
•Strengths and Weaknesses are focused internally: What do we do well and where could we improve?
What resources do we have and what resources do we need.
•Opportunities and Threats are externally focused: Outside of our organization, what
opportunities exist? What threats could harm our efforts? What is happening in the market
that could help or hurt us?
STRENGTHS
• Community Support
• City Council Commitment
• Financial Resources
• Knowledgeable Staff
• 3,200 Affordable Housing Units
• Pitkin County Partnership
• Ability to hire outside private-sector
resources
WEAKNESSES
• Maintenance Costs
• Ability to access financial resources quickly
• Development Neutral solutions alone can’t
solve the problem
• Staff workload limits ability to take on new
projects
• Buying down existing free-market
residential and converting to affordable
housing is prohibitively expensive
• Highly dependent on outside resources
OPPORTUNITIES
• Land Acquisitions
• Partnerships with
private & public entities
• Pitkin County potential for county-wide tax
• Regional partnerships
THREATS
• Scarcity of land
• Cost of Construction
• Increased housing costs in entire Roaring
Fork Valley
• Deferred maintenance and escalating
cost of capital repairs in privately-owned
affordable housing HOAs
• Inability of affordable housing residents to
move into free market units in the future
HELPFUL
SWOT ANALYSIS
HARMFUL
EXTERNALINTERNAL20
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
17
ACTION PLAN
DECISION MATRIX
Ajax Apartments
Weight on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 is high 5 3 4 4 5
Category Action Item
Development Neutral Replace Expiring Deed Restrictions with
Permanent Deed Restrictions 4 5 4 5 5 23 96 1
New Development Complete Lumberyard Project 5 4 3 4 3 19 80 2
New Development Complete Burlingame Phase 3 Project 4 3 2 4 5 18 78 3
Policy Community Development Policy Actions 3 4 5 5 2 19 77 4
Policy Certificates of Affordable Housing
Program Enhancements 3 4 5 5 2 19 77 5
Policy Develop Financial Resources for Construction,
Expiring Deed Restrictions & Land Banking 3 4 5 5 2 19 77 6
Development Neutral Incentivize voluntary downsizing 3 5 4 5 2 19 76 7
New Development Partnerships 2 4 2 5 3 16 65 8
Compliance & Sustainability APCHA Compliance Actions 1 4 5 5 1 16 62 9
Policy APCHA Policy Actions to increase
number of available units 1 4 5 5 1 16 62 10
Compliance & Sustainability APCHA Policy Actions to improve the
sustainability housing inventory 1 4 5 5 1 16 62 11
Development Neutral Additional Development Neutral Program Elements 3 4 1 5 2 15 61 12
New Development Land Banking 5 2 1 5 1 14 60 13
New Development Regional Collaboration 2 1 3 4 2 12 51 14Quantity of Affordable Housing UnitsProximity to Services Lower Cost: Most efficient use of land & dollarsSupports AACPHow quickly AF units will be realizedRaw ScoreWeighted Score Rank21
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
18
ACTION:
Replace Expiring Deed Restrictions
with Permanent Deed Restrictions
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Scott Miller, Chris Everson, Pete Strecker, Matthew Gillen
OVERVIEW
There are hundreds of deed restrictions with a sunset clause based on some
triggering event in the future. When those deed restrictions expire, they will be
gone forever. The goal should be to preserve the deed restriction permanently
and provide for the preservation of the integrity of the housing unit associated
with that deed restriction.
After identifying all known expiring deed restrictions, several tools for
preservation of those deed restrictions should be identified and the pros and
cons of each one explored.
Those tools include:
• Purchase the deed restriction and re-write the terms.
• Negotiate a trade with the owner of that deed restriction for
something of value.
• Enforce existing land use code, requiring replacement of
some deed restrictions.
• Legislate new land use code, requiring replacement of
some or all deed restrictions.
• Council and staff then need to actively pursue a strategy for
implementing these tools on an as-needed basis as
opportunities present themselves.
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Spring 2022:
Update the inventory expiring deed
restrictions.
Summer 2022:
Council worksession to discuss recent
attempts to preserve deed restrictions
& explore the list of possible tools.
Summer 2022:
Include the identified tools into the
Housing Strategic Plan.
Fall/Winter 2022:
Land Use Code (LUC) updates, in
coordination with other potential
amendments to the LUC. There is a
high likelihood that other actions will be
necessary beyond changes to LUC.
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
By preserving existing deed-restriction now, no
ground will be lost. We will not need to replace
these units with new units simply to get back to the
status quo.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The AACP states that “The provision of affordable
housing remains important” but, “we cannot build
our way out of this challenge.” Preserving existing
deed-restricted housing stock eliminates the need
for entitling and building new deed-restricted
housing on a one-to-one ratio. To the extent that
this can be accomplished, this saves the community
development dollars and the environmental
impacts of construction.
Development Neutral
22
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
19
ACTION:
Complete Lumberyard Project
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Scott Miller & Chris Everson
OVERVIEW
The City of Aspen’s Lumberyard affordable housing project site is located just south
of the Aspen airport business center on the east side of Colorado state highway 82.
The City anticipated the development of affordable housing in the area of the current
project site and purchased part of the site in 2007. Later in 2020, the City purchased
the 3-acre Aspen Mini Storage property, bringing the total project site area to about
10.5 acres.
In 2019, Aspen City Council directed the start of a community outreach and conceptual
design process which included a process of community engagement and feedback
to help inform the design process. The 2019 outreach and conceptual design effort
helped to establish that the City should provide a variety of unit types, serving a mix
of demographics, and that the site is appropriate for larger buildings and potentially
higher density than may be appropriate elsewhere. Since parking is challenging at the
airport business center, there was a sentiment that the development should be careful
not to make the parking challenge worse by under-parking any development at the
Lumberyard site. It was also decided that childcare is needed in the community and may
be appropriate at this site
The conceptual design effort studied unit counts ranging from 140 units up to 500+
units, and given the affordable housing crisis in Aspen, City Council set their aim at 310
units of affordable housing to be designed for the site. In order to accommodate the
higher-than-usual density for the site, and to mitigate the impacts of the development
to create a livable neighborhood, it was necessary to explore the use of underground
parking and 4-story building massing. In late 2020, the project team presented a
conceptual master plan with 310 units and 100% underground parking.
Prior to beginning a schematic design process, Aspen City Council had concerns
about impacts of 100% underground parking, building spacing, height, orientation and
highway and airport noise. These concerns and much more are currently being reviewed
through a process of community engagement and City Council feedback, with Aspen
City Council weighing in on the evaluation of four potential site arrangements.
The project aims to create 200+ rental units and 100+ ownership units for the purpose
of housing local community workforce, qualified based on the Aspen Pitkin County
Housing Authority regulations.
To be successful, the project effort will bring together necessary funding to begin
construction of access and infrastructure at the project site in 2024, with phases
of housing development to follow thereafter. With the continued schematic design
process ongoing, a development application is anticipated in mid-2022 and the land use
approval process will be pursued at that time.
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
2022:
Complete Schematic Design, Submit
Development Application for Approval
Process
2023:
PD Recording, Construction Documents,
Building Permit Application Process
2024:
Target for Access & Infrastructure
Construction Start
2025:
Target for First Phase of Housing
Construction to Start
2027:
Target for Occupancy of First Phase of
Affordable Housing
2028+:
Remaining Phases of Housing
Construction and Occupancy TBD
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
The Lumberyard Project is anticipated to yield
approximately 310 affordable housing units
CONNECTION TO AACP
The creation of affordable housing in the Aspen
area reduces pressures on the valley-wide
transportation system by providing housing
opportunities for local workforce nearer to where
they work and reduces the amount of time spent
commuting for workforce, significantly improving
quality of life. This effort similarly reduces air
quality impacts associated by reducing total
commuter miles.
New Development
23
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
20
ACTION:
Complete Burlingame Phase 3
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Scott Miller & Chris Everson
OVERVIEW
Two prior phases have been completed, with a total of 177 affordable units at Burlingame
Ranch. This thriving neighborhood is home to a diverse working population including
many families and children. The third phase of building is currently in process as
of March 2021. The current construction effort will create 79 additional affordable
condominium units in 8 buildings, along with associated landscape and infrastructure.
There are also two remaining single-family units to be constructed before the
subdivision is complete.
The current construction effort utilizes factory-built modular building construction
to shorten the construction timeline and to minimize on-site construction impacts to
the surrounding neighborhood. Foundations are constructed on the site, and modular
buildings are trucked in, lifted and carefully placed, and assembled to completion on the
site. Site retaining, roadway infrastructure, and landscape work is also part of the effort.
The Burlingame Ranch Phase 3 project effort will deliver 79 new affordable ownership
condominiums to Aspen and Pitkin County’s inventory of affordable housing, and sales
are expected to begin September 2022. The architectural character, unit sizes and
interior configurations are consistent with the previous phase
Phase 3 includes carport structures which allow each unit to have one assigned, covered
carport parking space with attached storage closet. There will also be an equal number
of uncovered surface parking spaces to reach an overall parking capacity of 2 parking
spaces per unit. Terms of use for all parking spaces is expected to be governed by the
new phase 3 condominium homeowner’s association, which will be set up in the same
manner as the two existing condominium associations which exist at Burlingame Ranch
already.
Adjacent to public parks and Open Space, the landscape for phase 3 will be integrated
with the prior phases and includes numerous open lawn areas, hundreds of trees and
shrubs, and walkway connections to create a highly accessible community. Those internal
walkway connections are also integrated into the larger trail connection plan, and the
facility will utilize an irrigation system equipped with a raw water source to avoid the use
of potable water for the purpose of watering.
The phase 3 residential program consists of approximately 84,000 square feet of livable
area within a total of 79 condominium units. The condominium units are a mix of flats
and multi-level townhomes with (25) 1-bedroom flat units, (12) 2-bedroom flat units, (5)
2-bedroom townhome units, (23) 3-bedroom flat units, and (14) 3-bedroom townhome
units.
Unit sales for these 79 new affordable homeownership units beginning September
2022 are anticipated to be facilitated by the Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority
(APCHA) and are expected to be done via a lottery process. The income levels to be
served by these units is expected to be APCHA income categories 2 through 5, although
the specific details of the number of units in each category and further details of the
sales process will be more closely defined throughout the remainder of 2021 and in the
coming months.
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Burlingame Phase 3 units
scheduled for sale fall 2022.
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Burlingame Phase 3 will result in 79 new ownership
units.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The first phase of Burlingame Ranch affordable
housing was built in 2006.
While land banking is not specifically called out
in the AACP as a strategy, the primary outcome
of the 2007 Housing Summit was to encourage
additional “land banking,” which ultimately resulted
in the purchase of the BMC West property, a
parcel at 488 Castle Creek Road and others.
The 2008 Affordable Housing Plan evaluated
15 potential sites for affordable housing units,
identifying a range of up to 685 possible housing
units.”
New Development
24
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
21
Community Development works continually to better coordinate the AACP and the
LUC in the creation of affordable housing development opportunities. During the 2022
Moratorium, staff will work directly on several affordable housing- related improvements
to the LUC. The overview below identifies potential policy changes to be evaluated and
proposed during the Moratorium and beyond.
Additionally, Community Development and APCHA will work collaboratively on a number
of these items.
OVERVIEW
• The Land Use Code (LUC) is the mechanism for exacting housing mitigation (units,
fees, credits) from residential, lodge, and commercial development activities. In the
GMQS standards, the creation of FTEs from development activities is the basis for
the system of private sector affordable housing (AH) development.
• There are numerous tools available to ComDev to alter the regulatory, development,
and finance landscape to deliver additional affordable housing to the community,
including:
• Alter zoning standards to permit more density, intensity, and available land for
AH development within the City Limits.
• Create an AH overlay zone over appropriate zone districts that allows for AH
development where applied and with specific standards.
• Increase employee generation and mitigation amounts to require more AH
from private development.
• Require or incentivize on-site AH development for certain project
and use types.
• Restructure the GMQS to decouple AH FTE generation, unit creation, and fee
extraction from development. Assess a fee or tax or certain uses to generate
revenue for AH development, buy-down programs, land acquisition, and AH
development subsidies.
• Alter development review processes to streamline AH development reviews
that meet specific standards.
• Revise development fees to lower costs to AH development.
• Create an impact fee for certain uses or development types which creates a
revenue stream to offer financial subsidies for private sector AH development.
• Affordable Housing by Right in Every Zone
• In addition to the LUC, the AACP is another key tool for encouraging more AH
development over time. The next AACP update could include the following to ensure
more AH is developed:
• Identify, annex (as necessary), and zone specific lands within the UGB for AH
development.
• Tie utilities extension policies outside the City Limits and existing service area
to AH development standards.
• Create policies for the UGB which preclude development of lands within the
UGB for uses other than or prioritizing AH.
• Create policies tying transit MMLOS and transportation network service
extensions to AH development standards.
• Create policies identifying lands in the UGB for AH-focused TOD
developments.
• Adopt clearly articulated land banking policies targeting specific properties in
the UGB appropriate for acquisition and AH development.
ACTION:
Summary of Community Development Policy
Recommendations
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Phillip Supino & Ben Anderson
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Once work on the moratorium is
complete, Community Development
staff will revisit this Action Item to
provide a more robust plan.
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
By ensuring the City’s regulations, policies, and
development and impact fees extract AH units
and revenue commensurate with the employment
generation and community housing impacts.
Further, by leveraging regulatory processes and
police powers to ensure the community gets the
development needed to achieve adopted City
policy.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The following AACP statements (among others)
support this action item.
I.1. Achieve sustainable growth practices to
ensure the long-term viability and stability of our
community and diverse visitor-based economy.
VII.1. Study and quantify all impacts that are
directly related to all types of development.
VII.2. Ensure that all new development and
redevelopment mitigates all reasonable, directly
related impacts.
VIII.1. Restore public confidence in the
development process.
VIII.2. Create certainty in zoning and the land
use process.
II.5. Redefine and improve our buy-down policy
of re-using existing housing inventory.
III.2. Promote broader support and involvement
in the creation of non-mitigation Affordable
housing, including public-private partnerships.
IV.2. All affordable housing must be located
within the Urban Growth Boundary.
IV.3. On-site housing mitigation is preferred.
IV.5. The design of new affordable housing
should optimize density while demonstrating
compatibility with the massing, scale, and
character of the neighborhood.
Policy
25
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
22
OVERVIEW
The AH Certificates program is more than a decade old. The program has included
new projects, conversions of freemarket units to deed-restricted, and the use of
historically designated properties – all completed by developers in the private
sector. Other than the land use reviews, the City of Aspen did not have to expend
any resources in the development of these units. The FTEs generated by a project
are typically determined by the number of bedrooms in each unit in the project.
Categories of the units are assigned in the deed-restrictions. For the completed
projects, all have been created in Categories 2, 3, and 4. There have been 109
FTEs generated by completed projects to date, with another 43 – either with Land
Use approval or in Land Use Review.
A number of program enhancements have been identified as necessary to improve
program effectiveness, respond to market dynamics, ease program administration,
and ensure the maximization of the benefits to the community and developers
provided by the program. Those program enhancements include:
• permitting program participants to leverage outside tax benefits and
financing to develop AH units for credits;
• aligning the value of a credit with the real-world occupancy of an AH unit;
• ensuring alignment between the value of a credit and the cost to build an
AH unit;
• offering City financial incentives to credits developers to lower barriers to
credits projects;
• improved tracking of credit market dynamics including sale price and
supply and demand.
More detailed program analysis is needed to
determine the full list of possible program
enhancements which could include queue
priority for building permit reviews as
the potential for developer assistance or
partnering. As it is included in the Land Use
Code, the normal LUC amendment process
is required to alter the program.
Since its inception, the AH Certificates
program has succeeded in motivating
private sector development of non-
mitigation AH units. The credits created
by those developments has provided
flexibility to private sector development to
meet its mitigation requirements through
the extinguishment of those credits. This
symbiotic relationship has provided benefits
to both sides of the credits equation.
However, analysis is needed to determine
if the credits program has resulted in more
AH units that would have been required of the same private sector development
activities over the same period of time.
ACTION:
Certificates of Affordable Housing Program Enhancements
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Phillip Supino & Ben Anderson
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
2022-2023:
program analysis, stakeholder outreach,
ordinance development, Council action
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Maximizing the effectiveness of the program will
incentivize private sector AH developers to build
new units, or convert free-market into deed-
restricted affordable units.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The following AACP statements (among others)
support this action item.
I.1. Achieve sustainable growth practices to
ensure the long-term viability and stability of our
community and diverse visitor-based economy.
I.5. Through good land use planning and sound
decision-making, ensure that the ultimate
population density of the Aspen Area does not
degrade the quality of life for residents and the
enjoyment of visitors.
V.2. Facilitate the sustainability of essential
businesses that provide basic community needs.
VII.2. Ensure that all new development and
redevelopment mitigates all reasonable, directly
related impacts.
II.1. The housing inventory should bolster our
socioeconomic diversity.
II.2. Affordable housing should be prepared for
the growing number of retiring Aspenites.
III.2. Promote broader support and involvement
in the creation of non-mitigation Affordable
housing, including public-private partnerships
TABLE 7. AH CERTIFICATES
PROJECTS SINCE 2012
Completed Projects FTEs Generated
301 W. Hyman 14
313/317 AABC 24
210 W. Main 18
518 W. Main 29.66
834 W. Hallam 18.75
815 Vine 3
829 W. Bleeker 1.25
TOTAL 109 FTEs
Projects with approval
or in review
FTEs Proposed
611 W. Main 15.9
1020 E. Cooper 14.1
1235 E. Cooper 12.7
TOTAL 42.7 FTEs
Policy
26
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
23
OVERVIEW
Taxes
• Current tax collections dedicated to affordable housing (1.0% RETT and 45%
of 0.45% sales tax) sunset 12/31/2040 (Resolution #81, 2008).
• Sales tax collections have been relatively stable, with annual escalation of
about 4-5% per year. RETT collections are extremely volatile & after the recent
two years of record transaction and price appreciation, it is anticipated that
there will be softness in the coming year(s) that will affect collections.
Debt Obligation
Types of debt issuances possible depend on project:
• General Obligation debt – full faith and credit of the City would back this
issuance, but then would require voter approval. Will ensure best borrowing
rate possible. This could allow for an ownership type product to be produced
and sold, and would allow for some immediate payback into the fund when
units are sold.
• Tax Revenue Bonds – This would again require voter approval and would be
limited in the size of the issuance to the pledged resources (tax collections
generated by the sales or RETT taxes) to meet annual repayment terms. Best
leveraged in conjunction with extension of existing taxes noted above, to
maximize the duration for the payback term.
• Certificates of Participation (COPs) can be issued if willing to pledge a city-
owned asset of equal value (either can be the project itself or another asset(s))
– if it were the project, it would then mean the project would be rental units.
This would likely yield a borrowing rate that is one notch below the best rate
the City could achieve under a General Obligation type issuance.
• Does not create new resources but rather just changes the availability of
resources to achieve goals sooner (pledges future resources today and
therefore not available in the future)
• Debt is best for creating or acquiring new assets. It is not as good an option for
preservation of deed restrictions (but is possible).
Establishment of New Sources
• Exploration of new fees to supplement existing tax revenues and other
affordable housing mitigation collections (also under review).
• Collaborate with other jurisdictions to further a regional tax to support greater
housing preservation and development.
ACTION:
Develop Financial Resources for New Construction,
Expiring Deed Restrictions & Land Banking
ACTION ITEM OWNER
Pete Strecker
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Specifics around any projects are needed to
best match debt issuance options for the desired
outcomes and to maximize the City’s credit rating
wherever possible. Until this is developed, any
debt issuance discussion is premature.
New fee creation will be explored during
the current land use moratorium period and
options will be brought forward to Council for
consideration.
CONNECTION TO AACP
Financing is a required component of any new
affordable housing acquisition or development.
Tax extensions and voter approval for debt
issuance authority are subject to regular
election cycles and would need to be
coordinated with that in mind, plus any
voter outreach effort prior to those voting
periods.
Fees can be adopted at any time, via the
City ordinance process. This will require
two readings and public review period.
Policy
27
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
24
ACTION:
Incentivize voluntary downsizing to recapture & utilize
unused bedrooms in the existing inventory
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Chris Everson & Matthew Gillen
OVERVIEW
There are potentially 400+ underutilized bedrooms within the existing inventory.
Subsidies for the creation of each new bedroom can be some $150,000+ per
bedroom for new development. If incentives can be provided for owners/tenants
with unused bedrooms to move to a smaller unit and free up the unused bedrooms
so that they may be utilized to house people, and if this can be done at a lower cost
than developing new bedrooms, then this can save resources such as development
dollars, staff time and the environmental impact of construction.
Actions/tools needed may include:
• Incentive calculation which multiplies the fee in lieu at the category of the
bedroom being traded in by the number of FTE slots being freed up and
adjusting for depreciation. The amount of the incentive should be less than
the subsidy of developing a new bedroom.
• The household which is downsizing may apply their incentive, which is
provided from the 150 Fund, to the purchase or rental of an existing or new
unit, when available, and will receive lottery priority to do so.
• Research and inventory specific units with vacant bedrooms and
communicate incentive to owners/tenants
Draft policy for implementation may include:
• Allow priority in lottery for re-location of target households, target
households should be able to use their priority to move to an existing or
new smaller unit as those come available.
• Implement policy with approval from APCHA board and City Council (for
use of 150 funds)
• Prepare incentive offers and agreements, target specific households for
solicitation of incentive
• Possibly of offering the downsizing household the ability to qualify using
their original category or current category, whichever is lower
• Evaluate the potential use of the Affordable Housing Certificates program
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Spring/Summer 2022:
Research and inventory specific units
with unutilized bedrooms
Spring/Summer 2022:
Draft policy for implementation - Include
incentive calculation methodology
and priority in lottery for re-sales and
available rentals for re-location of target
households, target households should
be able to utilize their downsizing
incentive for a move to an available
existing (smaller) unit or a newly
developed (smaller) unit as those come
available
Summer/Fall 2022:
Discussions with APCHA Board &
Aspen City Council
Winter 2022/2023:
Implement policy with approval from
APCHA board and City Council (for use
of 150 funds)
Winter/Spring 2023:
Prepare incentive offers and target
those specific households for solicitation
of incentive
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
By incentivizing downsizing to recapture and
utilize unused bedrooms in the existing inventory,
we can maximize the utilization of the existing
housing stock.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The AACP states, “Deed-restricted housing
units should be utilized to the maximum degree
possible.” For every unused bedroom that
can be recaptured and utilized, this saves the
community development dollars, staff time and the
environmental impact of construction.
Development Neutral
28
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
25
ACTION:
Partnerships
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Chris Everson & Scott Miller
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Under the right conditions, partnerships
can increase the pace of affordable housing
development or redevelopment.
CONNECTION TO AACP
012 AACP appendix
III.2 Promote broader support and involvement
in the creation of non-mitigation Affordable
housing, including public-private partnerships.
(Collaborative Initiative, Incentive Program)
II.2.a Establish a working group of people who
represent the City, County, public agencies,
and the private sector to implement the policy.
Explore models of producing affordable housing
units, including quasi-public housing development
corporations. (I - APCHA, Housing Frontiers,
City and County Managers, private sector, taxing
districts)
II.2.b Explore the creation of a program where
the City or County would provide a tax benefit,
payment or life-estate planning or other financial
incentive to a free-market homeowner to include
their property in the City/County’s land banking
for future affordable housing. (I - City Manager,
County Manager)
II.2.c Explore creating a program for deed
restrictions for a defined duration. (I - APCHA)
II.2.d Explore the benefits of expediting specific
affordable housing projects through the
development and construction phase.
OVERVIEW
Partnerships for Affordable Housing typically fall into three categories, (1) between
one or more governmental jurisdictions, (2) between a government and a non-profit,
and (3) between a government and private sector organizations.
The most common type of partnerships between one or more governmental
jurisdictions involves a city partnering with other cities to create an entity similar
to a housing authority. Some housing authorities have taxing authority, others do
not (APCHA). Local governments frequently form partnerships with non-profit
organizations to operate a housing program or manage a public housing project.
Sometimes the non-profit organization is eligible for grants that a governmental
jurisdiction is not. Non-profits also appeal to philanthropic organizations and
individuals who can claim tax deductions for making contributions.
Public–private partnerships (P3s or PPPs) often involve agreements among one or
more government entities and one or more private sector companies to design,
build, finance, operate, and/or maintain projects, facilities or operations which may be
funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private
sector companies. PPPs can be effective, but also bring challenges such as land cost,
funding, connections to the free market, expiring deed restrictions, and misalignment
of values.
Agreements to design, build, operate and maintain can be complex and can be effort-
intense to put in place and may incur significant legal fees due to the need to hire
attorneys to write complex, binding legal agreements which include arrangements
and terms that require certain obligations and guarantee and secure the cash flows
and involve outside funding mechanisms as well as management terms.
But PPPs can bring some benefits to the development process. Project risks can
be transferred to private partners, and greater price and schedule certainty can be
achieved. There can be opportunity for innovative design and construction techniques,
and public funds can be freed up for other projects or purposes. These potential
benefits come with limitations such as increased financing costs, limited flexibility and
often few bidders to partner with on such projects.
The amount of effort and/or risk taken on by a government or quasi-government entity
may be modified by including more or less of a role in the service or facility being
created. A PPP may be created so that the government or private sector partners
take on more or less of the work to create the service or facility sought.
Risks and/or activities transferred in PPP Agreements may include design,
construction, financing, operations, maintenance and may even include reversionary
rights. Financing risks may include financing costs, inflation, design/construction risks,
unforeseen project site conditions, permitting, and more. Operation and maintenance
risks may include facility maintenance and operations, future unforeseen conditions,
underutilization of assets, rent risks, and more.
In considering where to place itself on the spectrum, public agencies need to consider
questions about benefits of private sector innovation, benefits to accessing private
financing, private-sector performance incentives, and other private-sector tools which
public agencies may have difficulty managing.
New Development
No specific timeline can be
established for partnerships
at this point.
29
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
26
OVERVIEW
APCHA has a compliance program to ensure affordable housing units are housing
people who qualify with APCHA’s rules and regulations, as created by APCHA’s
Board of Director. Concurrently, APCHA fully supports keeping qualified people
in their units.
APCHA’s compliance process starts with qualifications. APCHA is continually
seeking to improve performance to ensure that qualified buyers and renters
receive all due consideration during the qualification process, and that unqualified
applicants do not proceed in the process and are clearly and transparently
informed. Similarly, APCHA residents must comply with APCHA regulations,
including but not limited to, residency and work qualifications. It is APCHA’s
responsibility to the Aspen community to resolve noncompliance fairly and swiftly.
• Automated identification of violations: APCHA cross references the list
of all APCHA property with the City’s short term rental database.
• Voluntary reporting of violations: “Report a Concern” is a button on
APCHA’s website homepage. This allows members of the community to
notify APCHA of violations. Importantly, it can be difficult for APCHA to
investigate some compliance cases if the reporting individual is anonymous.
• Hearing Officer: APCHA has hired and outside hearing officer to resolve
compliance cases where needed.
• Outreach and Communication: The best way to maintain compliance
is education. APCHA is revamping its communication and outreach
strategies with an emphasis on interactive, accessible forums and
education.
ACTION:
APCHA Compliance Actions
ACTION ITEM OWNER
Matthew Gillen
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Compliance actions are important because
they ensure that affordable housing units
are being occupied by individuals who meet
the qualifications as outlined in the APCHA
Regulations. Because Compliance is a handled on
a case by case basis and it time intensive, it does
not result in a significant increase in available units.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The plan says, “all deed-restricted housing
units should be utilized to the maximum degree
possible”, which includes ensuring that units are
used by qualified residents.
This is an ongoing effort.
Compliance &
Sustainability
30
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
27
OVERVIEW
APCHA has a responsibility to maximize value to the community and efficiency
and impact of APCHA housing. A simple measure of that impact is ensuring that
APCHA houses the maximum number of individuals possible in the available
housing units. Such a simple measure however, does not take into account
the wishes, goals and needs of APCHA residents, for whose benefit APCHA
properties were constructed. People’s needs and desires change over the years,
thus APCHA must seek voluntary, flexible, incentivized programs to maximize
occupancy in APCHA units.
• Maximum age of Dependent: In November 2021 APCHA lowered the
maximum age of a dependent from 24 to 19 in the employee housing
regulations, to free up space previously used by adult dependents.
• Monitoring “Excess” Units: Through the new HomeTrek system APCHA
can now better monitor and assess unit usage.
• “Buy Down/Right Sizing”: The APCHA board will examine possible
programs to incentivize people, voluntarily, to move to small units, after, for
example retirement.
• In Complex Bidding: Currently bidders in the same housing complex have
a priority over outside bidders. This policy is an effort to sustain community
ties.
ACTION:
Potential APCHA Policy Actions to
increase number of available units
ACTION ITEM OWNER
Matthew Gillen
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
By providing residents who have outgrown their
properties an incentive – and importantly no
disincentives -- those residents may voluntarily
want to move to another unit.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The plan clearly says: “All deed-restricted housing
units should be utilized to the maximum degree
possible.”
These are ongoing policy actions,
some of which have recently been
implemented – such as the Dependent
Age – and others are still under
development or under consideration
by the APCHA Board.
Policy
31
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
28
OVERVIEW
With affordable housing in the Aspen area in such short supply, APCHA has a
responsibility to obtain maximum impact and value from existing APCHA housing
stock, while also protecting residents’ rights and benefit under APCHA regulations.
Part of this effort is maintaining the sustainability and lifespan of APCHA housing
stock. Each APCHA housing unit that has lifespan extended reduces the need for
a new unit.
Owners of APCHA deed-restricted housing units are responsible for upkeep
and maintenance of their homes, but, unlike the free-market housing cannot
recoup the full value (generally restricted to 10 percent), of home improvements
upon sale. Coupled with the fact that, due to the scarcity of housing in the Valley,
sellers find buyers willing to buy less than adequately maintained homes, there are
disincentives for APCHA deed-restricted homeowners to invest and maintain their
homes. Further, some APCHA units, such as mobile homes have a limited lifespan,
and must be periodically replaced.
Actions:
• Home Inspection Program prior to Resale: APCHA has difficult role while
facilitating the sale of APCHA deed-restricted units, representing both the
seller (and preserving equity gained during the home’s ownership period),
and the buyer (ensuring the home is in acceptable or good condition to buy).
In January 2022, APCHA fully implemented a home inspection program to
improve transparency as buyers and sellers negotiate.
• Mobile Home Pilot Program: APCHA is exploring a pilot program to assist
owners of mobile homes in replacing their homes.
• Sellers Standards/Capital Repairs: APCHA will continue to monitor
and seek ways to maintain the standard of units sold by APCHA owners,
balanced with the equity of the seller.
• Ten Percent Capital Improvement Cap: The APCHA Board is currently
considering offering to homeowner who update their deed restriction
an addition ten percent capital improvement allowance to support the
maintenance of homes. This updated deed restriction also allows for capital
improvements above the ten percent cap for approved energy and water
efficiency and life/safety improvements.
• Encourage HOAs to Prepare Capital Reserve Studies: Homeowner
associations should be aware of their potential needs for capital improvement.
APCHA will be looking at the issue of HOA Capital Reserves in the future.
• Hire Contract Grant Writer: APCHA has funding and will hire a grant
writer for funding sources to support individuals who want to make repairs
to their APCHA Deed Restricted Property
ACTION:
APCHA Policy Actions to improve the sustainability of
the APCHA deed restricted housing
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Matthew Gillen & Diane Foster
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Maintaining existing housing units is minimizes the
need to replace or perform extensive repairs on
units.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The Aspen Area Community plan calls for
deed-restricted housing units to “be used
and maintained for as long as possible, while
considering functionality and obsolescence.”
These are ongoing policy actions,
some of which have recently been
implemented – such as the Home
Inspection Program – and others are
still under development or under
consideration by the APCHA Board.
Compliance &
Sustainability
32
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
29
OVERVIEW
This program has not yet been fully fleshed out. Staff from multiple departments,
including and importantly, Community Development, will need to work on this post
moratorium.
The development neutral program will pursue two different paths. First, policies
and investments will be explored that would lead to the conversion of existing
free-market units into deed-restricted affordable units. Second, the potential of
new streams of revenue form currently unmitigated economic activities and the
high value of real estate will be evaluated.
The revenue would mitigate impacts to the community from real estate
speculation, development, and resulting demands for services. The development
neutral program supports of number of complimentary policies, including
promoting appropriate residential density, re-using and sustaining existing
buildings, mixing free-market and AH units within neighborhoods, and requiring
development to mitigate for its impacts.
Specifically on the topic of “buydowns”/ purchase of free market property for the
purpose of converting to affordable housing: While past plans have supported
“buy-down” alternatives, there has been little comprehensive effort in this regard.
A “buy-down” program may be an expensive proposition, but this plan calls for
exploring it more thoroughly. The idea is to finally determine if the community is
willing to pay the price for providing long-term affordable housing by converting
existing free market homes, and or affordable housing, rather than building new
homes. This type of program has two significant cost-related challenges:
1. Purchase of free market residential property is typically 1.5X the cost of
developing new residential property, and
2. Converting purchased free market residential property to practical, usable
affordable housing will add additional cost to this effort and could cause
the purchase/conversion process to cost 3X to 4X that of developing new
affordable housing.
It is unlikely that this could be accomplished at any meaningful scale without a 3-
to 5-fold increase to the current affordable housing tax revenues.
ACTION:
Additional Development Neutral Program Elements
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Phillip Supino &
Pete Strecker
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
By exacting taxes to generate new revenue, the
City will increase funds available to purchase free
market units to bring into the AH system.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The following AACP statements (among others) support
this action item.
I.1. Achieve sustainable growth practices to ensure the
long-term viability and stability of our community and
diverse visitor-based economy.
I.5. Through good land use planning and sound
decision-making, ensure that the ultimate population
density of the Aspen Area does not degrade the
quality of life for residents and the enjoyment of
visitors.
II.1. The housing inventory should bolster our
socioeconomic diversity.
II.5. Redefine and improve our buy-down policy of re-
using existing housing inventory.
III.2. Promote broader support and involvement in
the creation of non-mitigation Affordable housing,
including public-private partnerships.
IV.2. All affordable housing must be located within the
Urban Growth Boundary.
IV.3. On-site housing mitigation is preferred.
IV.5. The design of new affordable housing should
optimize density while demonstrating compatibility
with the massing, scale, and character of the
neighborhood.
The current buy-down policy permits development with
an AH mitigation requirement to fulfill that requirement
through the purchase and deed-restriction of a free-
market housing unit, adding it to the APCHA system. In
the years since the creation of this policy, free market
housing has increased exponentially in value. Therefore,
individual buy-down units are a far less financially viable
option for development with a mitigation requirement
versus the purchase of AH credits or paying cash-in-lieu.
Simultaneously, the community has seen a significant
decrease in commercial development and, therefore,
the creation of new FTEs requiring housing units as
mitigation. This and other trends have reduced the
prevalence of the development of on-site AH units.
These dynamics have combined to decrease the number
of AH units brought into the system by the private sector,
relying instead on AH credits and City-built projects
to deliver the bulk of new AH units in recent years. It
has also increased the rate of population decline in
residential neighborhoods, undermining city policies
related to a healthy lived-in community, a diversity of
housing types and occupants in neighborhoods, and the
maximum utilization of residential housing units in town.
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
2022: economic analysis, case studies and
legal analysis, legislative development
2023: legislative process, TABOR vote
Ongoing: program development and
management
Development Neutral
33
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
30
OVERVIEW
By definition, land banking is the process of acquiring and holding land for future
development, re-development, or land trade.
Success requires cohesive partnerships among a variety of stakeholders and
all levels of government, as well as confidentially. As land is a finite resource,
acquiring sites for future use as affordable housing preserves future opportunities
for the City to act typically in partnership with a private contractor. The investment
in the land can serve as a way to secure more financing options and at more
favorable terms. Land banking positions the City to take advantage of favorable
market conditions.
Due to the nature of property acquisition in the public sector, specific properties
cannot be mentioned. Infill development alone cannot address mounting
affordable housing demands. City Council’s policy direction regarding land
acquisition is to consider any and all acquisitions, including partnerships.
Actions:
1. Continue to seek appropriate land for land-banking.
2. Consider an incentive program for sellers ??? Dedicate housing to family
name, other family incentives of value? Consider a tongue in cheek “cash
for homes” marketing effort, which would probably make national news.
3. Consider creating or enabling fast-track for Council approval of potential
contract to buy when needed. For example, 1.22 acres at 688 Spruce
Street was purchased by a private buyer before staff could bring it to
Council’s attention. Land purchase price was in range of other City
projects, ended up a missed opportunity for potentially around 20 new
units.
4. Consider purchase of parcels discussed with Council in executive session.
Consider a means of public discussion for potential conversion of other
City assets.
5. AACP Appendix
III.2.b Explore the creation of a program where the City or County would
provide a tax benefit, payment or life-estate planning or other financial
incentive to a free-market homeowner to include their property in
the City/County’s land banking for future affordable housing. (I - City
Manager, County Manager)
ACTION:
Land Banking
ACTION ITEM OWNERS
Scott Miller & Chris Everson
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
The availability of additional land creates more
housing opportunities, quantifying the number
is very difficult. The increase of AH units is
dependent on several factors: zoning, mass and
scale, NIMBYism, the useful amenities available
to the community, good design, incorporation of
smart growth principles.
CONNECTION TO AACP
The AACP provides guidance with respect to:
• Continuation of the Aspen Idea
• Environmental Stewardship
• Sustainable development
• Emphasis on quality and livability
• Addresses Housing and Daycare needs
Ongoing
New Development
34
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
31
OVERVIEW
At the direction of the City Manager, city and APCHA staff have been active
participants in the Roaring Fork Valley Roadmap process, facilitated by Pitkin
County. The group has embraced the concept of collaboratively address the topic
of workforce sustainability. In October approximated fifty stakeholders participated
in a series of focus groups that included representatives from Roaring Fork Valley
nonprofits, local governments and agencies and the private sector. This group
recommended a specific focus on a regional affordable housing project, there was
also strong support for addressing issues related to diversity, equity and inclusion
as well as mental wellness.
While this project is still in its early stages, there has been active and consistent
participation from all of the Roaring Fork Valley local government staff, along with
DOLA staff. The collective and overwhelming consensus of stakeholders that more
affordable housing is needed in the Valley aligns well with City Council’s critical goal
of increasing the number of affordable housing units.
Concurrently, the Roaring Fork Roadmap team has been in discussions with a
Housing Coalition group that initiated discussions about forming some type of more
formal regional housing group. While that group had a temporary hiatus during the
early part of the pandemic, the group has been meeting again to develop a plan for
better regional collaboration around affordable housing.
Recently these two groups have discussed how working together and in
collaboration with DOLA could yield results. Staff will keep Council updated as this
project moves forward.
Unrelated to the item above, during the December 2021 City Council Housing
Retreat, the City Council expressed support for Pitkin County considering a county-
wide tax to support affordable housing. The City Council has not taken, nor have
they been asked for a formal position on this topic.
ACTION:
Regional Collaboration
ACTION ITEM OWNER
Diane Foster
ESTIMATED TIMELINE
HOW THIS ACTION
INCREASES THE NUMBER
Affordable housing is an issue facing all
communities in the Roaring Fork Valley and
beyond. Where state and federal funding for
affordable housing will likely be available, a
regional effort is more likely to be successful than
individual localities seeking funding.
CONNECTION TO AACP
While the AACP encourages partnerships, the
AACP is generally silent on regional collaboration
Staff will provide City Council an
update on progress later in 2022
New Development
35
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
32
In any strategic plan that contains action items, it is also important to identify what action will not be pursued. Below
is a list of action we will not undertake at this point due to one or more of the following reasons
• Council asked staff NOT to pursue this strategy; and/or
• Lower chance of success than other strategies
These items could be pursued at a later date should Council’s policy direction change or is market conditions
change.
• Encourage new free market development in order to receive required affordable housing mitigation results
• Vail InDeed Model – Not pursing this model because
• It creates additional RO units; not the Category of units we need the most
• No rental caps
• No appreciation cap
• Buy Downs: Buying down existing free-market residential and converting to affordable housing is prohibitively
expensive, given available resources and compared to the actions which have herein been prioritized.
ACTIONS NOT CURRENTLY PRIORITIZED
36
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
33
An outcome of the July 2021 City Council Retreat, City Council adopted three Critical Goals in August 2021.
The Housing Critical Goal reads as follows:
Increase number of Affordable Housing Units: In order to deliver an affordable housing
system that is high quality, sustainable, and results in a lived-in community, Council will continue
to evaluate, identify opportunities, plan, partner, facilitate, and leverage existing and new
resources to invest in the development and maintenance of affordable housing.
This will be accomplished through:
• Convening a City Housing Retreat;
• Creating an affordable housing strategic plan;
• Completing Council directed affordable housing development projects;
• Continuing to seek additional affordable housing development opportunities;
• Leveraging and amending regulations and policies in support of affordable housing; and
• Supporting continuous improvement with the APCHA program, including ensuring adequate resources.
Since August 2021 Council has been presented with updates to the Housing Critical Goal and specific actions to further
that goal on a regular basis at Regular Meetings where Council has approved policy, Work Sessions to provide staff
direction on various affordable housing projects and program and through Information Only Memos.
The three departments primarily responsible for delivering on the Housing Critical Goal – the Capital Asset Department,
Community Development and Housing/APCHA – have all already scheduled appearances before City Council and
Information Only Memos for the entire 2022 calendar year. Rather than a wholesale review of this Housing Strategic Plan,
this Plan is a living document whose contents will be updated throughout the year.
That being said, staff does plan to do an annual review of overall progress and make whatever modifications are necessary
to the plan at that time.
REVIEW PROCESS
37
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
34
APPENDIX A:
HOUSING CHAPTER OF
ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN
38
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
35
38
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
HousingHousing
Vision
We believe that a strong and diverse year-round community and a
viable and healthy local workforce are fundamental cornerstones for
the sustainability of the Aspen Area community.
Philosophy
We are committed to providing affordable housing because it supports:
• A stable community that is invested in the present and future of
the Aspen Area.
• A reliable workforce, also resulting in greater economic
sustainability.
• Opportunities for people to live in close proximity to where they
work.
• A reduction in adverse transportation impacts.
• Improved environmental sustainability.
• A reduction in downvalley growth pressures.
• Increased citizen participation in civic affairs, non-profit activities
and recreation programs.
• A better visitor experience, including an appreciation of our
genuine, lights-on community.
• A healthy mix of people, including singles, families and seniors.
Many of the philosophical statements in the 2000 AACP still ring true
today:
“We believe it is important for Aspen to maintain a sense of
opportunity and hope (not a guarantee) for our workforce to
become vested members of the community. ... (We seek) to
preserve and enhance those qualities that has made Aspen a
special place by investing in our most valuable asset – people.”
“Our housing policy should bolster our economic and social
diversity, reinforce variety, and enhance our sense of community
by integrating affordable housing into the fabric of our town. A
healthy social balance includes all income ranges and types of
people. Each project should endeavor to further that mix and to
avoid segregation of economic and social classes ...”
Living in affordable housing is not a right or a guarantee, but a
privilege, carrying with it responsibilities to future generations, such as
long-term maintenance and regulatory compliance.
The creation of affordable housing is the responsibility of our entire
community, not just government. We should continue to explore
methods that spread accountability and responsibility to the private
sector, local taxing districts and others.
We continue to support the following statements from the 1993
and 2000 AACP: “Housing should be compatible with the scale and
character of the community and should emphasize quality construction
and design even if that emphasis increases [initial] costs and lessens
production, [within reason].” At the same time, new construction
should emphasize the use of durable and renewable materials in order
to improve our environmental stewardship.
We should demonstrate our commitment to future generations by
providing educational outreach regarding long-term maintenance
and regulatory compliance by adopting a strategic plan for long-term
maintenance of publicly-owned rental properties, and for handling
“unique” properties, such as those with a sunset on deed restrictions.
39
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
36
39
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
Housing
At the same time, we need a new focus on the issues surrounding
retirement in affordable housing, as we are on the brink of a rising
retiree demographic. In addition, we should continue to provide
housing that accommodates the needs of people with disabilities.
The provision of affordable housing remains important due to several
factors, including the continued conversion of locally-owned homes to
second homes, a trend of a more costly down-valley housing market
and the upcoming trend towards retirement in affordable housing.
With limited vacant land in the Aspen Area and limited public funds, we
cannot build our way out of this challenge.
Our affordable housing program is continually encountering new
crossroads that demand creative thinking, understanding and
thoughtful action.
What’s Changed Since 2000
Since the adoption of the 2000 AACP, a total of 652 new affordable
housing units have been constructed, with another 181 approved but
not yet built. By any measure, these are impressive accomplishments,
but various relevant trends have continued to challenge the goal of
establishing and maintaining a “critical mass” of working residents, as
stated in the 2000 AACP.
While the ratio of local workers living in affordable housing units
increased from 25% to 32% from 2000 to 2008, the ratio of local
workers living in free market homes dropped from 22% to 13%, the
result of continued conversion of locally-owned free market homes to
second homes.
At the same time, the economic boom period of 2004 to 2007 saw a
dramatic increase in the cost of downvalley land and homes, reducing
opportunities for Aspen workers to find free market ownership options
in the valley. While the recession has rolled back prices, this plan must
assume that the economy will experience another period of prosperity
during the life of the plan. In addition, the number of retirees in deed-
restricted housing is estimated to jump from approximately 310 today
to more than 800 in 2021.
The 2007 Housing Summit considered all these factors and more. The
primary outcome of the Summit was to encourage additional “land-
banking,” which ultimately resulted in the purchase of the BMC West
property, a parcel at 488 Castle Creek Road and others. The 2008
Affordable Housing Plan evaluated 15 potential sites for affordable
housing units, identifying a range of up to 685 possible housing units.
Aspen Area Housing
History
In the early 1970’s free-
market housing that had
primarily housed local
employees was being
demolished and redeveloped
as second homes. By
1974, the City and County
began addressing this trend
by establishing separate
affordable housing programs
and 14 years later formed
the joint Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority (APCHA).
APCHA is currently funded
through a City of Aspen sales
tax and a Real Estate Transfer
Tax (RETT).
The State enacted legislation
in 2001 granting Housing
Authorities across the state
specific powers to raise
revenue through sales taxes,
use taxes, an ad valorem
(property) tax, and/or a
development impact fee. To
date, APCHA has not pursued
these revenue sources. The
City of Aspen has a housing
sales tax, and both the City of
Aspen and Pitkin County have
Housing Mitigation fees.
APCHA operates under the 4th
Amended Intergovernmental
Agreement between the
City of Aspen and Pitkin
County. This agreement has
eliminated APCHA’s role as an
active developer of workforce
housing; that role has been
assumed by the City of Aspen.
Currently, APCHA is principally
involved in the qualification,
sales, and enforcement of
the housing program and is
involved in the oversight of
over 2,800 units of deed-
restricted housing. The
APCHA Board of Directors
alone, or in concert with
other entities, suggests new
policy, programmatic changes,
and legislation, or makes
recommendations, as required
by the City, County or State.
40
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
37
40
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
Housing
What’s New in the 2012 AACP
Linkages
The creation of Affordable housing can help reduce pressures on the
valley-wide transportation system by providing housing opportunities
for our local workforce in the Aspen Area, while reducing air quality
impacts associated with a commuting workforce. Affordable housing
is also critical to a viable economy, and helps to ensure a vital,
demographically diverse year-round community. At the same time,
limited opportunities and funds mean we cannot build our way
out of the housing problem, and we recognize that new affordable
housing includes infrastructure costs ranging from transportation
to government services, schools and other basic needs. Controlling
growth and job generation can reduce the pressure to provide
affordable housing.
Housing
Growth &
Economy
Transportation
Community
Character
The re-use of philosophical language from past community plans is
due largely to the long-term support in the Aspen Area for affordable
housing as a critical tool to maintain a strong year-round community.
Some shifts in policy direction for the 2012 AACP can be attributed to
the long-term growth and maturation of the housing program, bringing
greater awareness of the need for long-term capital reserves and
maintenance for individually-owned and rental properties, as well as
publicly-owned rental properties.
Another difference in the 2012 AACP is the decision not to establish a
specific number of housing units to be developed during the 10-year
life of the plan. This should not be perceived as a wavering of support
for affordable housing units. The plan calls for exploring the potential
of a new housing unit goal, but specific research on this topic was not
conducted as part of this plan.
This plan focuses on the ongoing challenges of establishing and
maintaining a “critical mass” of working residents. The policies outlined
in the Housing chapter and related housing mitigation policies in the
Managing Growth for Community & Economic Sustainability chapter
are intended to meet these challenges as the community continues to
provide affordable housing.
At the same time, the 2012 AACP calls for further research on the
physical limits to development in the form of ultimate build-out,
projected future impacts related to job generation, demographic
trends, the conversion of local free market homes and other factors.
This kind of statistical analysis will help inform future decision-making
and goal-setting in a more meaningful way.
Instead, this plan emphasizes the need to spread accountability
and responsibility for providing affordable housing units beyond
the City and County governmental structures, and continuing to
pursue affordable housing projects on available public land through a
transparent and accountable public process.
While past plans have supported “buy-down” alternatives, there has
been little comprehensive effort in this regard. A “buy-down” program
may be an expensive proposition, but this plan calls for exploring it
more thoroughly. The idea is to finally determine if the community is
willing to pay the price for providing long-term affordable housing by
converting existing free market homes, and or affordable housing,
rather than building new homes.
On the Horizon
As the community continues
to provide affordable housing,
it is important to recognize
and understand future
challenges.
We must continue to track
changes to the Colorado
Common Interest Ownership
Act (CCIOA) and update our
housing policies on a timely
basis.
APCHA should vigorously
promote adoption of CCIOA
by existing associations, and
require new associations to
adopt CCIOA.
Lending practices are
changing, resulting in new and
potentially difficult financing.
41
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
38
41
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
Housing
Policy
Categories
Collaborative Initiative
Collaborative Initiative, Work
Program for APCHA
Collaborative Initiative, Work
Program for APCHA
Collaborative Initiative
Incentive Program, Proposed
Code Amendment
Housing Policies
I. SUSTAINABILITY AND MAINTENANCE
I.1. Affordable housing should have adequate capital reserves for
major repairs and significant capital projects.
I.2. Deed-restricted housing units should be utilized to the maximum
degree possible.
I.3. Deed-restricted housing units should be used and maintained for
as long as possible, while considering functionality and obsolescence.
I.4. Provide educational opportunities to potential and current
homeowners regarding the rights, obligations and responsibilities of
home ownership.
I.5. Emphasize the use of durable and environmentally responsible
materials, while recognizing the realistic lifecycle of the buildings.
II. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
II.1. The housing inventory should bolster our socioeconomic diversity.
II.2. Affordable housing should be prepared for the growing number of
retiring Aspenites.
II.3. Employers should participate in the creation of seasonal rental
housing.
II.4. Employers who provide housing for their workers through
publicly-owned seasonal rental housing should assume proportionate
responsibility for the maintenance and management of the facility.
II.5. Redefine and improve our buy-down policy of re-using existing
housing inventory.
II.6. Eliminate the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) program, unless
mandatory occupancy is required.
III. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
III.1. Ensure fiscal responsibility regarding the development of
publicly-funded housing.
III.2. Promote broader support and involvement in the creation of non-
mitigation Affordable housing, including public-private partnerships.
Community Goal
Community Goal, Work
Program for APCHA
Collaborative Initiative,
Incentive Program
Collaborative Initiative,
Incentive Program
Work Program for APCHA
Proposed Code Amendment
Collaborative Initiative
Collaborative Initiative,
Incentive Program
42
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
39
42
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
Housing
Policy
Categories
Housing Policies
IV. LAND USE & ZONING
IV.1. Affordable housing should be designed for the highest practical
energy efficiency and livability.
IV.2. All affordable housing must be located within the Urban Growth
Boundary.
IV.3. On-site housing mitigation is preferred.
IV.4. Track trends in housing inventory and job generation to better
inform public policy discussions.
IV.5. The design of new affordable housing should optimize density
while demonstrating compatibility with the massing, scale and
character of the neighborhood.
IV.6. The residents of affordable housing and free-market housing
in the same neighborhood should be treated fairly, equally and
consistently with regard to any restrictions or conditions on
development such as parking, pet ownership, etc.
V. HOUSING RULES AND REGULATIONS
V.1. The rules, regulations and penalties of affordable housing should
be clear, understandable and enforceable.
V.2. Ensure effective management of affordable housing assets.
Incentive Program, Proposed
Code Amendment
Proposed Code Amendment
Work Program for Planning
Department & APCHA,
Proposed Amendment
Data Needs
Proposed Code Amendment
Proposed Code Amendment
Work Program for APCHA
Work Program for APCHA
43
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
40
APPENDIX B:
COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND LIVABILITY
44
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
41
CONNECTION TO AACP
Within the introduction of the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan, two of the stated central themes are “Emphasize the quality and
livability of affordable housing.” and “Provide for a critical mass of year-round residents.”
Within the housing implementation portion of the appendix of the AACP is an implementation step that, in part, states, “Amend the
Housing Guidelines to establish livability standards that promote pride of living in affordable housing.”
And although the AACP also encourages area employers to participate in the creation and maintenance of seasonal rental housing,
the sections shown above, along with many other such statements in the AACP, support the Housing Philosophy stated within the
AACP, which aims to nurture a stable, year-round community, with a reliable workforce with an opportunity to live near where they
work, and with a healthy mix of people, including singles, families and seniors.
LIVABILITY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
For public affordable housing developments, the City of Aspen performs typically performs rigorous community engagement, seeking
input from the community at large and neighborhood stakeholder groups. A significant portion of such community engagement is
typically devoted to affordable housing elements related to livability.
At each stage of the design development process, input received from the community engagement process is typically filtered
through Aspen City Council. This often results in a careful balance of various priorities such as livability, quality, neighborhood
impacts and project cost. And there are many more detailed project elements that require balancing as well, such as environmental
sustainability, accessibility, total cost of ownership or tenancy, constructability and more. These topics are interconnected with the
meaning of livability among the Aspen affordable housing community.
LIVABILITY – GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Goals: Housing developments should endeavor to balance the principles of community, livability and quality against impacts such as
unreasonable levels of cost and construction activity intrusion. Housing structures should utilize land as efficiently as possible and
should seek construction efficiencies to levels that do not sacrifice livability beyond levels that are not consistent with these goals.
Architecture should be sensitive to neighborhood context to the extent possible while achieving these goals.
Density: Density should be considered as more than just a number and should consider neighborhood context, available open space,
amenities and other considerations related to community character. Successful housing developments have been created in Aspen
with density ranging from around 7 units per acre up to nearly 80 units per acre.
Quality: Quality construction should be employed to mitigate sound and vibration transmission and to promote energy efficiency. It
is important to people not to feel as densely housed as they actually are, and it is possible to invest in construction quality, up to a
point short of diminishing returns, to make a densely populated facility feel as livable as possible given available resources.
Environmental Sustainability: Environmental sustainability standards which are consistent with community goals should be integral
to the construction quality program. Investments in sustainability measures should be carefully prioritized to be consistent with
housing development goals.
Housing Unit Sizes: Housing for a diverse population of income levels should not discriminate livable space based on incomes.
Creating equitably sized housing units of standardized sizes can create construction efficiencies and increases flexibility to transfer
units among households of different income levels. The Colorado Division of Housing has established “indicators of modest but
decent housing” with suggested sizes of 500 square feet for studio or efficiency units, 700 square feet for one-bedroom units, 900
square feet for two-bedroom units and 1,200 square feet for three-bedroom units.
necessary and where a high level of livability is otherwise demonstrated, with reduction criteria such as significant storage space,
above average natural light, efficient/flexible unit layout, site amenities including parks and open space, and above ground unit
versus below ground units.
45
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
42
The APCHA Affordable Housing Development Policy includes the following Minimum Unit Sizes and defines an “occupancy standard”
based on 400 square feet per “employee”.
Unit Minimum Net Sq Ft Occupancy Standard
Studio 500 1.25
1-Bedroom 700 1.75
2-Bedroom 900 2.25
3-Bedroom 1,200 3.00
In practice, the occupancy standard is less of an actual counting mechanism for occupancy and more of a conversion tool and
general benchmark related to the 400 square feet per “employee” standard.
The APCHA Affordable Housing Development Policy allows for the reduction of unit sizes by up to 20% in cases where both
necessary and where a high level of livability is otherwise demonstrated, with reduction criteria such as significant storage space,
above average natural light, efficient/flexible unit layout, site amenities including parks and open space, and above ground unit
versus below ground units.
Accessibility: Affordable housing facilities should be accessible above and beyond code requirements where possible. Varying
levels of accessible dwelling units include Type A Full Accessibility, Type B Adaptable and Type C Visitable. Type A Full Accessibility
units should be included at or above code minimums, and all other unit should be Type B Adaptable where possible. Townhome units
or units which otherwise include a stairway internal to the unit should be Type C Visitable, and Universal Design should be used in
common area facilities.
Noise and Air Quality: Locations for affordable housing should be sought which have favorable noise and air quality characteristics.
For locations where noise and air quality characteristics are not without flaws, mitigation techniques should be implemented to
reduce adverse impacts to reasonable levels.
Pedestrian Safety and Automobile Circulation: Whenever possible, housing developments should prioritize pedestrian movement
over automobile movement and pedestrian safety over automobile circulation.
Community Open Space: Community open space should be created to maximize the use of available land and should be landscaped
to facilitate peaceful, playful and socially interactive enjoyment with turf or low-grow grasses as well as strategically placed shrubs
and trees to facilitate demarcation of areas and/or privacy where needed. A mix of non-programmed and lightly programmed areas
are encouraged.
Parks and Trails: Parks and trails provide community benefits and should be connected to housing developments where possible.
The use of boulder retaining walls can create material cost efficiencies and can be a contextually sensitive means of retaining earth
as opposed to engineered alternatives.
Parking and Storage: Parking and storage are key attributes that relate to day-to-day interaction with a housing facility. Local
workers may not use their cars every day, but they have a right like everyone else to keep a car in their possession, particularly
because Aspen is a remotely located City. Affordable housing units do not generally afford the amount of space that suburban
living in America generally affords so convenient access to a reasonable amount of storage space is a key attribute to any housing
unit. Parking and storage should be located within reasonable distance to one’s housing. The use of carport structures can be an
equitable means of providing covered parking without a high level of expense and can be used where needed to retain earth or
serve as sound barriers from nearby sources of noise.
Total Cost of Ownership: Total cost of ownership or total rent should be considered in affordable housing designs. The use of
durable assemblies and materials as well as low-maintenance mechanical systems along with operational efficiency considerations
such as ease of snow removal and landscaping can help keep long-term costs down. Thoughtful design for management of snow,
ice, moisture and freeze/thaw conditions can eliminate the need for gutters and downspouts and can help keep maintenance costs
down.
Wildlife: Sensitivity to wildlife and surrounding open areas is extremely important. Trash, recycling and compost staging
46
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
43
facilities should meet local codes and guidelines related to “wildlife-proof” requirements and recommendations and should otherwise
be consistent with wildlife management practices. Mail and transit stop facilities should attempt to keep people separated from
areas which could potentially attract bears or other wildlife.
Site Lighting & Facilities: Site lighting should provide safety while remaining contextually sensitive and where possible should
employ the use of timers and/or sensors to be as energy efficient as possible. Guide-on principles can be equally safe and less
intrusive than flooding large areas with light. External availability of water and electrical sources are amenities that tenants and/or
homeowners highly appreciate. “Dark skies” and other code-related requirements and recommendations should be rigorously met.
Public Transportation: Access to public transportation is a must. Reduction of daily automobile trips should be encouraged through
availability of convenient, multi-modal transportation alternatives.
LIVABILITY – CHECKLIST
The outline below is a useful inventory of decision points for considering characteristics which affect livability.
Density, Environmental Sustainability, Accessibility
Family oriented vs. non-family oriented
Working vs. retirement orientation
Flats versus multi-level townhomes & accessibility
On-grade access, stairs to get to unit, below-grade, partial below grade units
Ceiling heights greater than 8 feet, 8’-6” to 9’-0 where possible
Minimum bedroom size, 10 feet
Storage
Internal to the unit, Kitchen cabinets, Laundry, Foyer/mud – front and rear, linen closets, oversize bedroom closets (upper
shelves for seasonal storage), Additional unfinished areas, storage closets under stairways
Lockable external storage, enclosed preferred to cages, proximity to unit, outdoor gear storage, bikes, kayaks, skis,
snowboards, fishing, etc.
Trash/recycling/compost & mail facilities
Proximity to units, aesthetics, durability, parcel boxes, wildlife-proofing, separating trash from mail due to wildlife safety,
lighting
Outdoor living
Private outdoor space is preferred by most people, grill, patio, enlarged covered balconies, avoid drip through, snow
barriers/trellis
Parking
Location on site and relationship to pedestrians, streets/alleys
Quantity per unit, per bedroom
Above grade uncovered, above grade covered, lots, street, head-in, parallel, angle, on-site, offsite
Guest / visitor / service usage, loading zone
Accessible parking
Proximity to unit
Dimensions of spaces / access, geometry of getting in and out
Integrated storage with parking
Snow removal, snow storage, haul-off, street clearing, secondary clearing
Public space/recreation
Location, trail, pedestrian access, on-site open site areas, landscape
Flexible use spaces, fencing, demarcation, open
Child safety, dog parks, community gardens, programmed spaces
Access to public transportation
Secure, covered bike storage at transportation nodes
47
CITY OF ASPEN
2022-2026 — Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
44
Noise
Unit-to-unit transmission, wall/wall, floor/ceiling, STC, IIC
Outdoor noise, mitigation, berms, trees, façade
Lighting
Natural light
Indoor lighting
Exterior lighting
Ventilation / heating / cooling
Low voltage & electric - controls, network outlets, electric outlets, cable/satellite, utility usage, lighting, etc.
Laundry in unit versus common, size & fit, maintenance, availability
Heating – type
Heat pumps (cooling?), mini splits, ducted, radiant, baseboard, cove
100% electric where possible
Common vs. in-unit
Hot water heating – common versus in-unit, tank, tankless, efficiency, accessible location, floor drain
Solar and PV accessibility/orientation, roof space for p/v, rooftop decks
Pets, service animals, emotional support animals, cleanup, bags, dna testing
Landscaping
Turf, native grasses, low-grow, low water
Upkeep, Irrigation
Hose bibs
Community gardens
Stormwater, raingardens
Kitchen
Single, double sinks
Electric appliances, refrigerator, dishwasher, disposal, range type, microwave, range hood externally vented
Solid countertops, island or space for dining table
Trash, recycling, compost
Storage, cabinets, soffits, natural light/windows
Bathrooms
Quantity per unit
Lighting
Tubs, showers, toilets
Storage
Ventilation
Finishes, durability, aesthetics
Sinks, single vs. double, fixture counts, types
Maintenance
Access to HVAC equipment, accessible filter locations, spare filters
Appliances, Floor coverings
48
www.aspen.gov // 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611
49
MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Aspen Mayor and Council
FROM: PJ Murray, EIT – Project Manager
Mike Horvath, PE – Senior Project Manager
Pete Rice, PE – Division Manager
Blake Fitch – Parking Operations Manager
Lynn Rumbaugh – Transportation Programs Manager
THROUGH: Trish Aragon, PE – City Engineer
MEMO DATE: February 11, 2022
MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
RE: Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City staff is requesting Council’s approval to proceed with
installation of the Galena Corridor Living Lab to improve safety on Galena St and Cooper
Ave during the summer 2022 season. The living lab consists of temporary physical
modifications to the roadway and programmatic changes to parking and transit.
Staff is requesting direction on which type of protective barrier should be installed for the
counter-flow protected bikeway – a barrier with a vertical element such as Flex Posts
(figure 2 below), a low-profile barrier such as rubber curbing (figure 3 below) or a
combination of the two.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The “Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core”
project is a vision for a safe and connected downtown core. The project is based largely
in the understanding that the City of Aspen right-of-way, which contains streets,
sidewalks, utility corridors, and more, is a public space with potential to serve the work
force, tourists, and the community more fully.
The “Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core” project team is exploring how space
could be allocated differently in the ROW with three goals in mind:
1. Increase safety for all users, including pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
2. Improve mobility and connectivity in the downtown core for pedestrians and
bicyclists.
3. Balance the roadway by providing equitable right-of-way (ROW) space for transit
and/or shared mobility options, alternative modes of transportation and the use
and storage of single occupancy vehicles.
50
During the February 1, 2021 work session, Council directed staff to prepare concepts for
the Hopkins, Galena and Hyman/Mill corridors that would holistically increase safety and
improve mobility for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. To achieve the goal of safe
corridors, the space in the right-of-way (ROW) cross section would need to be reallocated
to balance the space for vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian mobility. Currently, 70% of the
existing ROW cross section is dedicated to the movement and parking of vehicles and
occasionally shared with cyclists, and the remaining 30% of the ROW cross section is
dedicated to pedestrians.
Staff utilized the Pedestrian and Bicycle Masterplan, the Downtown Enhancement
Pedestrian Project (DEPP) and the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) to develop the
concepts presented to Council in 2021. The Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core
project is a unique opportunity to implement many components outlined in these master
plan documents and that align with the community’s values. Specific policies outlined in
the AACP that support this project are listed below:
Transportation Policy, II. Bike and Pedestrian – II.3 Improve the convenience,
safety, and quality of experience for bicyclists and pedestrians on streets and trails.
o II.3.b – Explore adding bike lanes to existing rights-of-way.
Transportation Policy, V. Parking – V.1 Develop a strategic parking plan that
manages the supply of parking and reduces the adverse impacts of the
automobile.
o V.1.f – Explore converting on-street vehicle parking spaces for other transit
options, such as bike lanes, bike parking, etc.
Environmental Stewardship Policy, I. Greenhouse Gases – I.3 Incentivize
alternative forms of transportation to reduce reliance on follis fuels.
o I.3.e – Explore the potential benefits of adding bike lanes to existing rights-
of-way, including looking for opportunities to eliminate some on street
parking and replacing it with bike lanes.
The high-level concepts that staff presented during the June 21, 2021 work session,
showed what Aspen’s downtown core could look like. Each concept showcased a variety
of safety improvement strategies which can be treated like a menu and were shown in
three downtown corridors (Hopkins Ave, Galena St, and Hyman/Mill Ave corridors). These
strategies are listed below:
Conversion of parking from head-in to parallel to reallocate space for other uses
o Counter-flow protected bikeways on one-way streets
o Activation areas
o Increased pedestrian corridors
Curb extensions to improve sightlines for all users and decrease the width of the
crosswalk
Transitioning to vehicle-free corridors for 100% priority on pedestrians and
bicycles.
Council requested staff to develop a safety pilot program or living lab that incorporated
physical modifications to the roadway (i.e. striping, parking configuration, bike lanes,
widened pedestrian areas, etc.) and programmatic modifications (i.e. improvements to
51
shuttles and on demand car services, bus stop improvements, additional We-Cycle
stations, a parking availability program, etc.) to test how these elements can work
together to improve safety in Aspen’s core. These modifications should be incrementally
implemented and consider impacts and benefits to core holistically.
The preferred concept for the living lab was presented during the August 23rd, 2021,
Council Work Session. The living lab proposed at this meeting was the first incremental
step to improving safety and mobility. A single corridor was chosen, Galena Corridor
(below), for testing temporary improvements and the modifications were narrowed down
to include:
Modification of the corridor cross-section to convert all head-in parking to parallel
parking on both sides of the street which improves sight lines and reduces conflicts
between users.
Widened pedestrian areas.
A shared bike lane with vehicle traffic and/or a dedicated bike lane traveling the
direction of vehicular flow in a similar fashion to the bikeways outside the core.
A protected counter-flow bike lane for cyclists traveling against the flow of vehicular
traffic.
Turning motion modifications at the intersection of Galena and Hyman (adjacent
to the Elks Building) to eliminate the left turn from Galena to Hyman. This simplifies
the intersection and reduces the potential for conflict. Hyman would become a one-
way street from Hunter to Galena with vehicular traffic traveling from east to west.
Intersection improvements with curb extensions at the following intersections:
o Galena & Hopkins – City Hall
o Galena & Hyman – Elks Building
o Galena & Cooper – Paradise Bakery
o Cooper & Hunter – Old Boogies Space
Figure 1. Galena Corridor
52
The August 2021 work session was followed up in November 2021 with an informational
memo to Council outlining the benefits and drawbacks of each of the three concepts staff
explored for the 2022 summer living lab. This info memo highlighted staff’s preferred
option for the physical modifications the Galena Corridor and programmatic changes that
were being considered for the living lab related to transit, mobility and parking. The three
concepts explored in the November 2021 info memo are included in Attachment A of the
memo.
DISCUSSION: Since the last outreach update to Council in August 2021, staff refined
the living lab proposal and conducted community outreach per Council direction. The
outreach included a questionnaire on Aspen Community Voice (ACV), focus groups with
community members, presenting at an ACRA board meeting and an open house to all
ACRA members. This memo presents staff’s recommendation to install a temporary living
lab for summer 2022 to study the safety improvement measures and monitor the impacts
on parking and transit and the outreach efforts in Phase 2 (Fall 2021) and 3 (December
2021/January 2022).
Galena Corridor Living Lab Final Recommendations: As mentioned above, there are
three main goals of this project:
1. to increase safety by providing safe, dedicated space for all users so the priority is
balanced,
2. to improve mobility and connectivity through the core, and
3. to balance the roadway by providing equitable right-of-way (ROW) space for transit
and/or shared mobility options, alternative modes of transportation and the use
and storage of single occupancy vehicles.
To accomplish these goals, two components to the living lab are proposed: temporary
physical modifications to the roadway cross section which address the first project goal
and programmatic mitigation techniques to parking and transit address the second
and third goals of the project. These components are discussed in more depth in the
following paragraphs.
The proposed living lab achieves Council goals without requiring permanent modifications
to the roadway or intersections. A lab allows the community to study the impact prior to
permanently modifying the corridor. This summer would demonstrate that prioritizing a
balanced roadway between transit options creates a safe and connected downtown core
for all users.
Physical modifications: The physical modifications proposed for the temporary living
lab are shown below in the following three figures, Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the temporary
living lab installed on Galena St and Cooper Ave respectively. Figure 4 shows proposed
turning motion modifications at the intersection of Galena St and Hyman Ave.
These temporary physical modifications balance the priority in the ROW but dedicating
safe space equitably. The space in the ROW was reallocated to provide 15% of the ROW
53
width to cyclists, 30% to pedestrians and 55% to vehicles. Table 1 below outlines the
safety measures proposed with the living lab and the physical modifications associated
with it.
Table 1. 2022 Proposed Living Lab
SAFETY MEASURE LIVING LAB COMPONENT – PHYSICAL
MODIFICATIONS
Improved sight lines Curb extensions at intersections
Convert head-in parking to parallel
parking
Install 4-way stop sign at the
intersection of Hopkins Ave and
Galena St
Increased mobility and connectivity Protected counter-flow bikeway
Shortened crosswalk width for
pedestrians
Safe, dedicated space + infrastructure for
all users to balance space allocation in the
ROW
Protected counter-flow bikeway
Formalize shared roadway for
cyclists + vehicles
Maintain vehicle access with
existing one-way road
Curb extensions at intersections
Minimize potential for unpredictable
interactions
Protected counter-flow bikeway
Remove left turn from Galena St to
Hyman Ave (figure 4 below)
Figure 2. Galena St Cross Section
54
Figure 3. Cooper Ave Cross Section
Figure 4. Galena St and Hyman Ave Intersection Turning Motions
Programmatic Mitigation Techniques:
55
Parking Mitigation – The living lab final design recommendation impacts 44 parking
spaces in the Galena St Corridor however, through mitigation techniques, the parking
availability in the Core will not change.
Currently, the target parking occupancy in the core is 85% daily occupancy. Below is a
graph that shows 2019 and 2021 maximum daily parking occupancy data as a 5-day
rolling average. The core experienced 44 days where parking exceeded the 85% target
threshold in 2019 and 20 days in 2021.
Keep in mind, 25-30 spaces were removed and utilized as activation spaces in the core
during 2021. So even though there were fewer parking spaces in the core, the parking
availability did not decrease. Additionally with City Hall no longer in the core, it is
estimated that the daily average of 15-20 parking spaces used for city business are no
longer needed.
Figure 5. Target Parking Occupancy
To maintain similar parking availability values in 2022 during the living lab, there are two
mitigation strategies proposed. Once the living lab is installed, staff will monitor parking
occupancy numbers and will implement additional mitigation measures as necessary to
maintain similar values to 2019 and 2021. The two parking mitigation include the
following:
1. Reclassify residential parking spaces, either in the commercial core boundary or
adjacent to the boundary to core parking spaces (core parking fees apply). This
generates 47 reclassified spaces in the core which allows the total number of core
**2020 parking occupancy data was excluded from
the analysis due to the impacts of COVID-19.
56
parking spaces to be consistent which ensures the occupancy numbers are
comparable during the living lab.
A. 200 Block of E Hopkins, north side of the street (Across from Francis
Whitaker Park)
B. 300 Block of S Monarch, east side of the street (across from the Limelight)
C. 300 Block of E Durant Ave, south side of the street (along Mountain
Chalet/St Regis)
D. 500 Block of S Mill St, east side of the street, (along the Ice Rink/Hyatt
Grand Aspen)
E. 400 Block of E Main St, south side of street, (along St Mary’s Church)
Figure 6. Reclassified parking spaces
2. Parking Availability Program, 2 stages
Stage 1 – Measures that would be immediately implemented with the Living Lab:
o Install additional pick up/drop off locations in the core near high use areas
such as banks, pharmacies, etc. Staff with coordinate additional pick
up/drop off locations with ACRA in the following months.
o Increase citation fees for all vehicles that violate the 4-hour parking
maximum in the core. A parking fee ordinance update is planned for this
spring and will incorporate the citation fee increase.
o Construction parking enforcement:
Revise the Construction Mitigation Plan (CMP) Manual to limit
construction related parking in the downtown core during the on-
season. This will require construction projects to update their CMPs
to address how site access will occur. Any site violating the
limitations outlined in the Manual rule will be subject to a correction
notice.
57
More consistently and stringently enforce the use of reserved parking
spaces for construction purposes. Parking spaces can be reserved
for construction IF they are used by a vehicle providing necessary
tools and supplies, not for commuter vehicles or convenient parking
near job sites.
o Stripe parking spaces in the core that currently are not striped. This ensures
parking is maximized by delineating spaces and provides a consistent
number of parking spaces used to determine daily occupancy.
Stage 2 – Implemented as necessary to maintain parking occupancy values consistent
with 2019 and 2021. The implementation of stage 2 techniques is on an as-needed basis
if the parking availability data shows, or the feedback received from the community
indicates additional mitigation is necessary.
o Decrease the maximum parking time limit to 3 hours instead of the current
4 hour maximum. The average parking stay in the core is 2 hours.
Decreasing the maximum time limit to 3 hours ensures turnover of spaces
and limits core parking for uses other than accessing core businesses.
o Increase hourly parking fees (example: up to 25% increase from $6/hr to
$8/hr) during the temporary living lab. A parking fee ordinance update is
planned for this spring and will incorporate hourly fee increases. Council will
have opportunity to provide feedback and approval or denial of all fee
increases through this process.
Transit Mitigation Techniques – The Galena St corridor plays an important role in
connecting existing transit methods. Staff recommends that existing transit options be
enhanced to assist the community, tourists and workforce navigate through the core so
the parking impacts can be offset.
Stage 1 – Implemented with the start of the living lab
o Install a We-Cycle station within the living lab boundary, Galena Corridor,
based on feedback from the community that an additional station in the core
is necessary.
o Bicycle Education Program in partnership with the Parks Department and
We-Cycle
Education partnership with local bike shops – requiring bells on all
rental bikes and patrons to watch the ACRA bike etiquette video.
Trail code changes and other safety measures will be presented by
the Parks Department at a later date.
o Additional signage for the turning motion modifications at Galena/Hyman
intersection.
o Enhance the Downtowner service by increasing hours of operation during
peak times based on data such as ridership numbers.
Stage 2 - Implemented as necessary to maintain parking occupancy values consistent
with 2019 and 2021. The implementation of stage 2 techniques is on an as-needed basis
58
if the parking availability data shows, or the feedback received from the community
indicates additional mitigation is necessary.
o Enhance the Downtowner service by adding frequency (drivers) to routes.
o Explore a fixed route transit option.
Community Outreach Results: Phase 2 and Phase 3 of engagement occurred Fall 2021
– early February 2022. The goal for this engagement window was to encourage the
community to be active in the development of staff recommendations to Council by
providing feedback on a potential living lab for implementation in summer 2022.
Additionally, staff sought input on several programming and service ideas developed to
address and mitigate concerns heard in previous windows of engagement. Engagement
levels deployed included Inform (keep informed) and Consult (listen/acknowledge
concerns and ideas and incorporate feedback into decision-making process).
The current engagement phase builds upon the previous engagement windows and
efforts on this project which included broader reach efforts and targeted conversations.
Staff has incorporated previous feedback from Council, business
conversations, and a community questionnaire to update the plan through the process.
This work has culminated in the current idea being shared with the community for
additional input before refining the final preferred proposal. A high-level summary of
outreach efforts in Phase 2 and 3 is provided below. A detailed outreach engagement
report is provided in Attachment B of this memo.
Phase 2:
ACRA Board Meeting presentation – September 28, 2021
Conversations between Commercial Core and Lodging Commission (CCLC) and
the city’s former Director of Parking and Downtown Service.
ACRA Member Open House – a joint ACRA-City hosted open house for all ACRA
members to listen to a presentation, ask questions and provide feedback on
December 1, 2021.
o Feedback collected at the ACRA Open House was overall understanding
that safety may need to be increased in the core but there was little to no
support of loosing parking spaces to accomplish safer interactions in the
ROW.
Phase 3:
Aspen Community Voice Questionnaire – Posted December 31, 2021 – January
26, 2022 with refined questions for the community regarding the proposed living
lab concept.
o As with many Aspen initiatives, few areas on the survey saw an
overwhelmingly clear majority. However, 73.2% of respondents indicated
that they experienced an interaction while navigating the Downtown Core
that felt unsafe. Participants also indicated that they were supportive
(59.5%) to using right of way space for a summer living lab.
o Key Takeaways:
452 people took the questionnaire, 574 interacted with the project
website ACV and 781 people visited the page.
59
59.5% of respondents support using the ROW for a summer living
lab. (page 4, Attachment B)
• 36% of business owners = supportive of ROW modifications
for a living lab, 64% are not.
• 60% of residents = supportive of ROW modifications for a
living lab, 40% are not.
53.8% of respondents were somewhat to definitely favorable of the
proposed living lab concept. (page 4, Attachment B)
• 34% of business owners = somewhat to definitely favorable of
the proposed lab concept, 58% = somewhat to definitely
unfavorable of the lab concept.
• 56% of residents = somewhat to definitely favorable of the
proposed lab concept, 29% = somewhat to definitely
unfavorable of the lab concept.
Respondents indicated that pedestrians and cyclists would likely
experience improved safety with the proposed living lab while the
community was split as to whether vehicles would feel safer with the
living lab. (page 5, Attachment B)
Respondents indicated which modes of transportation they use while
navigating through the core, vehicle users and pedestrians were
equal at 396, cyclists at 275 and bus users at 203. (page 5,
Attachment B)
The top three safety techniques respondents support are dedicated
bike lanes (277), shortened cross walks (251) and widened
pedestrian areas (189). (page 5, Attachment B)
The most favored parking mitigation techniques are limiting
construction parking (343) and additional pick up/drop off locations
(235). (Page 5, Attachment B)
Respondents preferred extended hours of the Downtowner (70%),
and providing Galena St Shuttle service during the summer (71.5%).
(Page 5, Attachment B)
Common themes of the questionnaire comment section can be found
on pages 6-8 of Attachment B. All comments are provided on pages
28-63 and 78-113 in Attachment B.
Community Focus Groups – January 31, 2022 @ 4pm and 5pm.
o While feedback from the focus groups was consistent with that obtained
through the questionnaire and earlier business outreach, there was general
consensus that everyone wanted to make the Downtown Core safer,
particularly the safety of pedestrians. Likewise, there was some agreement
that a solution would require compromise as there are multiple perspectives
on how best to achieve safety.
o Focus group highlights can be found on page 9 of Attachment B.
Parking configurations were polarizing in the group discussions.
Some group members expressed interest in removing cars from the
core entirely, that converting to parallel parking wasn’t a significant
60
enough change to promote ultimate safety for pedestrians and
cyclists and environmental conscious change.
As parking decreases in the core to allow for safer streets, the cars
will need to park somewhere. Most agreed that a longer-term solution
related to parking needs to be explored beyond the living lab.
Education for cyclists, particularly on rental e-bikes, was an agreed
need for safety in the town.
A complete list of feedback recorded during the focus group meeting
or emailed post meeting is provided on pages 118-125 of Attachment
B.
Measurement of Success: Throughout the duration of the living lab, staff will monitor the
success by collecting and analyzing data for many of the lab components such as daily
parking occupancy, Downtowner ridership numbers, We-Cycle ridership numbers,
accident reports, questionnaire responses, field data, etc. to determine if the lab is
successful. Staff will collect near miss data and user counts in the field during the living
lab install and will also monitor accident reports submitted by Aspen Police Department.
Staff will also collect daily parking occupancy data to monitor occupancy values in the
core. If occupancy values are not consistent with 2019 and 2021 data, Stage 2 of the
programmatic measures will be implemented and monitored. Lastly, staff will monitor user
numbers for We-cycle, Downtowner, shuttle services, etc. to see if the parking impacts
creates and increase in alternative modes of transportation through the core.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Funding equal to $75,000 for this project was appropriated within
the 2022 Asset Management Plan Fund budget, under project 51440: Downtown Core
Pedestrian Safety.
2022 Living Lab Costs:
Living Lab Stamped Design $10,000
Living Lab Install
Striping
Protected Counter-Flow Bikeway
$40,000
Parking Programming
Parking Space Striping
$5,000
Transit Programming
Downtowner Service Enhancements
We-Cycle Station Installation
Bicycle Education Program
$50,000
Community Outreach $25,000
TOTAL $130,000
Additional to the funding allocated in the 2022 Asset Management Plan Fund, this project
was awarded the TDM Innovation Grant from CDOT for $50,000. This grant is targeted
towards projects that provide transportation services within project and will be used to
fund the programmatic enhancements related to the Downtowner. The CMAQ Grant was
previously awarded to We-Cycle for additional stations in town. The new We-cycle station
proposed in the living lab area will be covered by this existing grant.
61
To cover the cost of the living lab install, design, striping and community outreach, staff
plans to apply for the Revitalizing Main St small project grant through CDOT in February
when the application is available. This grant offers additional funding up to $150,000 if
awarded to this project. In the past the city has been successful with obtaining these
funds.
Staff anticipates requesting $55,000 through the Spring Supplemental process to cover
the transit mitigation measure upfront until reimbursement from the TDM Innovation Grant
is completed and parking space striping in the lab area.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Implementing improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
will not only improve the safety and mobility aspects of the core for all users, but it is
anticipated that a more balanced approach to corridors will reduce the carbon footprint of
the city as biking and walking within the core become more safe, convenient, and
equitable. Everyone who lives, visits, works, or enjoys Aspen is a pedestrian at one point
in their time here, not everyone is a vehicle driver or a cycler. Improving the experience
and safety of our most vulnerable user should be a top priority.
ALTERNATIVES: Alternatively, one of the concepts shown in Attachment A from the
November 2021 informational memo could be installed for the summer 2022 season, the
corridor could remain as is with no safety measures or modifications to the corridor or
proceed to permanent construction of the proposed temporary improvements. Permanent
installation would allow for increased pedestrian areas to be included in the scope.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Council approve staff’s final recommendation
for the living lab in the Galena Corridor for Spring/Summer 2022 to include the physical
modifications outlined in this memo with the programmatic mitigation techniques outlined
for parking and transit.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Attachment A – Alternative living lab concepts from the November 2021 informational
memo
Attachment B – Aspen Community Voice Questionnaire Results and Outreach Summary
62
ATTACHMENT A
Concept 1: Dedicated bi-directional bikeway
Figure 1. Galena Corridor Concept 1
Benefits:
Minimal impacts to parking space striping on the west (right) side of the street.
Reduces conflict interactions between angle head-in parking and cyclists while maintaining
head-in parking on the west (right) side of the street.
Drawbacks:
Does not offer safety improvements for pedestrians in the corridor – pedestrian space
allocation percent (30%) does not increase in the temporary condition or have the potential
to increase if the improvements are made permanent. Road width does not allow for
widened pedestrian areas; curb line cannot shift.
Interactions between users at the intersections become complicated to keep cyclists in the
protected bi-directional bikeway. Where the one-way ends and a two-way road begins will
require unsafe movements by cyclists. A unique solution for the intersections will need to
be developed for this concept, it will not be replicable in other corridors in town.
Adding a bike sharrow lane for bikers in this configuration does not improve the safety for
bicyclists as vehicles have limited vision towards oncoming bicyclists.
Concept 1 impacts 44 parking spaces of the 86 parking spaces in the corridor.
63
Page 2 of 4
Concept 2: Dedicated Separate Bike Lanes
Figure 2. Galena Corridor Concept 2
Benefits:
Maximizes space allocated to pedestrians (existing = 30%, proposed = 40%) in both the
temporary test condition and permanent condition to be used as activation area, widened
pedestrian walkways, etc.
Maximum safety for cyclists – dedicated bike lanes both directions with simplified
intersection interactions between users compared to Concept 1 and no conflict interactions
between cyclists and angle head-in vehicles parking. Parallel parked cars have improved
sight lines for parking maneuvers.
Drawbacks:
Maximum impact to parking with parallel parking on the east (left) side of the street only.
Space allocated to vehicles decreases as a result (existing 50%, proposed 40%).
Concept 2 impacts 68 parking spaces of the 86 total spaces in the corridor.
64
Page 3 of 4
Concept 3: Preferred Option
Figure 3. Galena Corridor Concept 3
Benefits:
Increases bicycles safety - provides dedicated bicycle infrastructure for cyclists traveling
the opposite direction of vehicular traffic. Increased dedicated space allocation for cyclists
(existing = 0%, proposed = 10%)
Visual identification between vehicles and bicyclists is improved.
Allows for increased pedestrian areas not provided in Concept 1 in the temporary test
condition or permanent installation as activation areas, widened pedestrian areas, etc.
Increases number of parking spaces in the corridor compared to Concept 2 with parallel
parking on both sides of the street. The redistributed space provides room for safety
measures for pedestrians and cyclists and balanced space allocation in the ROW.
Drawbacks:
Does not provide dedicated bike lanes for both directions of cycling travel.
Concept 3 impacts 44 parking spaces of the 86 total parking spaces in the corridor.
Preferred Option: Staff presented Concept 3 to Council during the August 2021 work session as
staff’s preferred concept to implement and test during the 2022 spring/summer season for the
following reasons:
1. Concept 3 provides safety benefits to all users whereas Concept 1 and Concept 2 slightly
prioritize bicycle safety improvements. The goal of this project is to provide safe, dedicated
space for all users to balance the priority. Staff believes Concept 3 achieves this goal
without requiring complex intersections or slightly prioritizing bicycles over vehicles.
2. Staff met with a few ACRA members in August. During this meeting the ACRA members
provided the feedback that there is support for ROW modifications for increased safety of
the traveling public in the core. The business community feels strongly that the ROW work
65
Page 4 of 4
should strive to also prioritize a vibrant commercial core. Staff used this feedback to rank
the concepts from the business community’s need for parking spaces in the core with each
concepts ability to improve safety for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. Concept 1 and
Concept 3 impact the same number of parking spaces (44 spaces) however Concept 3
offers greater improvements for cyclists and pedestrians. Concept 2 impacts more parking
spaces (68 spaces) and was considered less ideal even though the pedestrian and bicycle
safety experience is maximized, it was too impactful on vehicles for a first incremental step.
66
Safety and
Mobility in the
Downtown Core
ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY REPORT
Winter 2021-2022 Engagement Phase
December 31, 2021-January 31, 2022
67
CONTENTS
Engagement Summary Overview
Engagement Window and Goals
Previous Project Engagement
Aspen Community Voice Page
Questionnaire
Ideas and Comments
Focus Groups
Distribution Channels
Print and Digital
Email
Social Media
Aspen Community Voice (ACV) Page
Visitor Summary
Participant Summary
Tool, Widget and Traffic Summary
Questionnaire
Content/Questions
Complete Responses Report
Ideas and Comments
ACV & Direct Email
Focus Groups
Participant and Session Overview
Response Documentation
Follow-up Email Submissions
3
3
3
4
5
8
8
11
11
11
12
14
14
15
16
18
18
24
116
116
118
118
118
124
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 2 68
ENGAGEMENT
SUMMARY OVERVIEW
Engagement Window and Goals
The current phase of engagement occurred between Dec. 31, 2021 and Jan. 31, 2022,
except for additional input from several focus group participants submitted on
February 1, 2022.
The goal for this engagement window was to encourage the community to be active in
the development of staff recommendations to Council by providing feedback on a
potential living lab for implementation in summer 2022. Additionally, staff sought input
on several programming and service ideas developed to address and mitigate
concerns heard in previous windows of engagement related to loss of parking in the
direct vicinity of the proposed living lab. Engagement levels deployed included Inform
(keep informed) and Consult (listen/acknowledge concerns and ideas and incorporate
feedback into decision-making process).
Previous Project Engagement
A critical component of the Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core project is
public engagement. The importance of public involvement in the decision-making
process is a priority for the City of Aspen. Throughout the project, a primary goal has
been to create awareness and listen to a broad cross-section of our community who
access and spend time in the Downtown Core for various reasons, including residents,
business owners, part of the workforce, consumers, recreationalists or visitors.
The current engagement phase builds upon the previous engagement windows and
efforts on this project which included broader reach efforts and targeted
conversations. Staff has incorporated previous feedback from Council, business
conversations, and a community questionnaire to update the plan through the process.
This work has culminated in the current idea being shared with the community for
additional input before refining the final preferred proposal.
In early August 2021, staff solicited feedback from the general public to gauge
if the community saw a need to improve safety and mobility, their level of
support to test changes, preferences around design elements under
consideration, and concerns. The results of this questionnaire were presented
to City Council during the August 23, 2021 work session.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 3 69
From September through early December, staff conducted targeted outreach
to downtown retailers and restauranteurs, including a meeting with the ACRA
Board, a follow-up meeting with several businesses located in the Galena and
Cooper corridor, and a joint ACRA-City hosted membership meeting.
Additionally, the city’s former Director of Parking and Downtown Service
discussed this project with Commercial Core and Lodging Commission
(CCLC), sharing the three original options for the living lab proposal and
listening to concerns. He also had one-on-one conversations with businesses
directly affected on Cooper and Galena. Staff incorporated this feedback into
the current proposal for the living lab.
Aspen Community Voice (ACV) Page
Over the course of the site being open between December 31, 2021 and January 26,
2022 (questionnaire live dates), a total of:
781 people visited at least one page
574 clicked on something on the site
452 took the questionnaire
2 contributed a comment or idea
Questionnaire
Demographics
A total of 452 individuals responded to the winter questionnaire, which exceeded our
expectations. By comparison, the fall survey received 93 responses. The largest
demographic group of respondents in a question about self-identification answered
that they identified as Aspen residents (328). Other responses showed 81 identified as
Aspen business owners, 74 as down valley commuters, and 13 as Visitors. Respondents
could select more than one category if applicable.
Mixed Opinions
As with many Aspen initiatives, few areas on the survey saw an overwhelmingly clear
majority. However, 73.2% of respondents indicated that they experienced an
interaction while navigating the Downtown Core that felt unsafe. Participants also
indicated that they were supportive (59.5%) to using right of way space for a summer
living lab.
When asked about favorability levels regarding the current proposed living lab:
53.8% indicated they were definitely to somewhat favorable
33.6% stated they saw the concept as definitely or somewhat unfavorable
12.6% remained neutral
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 4 70
Regarding perceived enhancement to community safety with the proposed lab,
participants indicated that pedestrians (55%) and cyclists (59%) would likely
experience increased safety. For vehicles, this opinion was divided at 50% thinking the
living lab would create safer and more predictable interactions.
Participants identified their modes of transportation (all that applied) to access the
core. These results showed that preferred modalities rank as:
Car (396)
Pedestrians with or without a mobility aid (396)
Cycling (275)
Bus (203)
Of the techniques used to increase user safety, participants demonstrated preference
toward:
Dedicated bike lanes (277)
Shortened crosswalks (251)
Widened pedestrian walkways (189)
Tactics like parallel parking (156) and counter-flow bike lanes (140) ranked lower. It
should be noted that there was not a choice to select if a participant did not like any of
these options, and we received this comment a couple of times in the area to provide
additional feedback at the end of the questionnaire.
When asked about specific programming or mitigation ideas related to transit and
parking, participants demonstrated a stronger preference for ideas such as limiting
construction parking (343), installing drop-off/pick-up spots (235), and developing
progressive timing structures for parking (217) than ideas like increased parking fees
(101) or an enhanced valet program (95).
Similarly, programming ideas related to enhancing the Downtowner and Galena
shuttle services witnessed more support than options of additional We-cycle stations
or bus stops.
In particular, participants responses resulted with:
70% support extended hours of the Downtowner service
71.5% support for summer season Galena Street shuttle service
67% support for extending evening hours of the Galena Street shuttle
However, when asked about additional stops for the Galena Street service, support
was only at 54%. An on-demand service from the Rio Grande parking garage to a core-
specific route received 57% approval. Support for additional We-Cycle stations was
split at 50% and the idea of providing a hail system rather than scheduling through an
app was only supported by 48% of the participants.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 5 71
Common Concerns and Comment Themes
While sharing details about what made the Downtown Core feel unsafe many referred
to interactions between cars and pedestrians, bikes and pedestrians, and cars and
pedestrians.
Concerns related to cars and busses included:
Pulling out of parking spaces or into intersections without looking
Opening doors into cyclists or pedestrians
Aggressive driving or speeding
Running red lights or stop signs
Turning when the green arrow is not lit (Main Street)
Going the wrong way on a one-way street
Driving on ped- bikeway.
Concerns related to cyclists included:
Ignoring basic traffic rules
Riding against or weaving through traffic
Riding on sidewalks and the mall/not dismounting when required
Ebikes going too fast or acting unpredictably
Groups riding side-by-side or as a pack rather than in a row
Concerns related to pedestrians included:
Jaywalking and darting out from between parked cars
Actively walking in the streets
Not paying attention to surroundings or vehicles
Assuming right-of-way at all times
Not checking traffic to slow or stop before stepping into
crosswalks/intersections
Additionally, several themes in the comments shared emerged, including:
A lack of visibility at night to see pedestrians or cyclists
Blocked views from larger parked vehicles or vehicles too close to
intersections
Challenges of navigating icy roads and sidewalks (inability for cars to stop
suddenly, street less icy or snowy for pedestrians to walk on than sidewalk)
Enforcement to curb undesirable behavior from each modality
A general distraction of all users (on the phone, taking pictures, looking for
parking or destination rather than traffic)
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 6 72
As mentioned previously, the comment section of the questionnaire shared a wide
variety of mixed opinions. The summary below is very high-level but several key areas
emerged which received equal amounts of support and resistance to an idea or
approach. Please refer to the complete list of feedback and comments included in
the “Questionnaire” section of this report.
The Living Lab
o General support for increasing safety, although ideas on how to achieve
that vary greatly
o Appreciation for designated spaces like a barrier to bike lane and wider
sidewalks to help clarify space for all users
o Acknowledgement that a living lab will provide an opportunity to test
ideas out before more permanent installation or investment is
undertaken
o Mixed reviews on both counter-flow bike lanes and parallel parking in
particular
o Participants wanted to make sure their voice was heard that they do not
support the living lab, often this sentiment was connected to concerns
about parking
o A connections that the living lab will likely benefit from supplemental
transit programming such as enhanced shuttle or bus services
Parking
o Parking is polarizing
o Passionate and vocal concerns expressed about loss of parking in the
core, and the potential impact on businesses or core access for those
who choose or need to travel by car
o Other participants eagerly expressed a desire to remove cars from the
core entirely for an expanded pedestrian mall, or at least additional
streets/sections.
o Mixed opinions and ideas on programming approaches such as timing or
fees and whether these would help or hurt
Cycling
o Bike and ebike behavior rise to the top of audiences that need more
education, including onus on rental shops to help
o Suggestions to remove cycling from the core, create additional bike
parking areas or bike routes around the core
o Should move in same direction with same expectations as vehicular
traffic
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 7 73
Balancing Multiple User Needs
o Some support for enhancing pedestrian and cyclist space, but
acknowledgment that balance is needed as cars are also part of this
ecosystem
o Scheduling “no car” days or times so there are pedestrian only
opportunities without fully limiting car access at other times
o Any changes should recognize different usage or volumes in different
seasons (e.g., more car travelers in summer)
o Enhancing transit options or incentives to bring less cars into town
Awareness, Education and Enforcement
o All users need to heighten their awareness when in the core – how they
use it, how they impact others, and watching out for oneself when
others aren’t paying attention
o Many list enforcement as a thought on how to to fix issues
Ideas and Comments
The majority of feedback was submitted through either the questionnaire or in one of
two focus groups; however, two people contributed comments to the “Questions and
Comments” tab on Aspen Community Voice. Both comments are included in the
detailed “Ideas and Comments" section alongside feedback captured from direct
emails.
Focus Groups
This summary intends to share the general sentiments at the focus groups, not to
interpret what this feedback means.
Of the 452 questionnaire respondents, 124 indicated a willingness to participate in a
follow-up focus group. An email invitation was sent to approximately 102, and 23
responded that they could attend on at the scheduled times or were interested in a
potential future session. The project team hosted two virtual focus groups on January
31 at 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. Ultimately, 16 participants participated, and a list of 7 expressed
input through email or would be willing to attend a future session if need is
determined.
Participants could express interest through a question for follow-up in the
questionnaire. As the second phase of engagement for this project was focused on
the business community, including specific conversations one-on-one or in a small
group with businesses, the intent for these discussions was to include a mix of
residents (17), business owners (3), and down valley commuters (1); participants could
identify as being more than one category (e.g., resident and business owner).
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 8 74
Each focus group followed the same discussion format:
Welcome
Purpose of Meeting Review
Meeting Agreements
Introductions
Brief Project Background
Discussion about the Proposed Living Lab
Rapid Response Round (Education, Balancing Multiple User Needs with Limited
Space, and/or What Do You Want to Make Sure We Hear Today)
Next Steps
Meeting Highlights
The bulk of the discussion was focused on feelings and thoughts about the proposed
living lab located along Galena and Cooper. The focus group participants were asked
to answer the following questions:
Discussion on about the Proposed Living Lab
Rapid Response Round (Education, Balancing Multiple User Needs with
Limited Space, and/or What Do You Want to Make Sure We Hear Today)
While feedback from the focus groups was consistent with that obtained through the
questionnaire and earlier business outreach, there was general consensus that
everyone wanted to make the Downtown Core safer, particularly the safety of
pedestrians. Likewise, there was some agreement that a solution would require
compromise as there are multiple perspectives on how best to achieve safety.
Parking, like questionnaire results and earlier outreach conversations revealed,
demonstrated itself to be a hot topic with polarizing views. Businesses and several
residents in attendance expressed strong concern for any lost of parking in the core
due to potential detrimental consequences on local businesses and residents parking
being reclassified. Others in the group expressed interest in removing cars from the
core entirely. Most agreed that longer term solutions related to parking need to be
explored beyond the living lab. However, discussion also illustrated that there are
many reasons for people to have cars aside from convenience like lack of shuttle
service in their area, part of a job, need for deliveries or service, or just feeling safer
being able to go door to door. Most agreed that cars are not going away anytime
soon, even if some may prefer that, so balance is needed.
Types of parking also received attention. To parallel park or not to parallel park was
the question. Pros and cons for this parking method also brought some polite debate.
In addition to street parking, many participants expressed interest in the City looking
at additional parking garage space either in town or down valley.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 9 75
Mobility, and other aspect of this project, was touched on as it related to how people
access the core and the impacts those modes have on complicating a single vision for
a solution. Cyclists emerged as both those who would benefit from aspects of the
living lab, but also some who contribute to the challenges. The living lab offers
infrastructure that helps define space for all users, like a bike lane, and this makes
cyclists feel safer traveling through town. Various opinions were shared on the counter
flow bike lane ideas as some preferred this, others felt cyclists follow the flow of traffic
and same road rules as cars, particularly as this is often the case I other areas around
the community.
Education for cyclists, particularly tourists or biking, was an agreed need. Several
participants pointed out that awareness in general – whatever your mode of travel – is
necessary. This education applies to changes made if the living lab is implemented as
well as in general. Messaging should be consistent across all connection points (City,
bike or car rental shops, visitor information) and be simple, so it sticks. Enforcement
was touched on slightly as another means to help enhance safety. Primarily, additional
presence or regulation of reckless behaviors. One participant stated that proactive
prevention with education would help reduce the need for enforcement.
Wayfinding as a way to help educate all modalities surfaced. It was noted more than
once that people find their way into town easily, however all can get confused in the
core or how to navigate it better. This related to where bikes should go from trails to
use of one-way streets.
Several of the participants identified a tie between this project and their passion for
environmental health. This led to some discussion on if Aspen could do more to limit
cars coming into town through transit options and incentives or providing more
parking down valley.
A complete list of feedback recorded during the session or emailed to the project
team by a participant the next day, is included as part of this engagement response
report. Please review that list in the “Focus Group” section for more detailed feedback
from participants.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 10 76
DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS
Print and Digital
Press Release
January 19, 2022: City Seeks Additional Community Feedback on Safety and
Mobility in the Downtown Core Project
City of Aspen Website
Homepage Newsflash: January 19-26, 2022
News Page: City Seeks Additional Community Feedback on Safety and Mobility in
the Downtown Core Project
Aspen Community Voice Project Page
Media Coverage
Aspen Daily News: January 21, 2022
Aspen Times: January 21, 2022
Print Ads
Aspen Times: ¼ Ads on January 16, January 19, January 22 and January 24
Aspen Daily News: ¼ Ads on January 16, January 19 and January 24
Digital Ads
Aspen Times: 30K Impressions in standard slots, January 14-26, 2022
Aspen Daily News: 300x250 slot, January 14-21, 2022
Email
ACV
January 5, 2022: Engage with Us
Promoting both Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core and Lumberyard
Questionnaires
2,568 Sent
1,754 Open Rate
271 Click Through
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 11 77
January 14, 2022: Take the Survey
Included small promotion inside Lumberyard Questionnaire email
2,560 Sent
1,619 Open Rate
237 Click Through
January 14, 2022: One Day Left to take the Safety and Mobility
in the Downtown Core Questionnaire
2,523 Sent
1,472 Open Rate
267 Click Through
Other
ACRA Membership Newsletter - January 5 and January 19, 2022 issues
Pitkin County Internal Staff Newsletter - January 2022
Social Media
Facebook
January 5, 2022: Engage with Us
Link to ACV for both Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core and Lumberyard
Questionnaires
199 Post Impressions
193 Post Reach
35 Post Engagement
January 10, 2022: Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core Questionnaire
535 Post Impressions
518 Post Reach
39 Post Engagement
January 25, 2022: One Day Left Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core
Questionnaire
557 Post Impressions
544 Post Reach
8 Post Engagement
Email - continued
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 12 78
Instagram
January 5, 2022: Engage with Us
Link to ACV for both Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core and Lumberyard
Questionnaires
283 Post Impressions
263 Post Reach
3 Post Interactions
January 10, 2022: Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core Questionnaire
350 Post Impressions
326 Post Reach
7 Post Interactions
January 25, 2022: One Day Left Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core
Questionnaire
211 Post Impressions
196 Post Reach
2 Post Interactions
Twitter
January 5, 2022: Engage with Us
Link to ACV for both Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core and Lumberyard
Questionnaires
201 Post Impressions
46 Media Views
4 Total Engagements
January 10, 2022: Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core Questionnaire
187 Post Impressions
January 25, 2022: One Day Left Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core
Questionnaire
115 Post Impressions
2 Total Engagements
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 13 79
Aspen Community Voice Page
Visitor Summary
Highlights
TOTAL
VISITS
943
MAX VISITORS PER DAY
223
NEW
REGISTRATIONS
4
ENGAGED
VISITORS
443
INFORMED
VISITORS
574
AWARE
VISITORS
781
Pageviews Visitors
10 Jan '22 24 Jan '22
200
400
600
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 14 80
Participant Summary
ENGAGED
INFORMED
AWARE
443 ENGAGED PARTICIPANTS
000
393049
000
000
000
000
011
000
000
Registered Unverified Anonymous
Contributed on Forums
Participated in Surveys
Contributed to Newsfeeds
Participated in Quick Polls
Posted on Guestbooks
Contributed to Stories
Asked Questions
Placed Pins on Places
Contributed to Ideas
* A single engaged participant can perform multiple actions
Safety & Mobility in the Down…443 (56.7%)
(%)
* Calculated as a percentage of total visits to the Project
ENGAGED
INFORMED
AWARE
574 INFORMED PARTICIPANTS
0
0
4
0
0
0
141
443
Participants
Viewed a video
Viewed a photo
Downloaded a document
Visited the Key Dates page
Visited an FAQ list Page
Visited Instagram Page
Visited Multiple Project Pages
Contributed to a tool (engaged)
* A single informed participant can perform multiple actions
Safety & Mobility in the Down…574 (73.5%)
(%)
* Calculated as a percentage of total visits to the Project
ENGAGED
INFORMED
AWARE
781 AWARE PARTICIPANTS
781
Participants
Visited at least one Page
* Aware user could have also performed an Informed or Engaged Action
781Safety & Mobility in the Down…
* Total list of unique visitors to the project
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 15 81
Engagement Tools Summary
Information Widget Summary
SURVEYS SUMMARY TOP 3 SURVEYS BASED ON CONTRIBUTORS
0
FORUM TOPICS
2
SURVEYS
0
NEWS FEEDS
0
QUICK POLLS
0
GUESTBOOKS
0
STORIES
1
Q&A'S
0
PLACES
2 Surveys
442 Contributors
452 Submissions
442
Contributors to
Winter 2022: Safety and
Mobility in the Downtown Core
Questionnaire
DOCUMENTS TOP 3 DOCUMENTS BASED ON DOWNLOADS
6
DOCUMENTS
0
PHOTOS
0
VIDEOS
0
FAQS
0
KEY DATES
6 Documents
4 Visitors
9 Downloads
3
Downloads
12.01.2021 | ACRA
Membership Meeting
Presentation
3
Downloads
08.23.2021 | Informational
Memo to Council
1
Downloads
01.29.2021 Memo to Council
for February 1 Work Session
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 16 82
Traffic Sources Summary
REFERRER URL Visits
www.aspentimes.com 62
www.google.com 35
www.cityofaspen.com 11
partner.googleadservices.com 9
android-app 6
www.surveymonkey.com 4
l.facebook.com 3
link.edgepilot.com 3
m.facebook.com 2
admanager.google.com 2
cityofaspen.com 2
duckduckgo.com 1
em-ui.constantcontact.com 1
t.co 1
url.emailprotection.link 1
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 17 83
QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire Content
For over a year, the City of Aspen has been exploring how right-of-way (ROW) space
could be allocated differently to increase safety for all pedestrians, cyclists, and
drivers. The “Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core” project is a vision for a safe,
connected, and active downtown core in Aspen.
Incorporating the feedback solicited through City Council work sessions, a community
questionnaire in fall 2021, and several focus group discussions with members from the
Aspen Chamber Resort Association, the project team has refined a conceptual plan for
possible implementation starting in summer 2022.
The City now seeks additional feedback from our community, including residents,
commuters, businesses, and visitors, to identify and prioritize challenges and potential
solutions to enhance mobility and safety. Additionally, we need your input on a
proposed living lab for safety improvements in the Galena Corridor (Galena St. and
Cooper Ave. area).
We invite you to take this short questionnaire (approx. 7 minutes) to share your
thoughts and experiences of traveling in and around Aspen’s downtown core.
Information gathered here will be shared with City Council and help inform the
decisions made around a living lab planned for implementation in Summer 2022.
This survey will close on Wednesday, January 26, 2022, at 5 p.m.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 18 84
General Questions:
1. Please select the option(s) that best describes you (Select all that apply). *
a. Aspen resident
b. Aspen business owner
c. Downvalley Commuter
d. Visitor
e. Other – please specify
2. What types of transportation do you use to navigate through the core? (Select all
that apply). *
a. Car
b. Motorcycle
c. Bicycle
d. Pedestrian – Walking
e. Pedestrian – Mobility Aid (e.g., wheelchair, walker, etc.)
f. Bus
g. Ride Share/Taxi
h. Other – please specify
3. Have you experienced an interaction with a vehicle, pedestrian, or bicycle that felt
unsafe while navigating through the downtown core? *
a. Yes
b. No
4. If you answered yes to Question #3, please share what occurred that made you feel
unsafe.
5. There are many techniques or safety measures proven to increase user safety in
the roadway and to provide safe, dedicated space for all users. Many of these
measures have been installed in downtown Aspen. These measures consist of
things like curb extensions which improve sightlines and shorten crosswalks to
decrease pedestrian time in the vehicular path, counter flow bike lanes which offer
safe connection for cyclists on one-way streets, and widened sidewalks which allow
for improved mobility and modified parking configurations that improve sightlines.
Please select all safety measures, listed below, that you would support
implementing and testing for the summer 2022 season to improve safety for the
traveling public in the downtown core. *
a. Dedicated bike lanes (safe dedicated space for cyclists in the roadway)
b. Protected counter-flow bike lanes (bike lanes run the opposite direction of
one-way vehicular traffic flow)
c. Widened pedestrian walkways
d. Shortened crosswalks (decrease time pedestrians are in the vehicle path)
e. Parallel parking (improve sight lines between cyclists and parked vehicles)
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 19 85
6. Research and implementation show that by providing safe, dedicated space in the
right-of-way (ROW) for all modal types in a multimodal corridor (pedestrians,
bicycles, and vehicles), the safety for all users is indirectly increased. When each
user has safe, dedicated space in the ROW, safer and more predictable
interactions can occur. Redistributing space in the ROW from parking spaces to
widened pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle lanes can facilitate these safer
interactions by improving visibility and mobility for pedestrians and cyclists.
Would you support redistributing the space in the ROW to temporarily test safety
measures in Aspen over the summer 2022 in the downtown core? *
a. Yes
b. No
Living Lab Intro Page:
As part of the Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core Project, a living lab is being
proposed for implementation during the 2022 Summer Season. A living lab is the
installation of temporary improvements to the roadway that allow the community to
“test” the improvements and for staff to gather data and feedback on the success of
the improvements.
The proposed living lab consists of safety improvements on the Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue one-way streets in the core, shown in this map.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 20 86
Living Lab Specific Questions:
7.Over the past year, several conceptual designs were considered for the living lab
based on roadway design standards and innovative mobility options. The preferred
living lab concept is shown below and consists of widened pedestrian areas,
counter-flow bike lanes, and parallel parking. This concept balances the space
dedicated to all users to improve safety this corridor.
Please rate your favorability of implementing and testing this specific safety
improvement concept on a scale from 1-5 (1 indicates less favorable, 5 indicates
more favorable) during the summer 2022 season. *
a.Definitely Favorable
b. Favorable
c.Neither Favorable or Unfavorable
d. Unfavorable
e.Definitely Unfavorable
8.In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown
above in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable
interactions for Pedestrians? *
a.Yes
b.No
9.In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown
above in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable
interactions for Cyclists? *
a.Yes
b.No
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 21 87
10. In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown
above in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable
interactions for Vehicles? *
a. Yes
b. No
Parking Mitigation Measures Questions:
In addition to the infrastructure modifications to the ROW, a parking mitigation plan is
being proposed that addresses parking space availability (or turnover of parking
spaces) in the downtown core.
11. Please select all the options you would support to offset parking impacts and
maintain current parking occupancy numbers in the core. *
a. Limit construction vehicle parking in the living lab area (Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue one-way streets) for the duration of the testing phase
(approx. May to October 2022)
b. Enhance the existing valet parking program
c. Install additional pick up/drop off locations near high use areas
(pharmacies, banks, etc.)
d. Implement a progressive timing structure where high demand parking areas
limit maximum parking times (e.g., 2 hours instead of the current 4 hours)
and parking areas allow with less demand allow longer parking time (e.g.,
current 4 hours)
e. Implement a progressive fee structure where high demand parking areas
have higher hourly fees and parking areas of less demand have lower hourly
fees
Transit Mitigation Measures Questions:
Transit mitigation measures are also being proposed as part of the living lab to assist
navigating through the downtown core. At this time, the plan does not increase or
enhance transit services into town, just those serving the core.
Please indicate below which, if any, of the following proposed transit mitigation
options you would support implementing as part of this safety improvement living lab.
12. On-demand service enhancements: Provide a hail system within the core, rather
than schedule through an app. *
a. Yes
b. No
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 22 88
13. On-demand service enhancements: Dedicate an on-demand vehicle for service
from Rio Grande parking garage to the core – specific route. *
a. Yes
b. No
14. On-demand service enhancements: Extend hours of Downtowner services. *
a. Yes
b. No
15. We-cycle: Install station within the living lab boundary. *
a. Yes
b. No
16. Increased Galena St shuttle service: Additional bus stop locations. *
a. Yes
b. No
17. Increased Galena St shuttle service: Shuttle service during summer season. *
a. Yes
b. No
18. Increased Galena St shuttle service: Extend hours later into the evenings. *
a. Yes
b. No
19. Please provide the project managers with any additional feedback regarding
the Safety and Mobility in the Downtown Core living lab project.
20. Would you be interested in participating in a 60-minute focus group (virtual or
in-person TBD) in late January to further explore the Mobility and Safety in the
Core preferred option?
a. Yes
b. No
21. If you answered yes above, please provide us with your contact information
(optional).
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 23 89
COMPLETE
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 24 90
Q1 Please select the option(s) that best describe you (select all that apply).
Aspen resident Aspen business owner Downvalley commuter Visitor Other (please specify)
Question options
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350 328
81
74
13
28
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Checkbox Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 25 91
Q2 What types of transportation do you use to navigate through the Downtown Core (select
all that apply)?
Car Motorcycle Bicycle Pedestrian - walking Pedestrian - mobility aid (e.g., wheelchair, walker, etc.)
Bus Rideshare/Taxi Other (please specify)
Question options
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
396
30
275
386
10
203
66
26
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Checkbox Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 26 92
Q3 Have you experienced an interaction with a vehicle, pedestrian, or bicycle that felt unsafe
while navigating through the Downtown Core?
331 (73.2%)
331 (73.2%)
121 (26.8%)
121 (26.8%)
Yes No
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 27 93
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 11:04 AM
bike and car interactions
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 11:16 AM
I have had cars not see me as a pedestrian as well as had
pedestrians not pay attention to me in a car.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 11:22 AM
Poor interactions between cars, bikers and peds can occur,
specifically when a car pulls out.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 12:04 PM
Close calls as a biker with cars pulling out of parking spaces. Also it
is very difficult to see around angle head in parking spaces as a
cyclists, driver or pedestrian at intersections to cross the street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 02:40 PM
I was nearly hit by a car not paying attention at an intersection
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:33 PM
Tourists walking into the street to take selfies
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:37 PM
Cars never stop at pedestrian crossings
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:41 PM
cars not stopping for pedestrians crossing streets
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:42 PM
Cars not stopping at crosswalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:44 PM
As a pedestrian and bicyclist, I have to be extra careful about cars
that are not aware of their surroundings. As a bicyclist I am ashamed
that others on bikes are so cavalier about cruising through town. As a
driver, people walking and texting and generally unaware is equally
unnerving!
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:49 PM
Short crosswalk times.
Q4 If you answered "Yes" to Question #3 above, please share what occurred that made you
feel unsafe.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 28 94
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:55 PM
Crossing the intersection of Monarch and Hopkins on foot at night I
have nearly been hit by a car multiple times. In addition while driving
downtown I have nearly hit bikers with my car because they rarely
stop at stop signs and often ride while shooting across pedestrian
crosswalks.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:55 PM
I've seen cars driving well above the speed limit & driving very
aggressively—to the point where stopping for a pedestrian in the
cross walk was difficult. I've seen cars flat out ignore cross walk
flashing lights and continue through an intersection. I always wait until
cars completely stop before I enter a crosswalk and have had to
pause/backpedal when it's unclear whether the driver is going stop.
There just seems to be a fairly pervasive sense of absentmindedness
with drivers. As a cyclist myself, I have a bit of a pet peeve when
other bikers ignore stop signs and traffic signals, and reacting to such
behavior while driving is terrifying and difficult. I've also personally
had driving instances where pedestrians are trying to cross main
street at night and are all but invisible. Any place without flashers can
sometimes be nearly impossible to see people waiting.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:10 PM
Pedestrians taking their right-of-way a little too liberally. Looking at
phones while stepping into crosswalks, standing in streets to take
photos, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:11 PM
Near the police station-and other parts of town--carrs do not stop--
plus the crosswalks are all ice and dangerous in the winter
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:22 PM
A car that I didn't see and didn't see me
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:38 PM
Drivers and pedestrians not paying attention
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:38 PM
Failure to yield to pedestrians, even at crosswalks with flashing
signals.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:53 PM
Biking through the downtown core to the East of Aspen Trail. I
commute around town using my bike and Durant Ave is especially
hard with the busses and cars. Crossing Mill street to get to the
Library from the West end is especially tricky. (do I cross at the cross
walk or is that just for pedestrians?) Getting to City Market again on
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 29 95
Durant Avenue. This isn't in the downtown core but last summer I've
had cars follow me on the bike/pedestrian only Hopkins. They try to
pass but they get blocked by the signs and then finally get close to
the end and try to merge into Main st.. Very annoying, especially
when you have kids biking with you.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:56 PM
During high season, there are people that walk into the streets acting
as if they aren't actually active streets. They are on their phones in
the street - not paying attention. One can only drive a few miles an
hour to feel safe that they won't hit a pedestrian, biker, or a car that is
backing out of a diagonal space. Often there are large vans/trucks
parked that obstruct the view at stop signs or when backing up.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:58 PM
I've had a few cases while riding my bike that drivers made
unexpected and unsignaled turns in front of me or pulled out from a
stop sign into my path.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 06:17 PM
I live near 8th st and cross often near the bus stops. Cars are entering
town very quickly here and often don't stop when the lights go on at
the crossing. I bike a lot and in the winter the plowing on both the
roads and the sidewalks is very poor and makes cycling difficult. It
would be great to have safe cycling options year round.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 06:36 PM
Cars not obeying traffic laws, not looking out for bikes
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 07:13 PM
People walk in the middle of the street in winter and summer without
paying any attention to bikes, cars or buses!
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 07:40 PM
I’ve felt most unsafe at the four way at Cooper street and original
street, next to city market going up the pass. There has to be better
signage for pedestrians crossing the roads and to inform cars of
pedestrians. I’ve been *almost* hit at this four way more times than
I’d like
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 08:34 PM
I was parked on Cooper in front of City Market, on South side of
street where you parallel park and opened my door and hit a biker.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 09:01 PM
The crosswalk light is broken at Hopkins and Original, which makes it
quite scary to cross as a pedestrian in the winter with the roads being
slick.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 30 96
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 09:30 PM
Drivers in cars not paying attention to signage, pedestrian right of
ways, and bicycle lanes.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 07:15 AM
Cars/trucks running stop signs, car doors opening while on a bike,
drivers and pedestrians on cell phones not looking when going
through intersections.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 08:26 AM
There's no one incident. It happens all the time. As a pedestrian or
cyclist, I don't feel safe at intersections. There's too much going on --
drivers are distracted. I hold back from entering intersections (even if I
have the right of way) unless I have locked eyes with the driver. It's at
its worst at high season. Over winter break, in the course of 15
minutes I witnessed a driver at the White Tavern intersection make a
RIGHT-handed U-turn (figure that one out) and on Main Street at the
Carl's Pharmacy intersection had a car to the left of me turn right in
front of me (I was in the right hand lane) to curve back to get onto a
cross street. Thank goodness I was in a car in those two examples.
It's nuts out there.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 08:33 AM
People standing in the middle of the street with no regard to
oncoming cars or traffic.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 08:44 AM
Aspen Country Inn residents CANNOT even cross the highway 82 to
reach the walking/biking path just across the street, or to reach the
bus or return from the downtown core by bus. Four lanes of traffic
going 50-55-60 miles per hour is impossible to navigate on ice/snow,
especially in darkness. NO SIGNS are posted. A SIMPLE solution is
to PLOW the small old road leading to the abandoned Maroon Creek
Bridge (occassionally now tracked for xc skiing) which is NOT tracked
for walking. Deep snow now negates any travel by foot. If we could
get over the old bridge, we could use the Truscott tunnel to get across
the highway. Was told by City and County staff that the STATE would
not allow plowing that small (one or two block road?) to make life
safer for employees and seniors. Nevermind, it is FINE to track the
old bridge for skiers. Is this equal treatment?
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 09:37 AM
Jaywalkers, bikes going wrong way down streets and people basically
not obeying laws of parking (unregistered scooters, e-bikes and
unlicensed and uninsured vehicles parking and driving without license
plates). No police enforcement of any rules of the road. Street signs
that are not accurate, (on every corner a sign says 'No Parking' but it
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 31 97
should say 2 scooters, motorcycles or e-bikes per corner. The signs
near the entrance to town say the speed limit in town is 20 MPH yet it
is 25 MPH on that very road where this misleading sign is located.
Last year when the city of Aspen told Google maps and other internet
driving apps that Highway 82 was closed when it wasn't, was and is
extremely bad form and should be a lesson that Aspen is not a good
neighbor. The Parking Department should be enforcing all parking
rules not selectively waiting for a complaint to issue a warning. There
are cars all over town that haven't moved in weeks and are covered
in snow and make it hard to walk and drive down the streets. Start
enforcing the rules of the road!!
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 09:51 AM
I have been hit twice by drivers looking left before making a right turn
and ignoring me as a pedestrian crossing from the right.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:03 AM
Cars proceeding through a red light at an intersection- new meaning
to “long yellow”. Protected left turn green arrow already on. Cars
doing u-turns in the middle of Main Street. Unsignalled lane changes
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:03 AM
Traffic light on main st. by the Jerome. Cars going through the green
light/arrow for cars turning left. Was nearly hit by driver racing through
when I had the green arrow.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:10 AM
A women having an altercation parking at City Market, backed out on
to Spring Street too quickly, then gunned her engine and sped blindly
around the corner of Spring and Cooper streets, as a friend and I
stood on the southeast corner of that intersection. It was an obviously
dangerous reaction to her parking difficulties.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:13 AM
The stop signs are not prominent. The name on the street signs are
difficult to read or see. The intersections need more street lights.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:25 AM
On a near daily basis my life is put in danger by drivers going too fast
and ignoring road rules. The police do not enforce the law to keep
these drivers in check. Aspen is not a pedestrian or bike friendly
place once the summer crowds dim.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 12:38 PM
The most repetitive interaction is at the 4 way stops on either side of
City Market to the east. There is no sidewalk on the southeast corner
of the Cooper intersection. It is very poorly lit and cars do not stop,
particularly at night when all they are looking for are other car
hedlamps.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 32 98
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 01:32 PM
Cars pulling out of parking spaces
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 01:49 PM
visitors walking into street carelessly
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 02:38 PM
Pedestrian and vehicles don't always looks for each other.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 02:59 PM
Cars not paying close attention to cyclist or realizing that the road is
shared w/ cyclist.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 03:00 PM
Usually when I feel unsafe in the core it is either when I am driving or
walking and people don't understand that vehicles can't stop quickly
when the roads are icy. I have worried about hitting people who walk
out in front of me assuming I can stop, and have also been nervous
drivers don't anticipate a longer stop distance.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 03:17 PM
I find regularly that other drivers/riders are driving too quickly and not
paying attention to signage in crosswalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 03:39 PM
Driving an automobile or walking around the downtown core,
particularly at night, is definitely unsafe. Lack to proper lighting at
night, and voluminous traffic congestion day and night on Main St and
other roads (those shared with buses are really scary) contribute to a
dangerous condition for pedestrians, bikers, and drivers as well.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:18 PM
Cars not stopping for pedestrians in crosswalk
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:30 PM
Biking and walking in the core is uncomfortable. while biking you have
to constantly be on guard for cars backing out. Sidewalks are narrow
for the amount of people. If you get stuck behind a slow walker you
cannot pass them easily. In the winter the snow makes the walkways
even more narrow. For the most part cars drive slowly and are
watching for pedestrians but pedestrians usually don't pay attention
and cross wherever they see fit.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 33 99
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:46 PM
Multiple bike-car and pedestrian-car incidents.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:51 PM
Folks not paying attention in general - cars backing out of parking
spaces without looking, folks walking erratically.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:53 PM
Lack of attention has lead to several near misses in and around the
mall, especially during the peak seasons.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 05:10 PM
I have been hit by a car while in a crosswalk as a pedestrian -
thankfully uninjured. Have had several near misses at the intersection
near City Market. Biking is fraught with peril, no matter how defensive
you are.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 05:14 PM
I have seen many instances downtown of entitled people not paying
attention even to the large flashing yellow lights at crosswalks. I have
also seen pedestrians and bicycles (mainly bicycles) almost get hit on
the ped trail at the intersection of N 8th street. Almost every car pulls
right up past the stop sign and into the bike/ped trail. Bicyclists going
the wrong way on Galena Street and then berating you for using the
crosswalks. Bicyclists rolling on the sidewalks because it sure as hell
isn't safe to bike on main street even with a 25 mph speed limit. So
it's a toss up at that point be mad at the bicyclist trying to be safer or
be mad that we can't even bike around our own town without fear of
being hit. Now onto vehicles: people treat downtown like we're still on
82, like where are you going so fast in your G wagon good buddy? I
almost witnessed a person in a wheelchair and his child at the Main
and Hunter flashing lights get hit by a car. I've almost been hit by a
car at the main and hunter flashing light crosswalk. It is wholly unsafe
to even use the crosswalks with the blaring lights in town because
people are just not paying attention. Another factor that makes main
street unsafe is people park 5 feet away from the curb and just swing
their doors wide open into the street without even looking causing
people paying attention to have to slow down, stop, or change lanes
in a hurry. Additionally, the Jerome constantly has vehicles hanging
out the side of their little pull in spot and it's a pretty big hindrance to
other vehicle traffic. As much as angle parking sucks for being able to
see around cars the parallel parking situation is a nightmare when
people park 5 feet away from the curb and start getting out into the
lanes. I think that's it.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 06:24 PM
frequent conflicts over cross-walks, cars backing from head-in
parking, stop sign protocols, cars speeding, cars running signals and
signs, cars and shuttles double parked, and generally poor right-of-
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 34 100
way sharing. it seems like people in cars don't realize they are
dangerous to others.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 06:25 PM
Autos do not often recognize or yield to pedestrians
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 08:06 PM
I have had some close calls as a pedestrian crossing intersections.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 09:08 PM
Driving thru the core, a family with 2 dogs and a baby stroller walked
in front of my car without looking up from their phones - rather
shocking. I do my best to find a way to not cross the street in the
Commercial Core while walking. I have specific streets I ride on with
my bike and attempt to avoid the core - no one is paying attention,
and the places to stop or move forward without a stop don't make any
sense.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 07:47 AM
I had a hard time seeing the lights flashing when a pedestrian was
crossing the road, and I had to slam on the breaks. Vice versa, I have
also been the pedestrian that has almost been hit by drivers who are
not paying proper attention to their surroundings.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 07:49 AM
Cars trying to turn right on Galena at the Elks building when it is a
one way only. I have had to stop vehicles many times from turning the
wrong direction.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 08:57 AM
I've seen cars ignore the red light at Galena while traveling east on
Main. I've also experienced cars unable to stop/slide into the cross
walk due to ice/snow. I won't use the crosswalks with flashing lights to
cross Main street because too often people don't stop, I only cross at
an intersection with a traffic light. I do think there are some
pedestrians that could pay better attention, but most of the issues I
see involve vehicles.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 09:07 AM
Pedestrians and bicyclists crossing street without looking outside of
crosswalk. It is dangerous when Bicycles "run" stop signs and/or
stoplights without first checking the flow/direction of traffic and their
surroundings.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 09:09 AM
Cyclists treat the road as if they own it and pedestrians do not yield to
traffic that may not see them. I've had multiple occasions where a
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 35 101
cyclist or pedestrian has shot out in front of me and I've almost hit
them (not in a cross walk or designated crossing area). I do not like
the idea of loosing more parking spaces and further curtailing streets
to cyclists & pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 10:07 AM
cars, people, bikes proceeding through crosswalks without regard
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 10:26 AM
biking through intersections and on street
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 10:52 AM
I've almost been hit by a car in the crosswalk multiple times. As a
driver, I experience pedestrians walking everywhere, outside of
crosswalks, along the street, in crosswalks during a red light, etc.
which is hard to navigate in a car. Bicycles run stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 10:56 AM
While in crosswalk, cars backing out of parking spaces.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 11:29 AM
Mostly run in's with cyclists, going the wrong way down Galena,
primarily at the intersection of Hyman and Galena.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 12:39 PM
Drivers not stopping at stop signs or cross walks. Bicycles going
through stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 12:42 PM
Drivers not paying attention, Bikers not paying attention and driving
down the sidewalk, walkers not paying attention - standing in the
middle of the street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:05 PM
I have many times been in a cross walk when the car seemed not to
see me and stopped just in time
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:15 PM
Bicyclists riding the wrong way on the Galena/Cooper corridor, and
those who blow through stop signs. Angled parking on both sides,
coupled with the narrow street (especially in winter) make it
challenging when backing out of parking spaces, and avoiding others
who are doing so. Pedestrians (primarily tourists) who walk down the
middle of the street "rubber-necking" or taking pictures. Aggressive
taxi and limo drivers who drive too fast and park illegally.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 36 102
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:46 PM
Walking across the crosswalk and cars not stopping or yielding.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 04:21 PM
Cars don't yield to pedestrians in the core. When town gets busy, I
avoid downtown because of how unsafe it is.
Screen Name Redacted
1/08/2022 04:58 PM
When town is busy, I slow down and use more care when driving,
biking, walking, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/08/2022 04:59 PM
Bicyclists tend to run stop signs and expect cars to yield
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 10:51 AM
Cars either ignoring or not noticing traffic laws. Since they are the
biggest threat to a pedestrian or bikers safety, they are very
intimidating when you can't predict their actions when they don't
follow traffic laws.
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 11:52 AM
Mostly tourists that aren't paying attention.
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 12:00 PM
Car moving too fast, driver not paying attention to pedestrians
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 04:34 PM
Visitors walking all over the place in the middle of the streets, bicycles
driving through the walking malls, visitor vehicles parking on
sidewalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 05:41 PM
Frequently I feel unsafe both driving and walking because of careless
drivers that are going to fast, not paying attention, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 09:47 AM
I've felt unsafe biking and walking through the core on a regular basis.
I feel like vehicles don't see me and are focused on finding a parking
space rather than watching for peds/bikes.
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 01:14 PM
Pedestrians don’t abide by crosswalks, they wander in the middle of
streets Bicycles don’t ride safely or use rules that apply to them.
Visitors don’t use proper rules of the roads, they don’t use stop signs.
Electric Bicyclist ride in the middle of sidewalks making it unsafe for
pedestrians. They also wander around town with no clue of where to
go.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 37 103
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 04:28 PM
always on my bike
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 04:40 PM
Almost hit by cars crossing at crosswalks numerous times and also
almost hit by bicycles on sidewalks numerous times. As a driver, I
have had many pedestrians cross in front of me without looking while
not inside a crosswalk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 08:18 AM
Cars not stopping for pedestrians in crosswalks on Main St, in
particular Main/Hunter. Cars in core not attentive to bicycles and
pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 09:46 AM
The drivers do not yield to pedestrians even in cross walks with
flashing lights. The one in front of the police station is very bad with
drivers pulling out onto main while main is stopped for the pedestrian.
The lights at the Jerome are the worst and have been the 25 years I
have lived here. The cars turning down mill towards clarks do not
yield. These danger zones need to be a 4 way stop to allow
pedestrians to cross any which way saftely. I have nearly been hit at
both of these intersections. Main street with 4 lanes has a lot going
on and then add people new to the area navigating the busy streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 10:18 AM
I often bike into town via the ped bike way. It drops you off at an
unsafe location on Aspen street where buses are coming fast down
the hill and it's hard to get going again after stopping power up the
hill. I usually have my kids in the bike trailer as well and from the end
of the ped bike way all the way through town it feels very dangerous
to bike in the street. Cars are backing out and I've almost been hit
multiple times. The sharrows don't seem to do anything! Please make
the downtown core a safe place to bike by limiting the cars backing
out and the narrow two way streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 03:12 PM
Pedestrians jaywalking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 03:22 PM
While walking or biking through the core, I commonly experience
drivers who are distracted and don't see me. This has resulted in
many close calls over the years.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 04:03 PM
Cars flying thru the town. Also as a driver when pedestrians do not
use the RRFBs
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 38 104
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 04:41 PM
Crossing at garmisch and main always feels unsafe
Screen Name Redacted
1/13/2022 08:45 AM
Bicyclists do not obey stop signs and cruise through intersections
(dangerous to cars and pedestrians); pedestrians do not look before
crossing through intersections (dangerous to cars and bicycles)
Screen Name Redacted
1/13/2022 07:02 PM
bicyclists passing too closely, not announcing their approach.
bicyclists not stopping at stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 05:00 PM
Cars running stop signs. Unsafe drivers when I’m walking or biking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 05:12 PM
I was trying to cross the road and was almost hit by a bus
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 06:06 PM
Cars not come to a full stop at stop signs while I have been crossing
on foot and also on my bike, nearly being hit on several occasions.
Cars backing out of diagonal spaces and not seeing me on my bike.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 06:33 PM
Every time I see TEXAS plates I say WTF
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 07:36 PM
Frequently vehicles do not slow down or stop for pedestrians
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 07:40 PM
Drivers on the phone, clueless pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 08:12 PM
Too much J - walking….. restaurants using public space for profit, not
good…. This forces already mentally challenged into the street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 09:27 PM
Speeding cars, pedestrians crossing streets looking at cell phones,
bicyclists not dismounting in appropriate zones
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 09:31 PM
Bicycle riders who feel they "own" the streets and don't have to follow
safe driving rules. Too often they don't stop at stop signs, including
the 4 way stop by City Market. Also, sometimes they cross in front of
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 39 105
cars, making sharp turns.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 11:22 PM
I am on the fire department, so I have responded to these issues;
however, I have not experienced anything that made me feel unsafe
on our streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 06:00 AM
As a born and raised Aspenite, who hopefully temporarily has had to
move down valley because there isn't enough affordable housing, I
have been biking in Aspen for over 35 years and pretty much every
ride in town feels sketchy because there are so many drivers that
don't pay attention, are on their phones and don't come to complete
stops at stop signs. To be fair, there are many bicyclists who are
equally clueless on their bikes; I've seen people on their phones,
blowing through stop signs and not paying attention and then of
course there's the uptick of clueless, unsafe, unskilled tourists on
rental bikes, so that's fun ha ha!
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 09:25 AM
Drivers coming from low visibility stop signs into the intersection with
too much speed- extra scary in winter conditions and also when on a
bike/skating
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 09:38 AM
Almost being run over by someone driving and not looking at where
they are going.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 10:35 AM
I am very careful when walking but if i must drive, bikers on electric
bikes will just pull out in front of you with no attention to stop signs
and right of ways. Also when walking, the number of drivers quickly
stopping at an intersection you are walking through, who are talking
on their phone, miss the pedestrian and just pull out as only looking
for cars. Most have rental plates on car. Do what Sydney Australia
had in place 30 years ago - it’s illegal to be on the phone while driving
- and hands free makes no difference- brain is elsewhere. I know the
aspen police don’t care for tourist enforcement but everyone needs to
be part of the solution to protect all. Even though I occasionally drive
in town for groceries or time crunch, i believe in our busy tourist
months, cars, scooters, and electric bikes should be banned in the
commercial core during peak hours - maybe 11- 4.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 01:14 PM
Driver of a car not noticing pedestrians and bicyclist in the
intersection
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 40 106
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 01:26 PM
Automobiles not stopping at stop signs/also cyclists not stopping at
stop signs and riding 2 or more abreast
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 06:30 PM
Dogs, bicycles, pedestrians not paying attention and lack of any
serious commitment from any City sector to enforce rules other than
install pointless signage. It is safer to use the alleys.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 06:35 PM
Parked cars Backing up Pedestrians crossing streets at all places.
Not enough cross walks nor directions for pedestrians to cross AT a
crosswalk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/17/2022 08:27 AM
Riding a bike in the core is difficult because of the angled parking,
cars pull out are often blind. When it’s snowing walking across Cross
walks is difficult bc of snow accumulations as well as cars driving
can’t always stop quickly and skid.
Screen Name Redacted
1/17/2022 09:35 AM
Its a daily occurrence of visitors speeding and disregarding stop signs
Screen Name Redacted
1/17/2022 10:37 AM
The intersection at Gondola Plaza (Hunter and Durant) is very
dangerous. I've been almost hit by cars and RFTA Buses on several
occasions. The Buses are aggressive and don't respect pedestrians
at all. Drivers are distracted, usually by cell phones, trying to make
the turns. Then there's all the skiers and drop offs. Of course, if there
was a logical and legitimate in town parking lot for skiers it would
make sense.
Screen Name Redacted
1/18/2022 08:27 AM
Erratic driving behaviors by other cars, double parking, sudden drive
off from curb without warning or looking for bicycles..... Pedestrians
watching phones, while crossing streets. It's Disney land !!!
Screen Name Redacted
1/18/2022 10:34 AM
Cars move very fast down main street. Stop lights stop them
(typically) but crosswalks with lights are risky and I've almost been hit
by a car speeding up fast when green light came on at Galena &
Main - almost hit me in front of police station. I've also almost been hit
by cars making turns onto Hopkins while I was in the cross walk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 01:07 PM
drivers not paying attention to pedestrians in general, nobody follows
the right of way rules at four-way stops
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 41 107
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 01:49 PM
Afraid vehicle won't stop; backing out of a space while biking
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 03:31 PM
I've seen cars go down the one way street in the wrong direction. I've
seen pedestrians walk across the middle of the street rather than at a
crosswalk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 04:45 PM
No street lights to see pedestrians or cyclists. Too dark. Cyclists don't
know where they should go...should they go in middle bike lane or
stay on the far lane...where do they turn? What does it mean to have
cars on some blocks and not on others. Not clear.
Screen Name Redacted
1/20/2022 10:37 AM
Crossing Main St, usually at Hunter and Main
Screen Name Redacted
1/20/2022 03:24 PM
Vehicles running stop signs, speeding. Peds texting while crossing.
Large families of bike renters obstructing downtown traffic flow.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 04:35 AM
Drivers often don't look to the right before making a right hand turn at
an intersection, they just look left to look out for oncoming traffic. This
puts pedestrians on the right at risk of being hit by a car.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 06:42 AM
As a pedestrian I encountered several potential,incidents with cars
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 09:57 AM
The intersection of Hunter St and Main is too dark, and pedestrians
push the flash and jump on the street right away, I almost hit
somebody that I didn't see at all until he was in front of my headlights.
Same happens with the flashing intersections to the north, except
paepcke.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:26 AM
Since biking in town for 40 years as a resident, I've had many close
calls regarding reckless illegal driving, which would have ended up
with a severe injury or death if I wasn't a bike racer & cycling
instructor to be frank. We really need much more enforcement of
traffic laws, including enforcing full stops at Stop signs, proper speed
and drivers yielding to pedestrians in cross walks per local & state
law. We recently saw a 58 yr. old man get seriously injured in a hit
and run on Main St. in front of APD, no less and others have been
injured and killed downtown in recent years due to illegal driving.
Town won't be safe or encourage walking and riding till this is done in
a very serious manner, which may boil down to housing a larger
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 42 108
APD.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:31 AM
Combination of uneducated bike users and unclear bike lanes / travel.
Bikes riding wrong way, not stopping, riding in malls, etc. I think
increased bike enforcement and education could be helpful
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:52 AM
Cars flying through intersections, blind crossings so hard to see who
is coming, not clear bike lanes
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:55 AM
Bike riders on the pedestrian mall
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 11:42 AM
The intersection of Hyman and Monarch should be a four way stop. I
have almost been hit crossing the road many times.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 12:59 PM
Vehicles are unaware of pedestrians and cyclists. They are often lost
and looking at their phones. We need better visibility as cyclists to
safely navigate the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 02:00 PM
I am on Hyman and Original and have asked city to put in pedestrian
crossing light like on Hopkins. Nothing so far. Dangerous to cross as
cars often don't stop.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 04:54 AM
Bikers riding on the malls
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:46 AM
People walking and biking who don’t look out for traffic
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:48 AM
Pedestrians crossing at random (not a crosswalk) locations
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:49 AM
Many interactions with pedestrian who ignore common sense and
walk into the road without looking both ways. Bikers who ignore traffic
and traffic laws and common sense brought on by City of Aspen
regulations that encourage bad behavior.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 07:04 AM
Cars driving too fast and not being aware of one-way roads.
Downtown core is very busy and a lot of people walk on the streets
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 43 109
mixing pedestrians and cars.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 07:55 AM
Keep in mind I am a cyclist. Cyclists riding bikes on the wrong side of
the road. Skateboarder suddenly riding out in front of me when I have
the ROW. Cyclists doing the same. All of these occurred in the core.
Also pedestrians crossing main street in West End in the dark.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:07 AM
Large trucks are too big to angle park in the core and also people
backing up[ are not looking when they pull out---not good - they need
to change parking to the way it use to be
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:40 AM
Bicycles riding the wrong way (against traffic) on one-way Galena.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:41 AM
Cars driving too fast snd not yielding to pedestrians or bikes.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:24 AM
Summer: pedestrians not aware of stop signs, bikes mostly ebikes
not following road rules: stop signs wrong way down one ways pulling
out in front of cars
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:37 AM
cars not stopped at intersections, too much congestion
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:45 AM
Aggressive, angry, distracted drivers
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:55 AM
Bicyclists ignoring one way street signs and going the wrong way
down a street
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:34 AM
It feels very unsafe to ride a bicycle. I have had cars back into me
without looking or make left turns without looking. There are also
tourists on e bikes who drive the wrong way or too fast or on
sidewalks making it scary to walk as well.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:41 AM
Nothing major. Just the occasional jay walker, or bike going the
wrong way or darting around cars. I’ve also had bikes weave through
cross walks while people were walking. On my bike, I’ve had cars
almost back out into me. People love to walk down the middle of the
street, especially in winter.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 44 110
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:15 AM
Biking through the core in areas that have diagonal, pull-in parking(
as opposed to parallel) presents a huge safety concern for bikes.
Bikes are at risk when cars are backing out of these parking spots as
it is really difficult for drivers to see bikes. The solution for bikes is to
move out into the middle of the roadway which presents other safety
issues. Most vehicle drivers are not used to sharing a lane with a
bikes and often attempt to pass bikes which puts the vehicle fully in
the lane of upcoming traffic endangering other drivers, bikes and
pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:50 AM
Vehicle came close to hitting me as driver was talking on her phone.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:55 AM
Where is “none of the above” answer in the later survey questions?
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:20 AM
Many Bicycles, not all, do not obey stop signs or crosswalks, and ride
through the malls, not slowing down.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:30 AM
Cars ignore crosswalks and flashing lights on Main Street
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:48 AM
Bicycle riders through the mall
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 12:21 PM
Pedestrians do not look before the cross the street. Bikers don’t
follow the one one.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 02:35 PM
The one way streets are to narrow and chaotic. Just go back to the
way it was. Many long time locals are impressed how much worse
the city has made things in such a short time.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 04:54 PM
Riding your bike through downtown isn’t safe but you bike with your
head on a swivel and it’s fine.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 05:04 PM
People driving while playing with their phones
Screen Name Redacted Intersections on the Hopkins bike/pedestrian way. Crossing Monarch,
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 45 111
1/23/2022 08:55 AM Aspen, and Garmisch are a daily gauntlet with speeding cross traffic
and short sight lines.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 09:47 AM
Just the typical tourist stuff. People not paying attention, looking for
parking spots while still driving forwards. Obviously worse when on a
bike, as you're much more invisible.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 10:17 AM
Pedestrians who step into the street without a glance to see if a
vehicle is approaching. Maybe crosswalk stripes in “core” would help.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 11:21 AM
pedestrians on cell phone; bikes on mall and sidewalks; vehicles not
obeying stop signs
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 12:05 PM
Bicycles ridden in the mall
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 05:28 PM
No one uses turn signals, People are constantly going the wrong way
down Cooper Ave towards Galena. NEVER ANY POLICE around on
Sundays to keep people from parking in commercial spots, and
handicap spots, like they used to.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 07:14 AM
Bicycles traveling the wrong way on one-way streets in the core
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 08:44 AM
Cars going through crosswalks without paying attention. Cars going
the wrong way on Galena.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 11:04 AM
Some drivers do not practice courteous behavior and just dealing w
rude people
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 11:52 AM
Distracted driving and an unconstrained urban approach to driving in
the core within the busy seasons.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:01 PM
The lack of turn signal use, speeding, bicycles on the brick pedestrian
malls going way too fast.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:47 PM
People driving too fast... not watching, driving looking other way while
turning corner. Drivers looking at phone.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 46 112
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:55 PM
Have had three incidences where I had the right of way with a green
light trying to cross main st going north on mill; people don’t see
bicycles, they cut in front making me slam on my bicycle brakes in
order not to go flying over their car hood. Now I wave my hand at
them and swerve in my lane so they can see me and I watch where
their heads are pointed
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 04:52 PM
Aspen is Disney World with Cars. I'm convinced of this by the way
visiting pedestrians act when they walk, turning at anytime or
anyplace crossing streets glued to phones and not looking....J-
walking through an interesectiuon if it suits. It's amazing to me more
people aren't injured or killed in this town especially in winter when
the handicap of icy roads makes driving down right dangerous.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:34 AM
Biking when cars blindly back out of parking spots, turn with out using
a turn signal and cars going too fast.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 01:10 PM
I was on Cooper St. I had backed up so I could get into a parking
space. I was sitting in the street waiting for a car to back out of his
space. A man was backing out of his space and hit my car. Head in
parking is dangerous. You can’t see who’s coming behind you.
Parallel parking is the way to go.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 03:43 PM
Pedestrians don't look for cars when crossing the street; similarly cars
don't look for pedestrians
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 03:52 PM
Too many bicycles on the SIDE WALKS!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 04:46 PM
I witnessed a cyclist biking the wrong way down a one-way street and
have an awkward, potentially dangerous interaction with a vehicle
backing out of an angled parking stall. I've also experienced
personally and witnessed many close-calls between cars and
pedestrians at crosswalks due to lack of visibility caused by parked
cars.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:42 PM
Pedestrians or bikers not following street crossing or guidelines.
Screen Name Redacted if there were proper parking spaces, vehicle traffic would drop by
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 47 113
50%. I've spent so much time driving around the streets of downtown
just looking for a place to park.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:44 PM
The tourists and locals are on their phones and not paying attention
when driving.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:45 PM
At City Market on Cooper BEFORE you put up the barriers. Everyone
was fighting for a parking space
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:48 PM
Cars going too fast or too close when biking. Ebikes on bike path
along cemetery lane, around golf course, owl creek path, or Rio
Grande also dangerous (I was hit by ebiker actually)
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:49 PM
Failure of drivers to stop at crosswalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:51 PM
Person on cell phone driving and clearly not paying attention to
pedestrian crossing. Have also had cyclists pull out in front of my
vehicle into the street without signaling or warnings.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:51 PM
Car sliding on ice
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:53 PM
I can't say I have felt unsafe however I certainly have to be very
vigilant while walking or riding my bike through the core due to
automobiles and visibility challenges.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:53 PM
As a walker I am run or hit by bicyclist more than once every year.
Bikers and especially ebikes need to follow regular traffic regulations.
Bikers pass me on the inside as I turn right and run stop signs all the
time.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:59 PM
Car passed me at an intersection without slowing, even though I had
the right-of-way.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:59 PM
I've experienced unsafe drivers
Screen Name Redacted In the summer people not paying attention to stop signs, bicyclists not
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 48 114
1/25/2022 06:01 PM stopping for stop signs, and people on cell phones not being careful
enough. Pedestrians crossing mid street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:03 PM
Cars driven by visitors who are multitasking and also seem unaware
of cycling rules that mean cyclists blow through intersections, and
pedestrians walk across the street with earbuds and texting. A perfect
storm of everyone in their bubble. Why not have info at the airport
and at major destinations letting motorists know not just the speed
limit, but also the environment where pedestrians and cyclists have
the right of way
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:03 PM
Cyclists blowing through intersections with little or no regard to cross
traffic
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:05 PM
Can’t see pedestrians at night
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:05 PM
Occasionally a pedestrian may suddenly dart out either mid-block or
even a crosswalk without looking for cars or bicycles necessitating a
quick stop.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:07 PM
Pedestrians walking out in front of my car
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:09 PM
Have a asked months ago to get a ped crossing light on my corner of
Hyman & Original as cars speed by with not stop sign
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:09 PM
I get very anxious about driving in town at night as its hard to see
pedestrians crossing the street -often not in crosswalk areas and
usually dressed in all black clothing!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:12 PM
Almost been hit by a car while crossing a street
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:15 PM
Drivers blowing through stop signs and cars and buses ignoring the
pedestrian crossings even with flashing lights
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:19 PM
almost run over by a speeding truck on Aspen St
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 49 115
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:21 PM
incidents with all 3--the problem is people putting their brains on hold
when in town. bicycles not obeying rules of road--riding on wrong
side of street, turning into oncoming traffic, ignoring stop signs
pedestrians walking out into street in middle of block from between
two large parked vehicles cars ignoring stop signs ETC ETC
changing streets, parking, etc is no cure for stupidity, carelessness
and obliviousness
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:22 PM
car vs pedestrian
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:22 PM
Cars turning and almost hitting me on my bike; cars racing through
the downtown in a hurry to get somewhere; drunks driving erratically
in the evening hours;
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:23 PM
Ebikes don’t follow the rules of the road
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:24 PM
1) people talking and driving while using cell phones making driving
errors. 2) bicicylists ignoring traffic laws, being aggressive and/or
reckless 3) pedistrians crossing mid street without proper caution
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:25 PM
People not paying attention. Visitors who don’t know the city and get
confused.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:25 PM
When you mix visitors on foot and in cars who don’t know their way
around with locals in vehicles trying to get quickly to their destination
you can end up with dicey situations.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:26 PM
Just crossing the street
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:27 PM
Drivers often aren’t watching for cyclists even when cyclists have the
right of way in an intersection. Creating more bike/ped right of ways
would help me feel more safe.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:27 PM
not looking, not caring, driving straight through crosswalks even with
children in the crosswalk
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 50 116
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:27 PM
almost getting run over or backed into by tourists while crossing
streets
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:31 PM
cars backing into bike/peds and/or basically going to quickly
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:32 PM
As a driver, I have had many close calls with pedestrians who walk
out into traffic without looking and/or with their attention on their
phones (including a woman pushing a baby in a stroller - this one
was in summer in the West End); I've nearly been run into many
times by bicycles on Hopkins crossing Aspen Street without slowing
down or looking. As a pedestrian, I've nearly been hit by bicycles on
sidewalks (I don't mind if they have small children and are riding on
the sidewalk, but adults should ride on the street.)
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:32 PM
Bicycles feel they own the roads, cars park haphazardly, cars can’t
find parking, people just walk in front of vehicles expecting right of
way
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:35 PM
car not stopping as I cross the street. I was near an accident when a
driver struck a pedestrian
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:37 PM
Cars not stopping at crosswalk, people walking down the middle of
the road, cyclists going the wrong way on the one way street- riding in
the middle, cyclists on the pedestrian mall.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:42 PM
Visitors on ebikes are extremely unsafe in the core. These types of
bikes should not be allowed on the 4 east west and 4 north south
streets that make up the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:48 PM
trying to walk in crosswalks in the winter - people driving too fast even
busses… and then getting mad at me because i made them stop by
walking in the designated crosswalk- like cars matter more than
people and safety
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:50 PM
It happens all the time. No one is paying attention. No courtesy. No
communication. No one understands the rules, they just go. We can’t
even merge correctly.
Screen Name Redacted 1. The car was driving the wrong way. 2.The car was driving the
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 51 117
1/25/2022 06:51 PM wrong way. 3.The car was driving the wrong way. 4. The car was
driving the wrong way. 5. The car was driving the wrong way. 6. The
bicyclist didn't stop at a stop sign. 7. More common is people
crossing the street when I'm already in the intersection and think they
have right of way. 8. People reversing out of angled parking and
backing into me. 9. No one uses turn signals so you think you are
safe to cross and almost get hit. 10. People stopping on the road
suddenly and without warning to let out passengers. 11. Cars parked
so near to the corner of a street both legally and illegally that you
can't see traffic coming which has almost caused several crashes
because it's a blind corner. 12. people J walking and thinking they still
have the right of way. 13. People walk out in front of my car as I slide
through a stop sign because the drainage is graded too steep then
acting as if i did it on purpose.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:52 PM
I feel the new bike lanes should be on the side of the roads and not in
the center. It times you can’t get past a bicyclist during the summer.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:53 PM
Cars not watching out for pedestrians. Cars speeding.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:59 PM
Bicyclists speeding through the Mall and intersections on many
occasions. Pedestrians not paying attention to cars, bicycles or other
pedestrians numerous times. Drivers also not paying attention to their
surroundings.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:00 PM
I rarely drive into town , but when I do pedestrians step out in front of
you without looking, so you have to literally slow down and look at
every intersection. Mostly ride bike into town and even then people
will step out in front of you without even looking up. Lastly being a
pedestrian is scary , because some drivers are not paying attention.
I’ve almost been hit in the crosswalk across Main Street & Mill in front
of Jerome
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:05 PM
I’ve almost been hit several times by cars coming down the hill on S
Aspen St trying to make the green light whilst walking home crossing
S Aspen ST walking along Hopkins. I’ve also had several near misses
on Hopkins Ave during the summer. Bikes and cars going to fast on
the pedestrian way.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:06 PM
Cars stopping in the middle of the road. Cars backing up out of
parking spaces. Bicyclists not stopping at intersections. Bicyclists
riding on sidewalks. Pedestrians stopping in the middle of the road.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 52 118
Pedestrians stepping out from between parked cars (not at an
intersection). All three using their phone while moving in the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:14 PM
Summer especially feels unsafe driving in Aspen with cyclists and
pedestrians oblivious to traffic, jay walking, ignoring stop signs etc
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:14 PM
I’ve witnessed three people not stopping at stop signs within the last
3 months. It’s a bit scary. I’m not sure if they didn’t see the signs or
were too busy looking at stores or for parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:15 PM
Bikes going through stop signs and riding 3 across a lane
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:17 PM
you can't make this shit up i have lived in the same house for 50
years.i ski everyday. i ride a bike to the gondola .i ride the bus I walk
everyday i Have 2 motorcycles I hike everyday in the summer. You
must be new if you think there is any kind of stupid behavior that I
have not seen or been involved in, Get a clue. the transportation
accesses and pathways are over run with stupid tourists who do care
if they are speeding don't know where they are or going. life and
getting around aspen is reckless. Stop the number of people coming
to town. Growth is the question slowing growth and stopping growth is
the answer. If you thing you can manage growth of paint lines or rent
bikes or charge for parking or elite parking or building sidewalks you
are putting lipstick on a pig. Stop the airport expansion stop the greed
of the ski co Ionization of a box canyon town at 8000 ft in the rocky
Mts
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:23 PM
Tourist in the street taking pictures. Cars not complying with speed
limits, out of town cars driving down one ways and even the
pedestrian mall. Tourists walking excessively slowly thru crosswalks
due to cell phone use, lack of ice removal that causes a slew of
problems with vehicle traffic. Lack of planning to remove snow plow
making busses unable to pick up and or excessively delay schedule.
Lack of ice and snow plow making it unsafe to walk even on highly
used sidewalks.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:27 PM
Cars not stopping
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:35 PM
pedestrians do not seem to have a clue walking downtown
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 53 119
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:35 PM
People on their phones while driving. In NY it is a $250 fine for if you
have your mobile phone in your hand in while you are driving. It
wouldn’t be a bad idea for Aspen to institute a policy like this. In the
last 20 months with all of the new people in town, it is death defying
to cross Main Street at almost every intersection. Mill St in particular
is the worst!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:37 PM
Bicycles crossing streets without respecting traffic rules
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:38 PM
Cars too fast. Pedestrians on phones. Bicycles everywhere on
sidewalks, malls
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:41 PM
When I'm driving I'm always watching closely for pedestrians stepping
out from between cars or walking across/ down streets without paying
attention. When walking, I am always watching closely for vehicles
that may not stop for pedestrians due to distractions. It's really
amazing that more vehicle pedestrian accidents don't happen in
Aspen.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:50 PM
The downtown is just not safe for pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:56 PM
People crossing when they want; with no regard to traffic,
intersections and lights I ride strictly my bicycle in the spring summer
and fall and am respectful of all transportation. I have found most
cyclists have road rage, don’t think traffic rules apply to them and now
that you have put in place that bicycles only need to yield at stop
signs, they refuse to stop or yield and feel that they always have the
right of way. I am in support or more bikes and less cars, but the favor
towards bicycles is causing aggressive cycling behavior
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:02 PM
Cars on main street driving too fast, people not watching for
pedestrians in the core. Confusion about who has the right of way
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:02 PM
Tourist drivers get confused. Some streets are one way, some are
not. Some corners have stop signs, some do not.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:03 PM
I have nearly been run down walking across pedestrian zones in the
Aspen core. riding a bike through the core is treacherous as well.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 54 120
cars, bicycles and pedestrians do not pay attention to stop signs or
crosswalk areas.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:03 PM
Drivers as private citizens/tourists as well as those that drive for
RFTA continuously flex their sense of entitlement in Aspen proper, as
well as highway 82. There are so many infractions that occur
daily/nightly that get no response from authorities and it is a shame…
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:04 PM
I was a pedestrian walking north at Monarch and Hopkins and a
driver heading west on Hopkins didn't stop at the stop sign and
sideswiped me.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:10 PM
People not looking where they are going or walking out to the street
without regards to snow on the roads and cars
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:11 PM
almost struck a pedestrian at night. dressed in dark clothes and dimly
lit intersection.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:21 PM
EBikes and Cars going way to fast down the pedestrian bike way on
West Hopkins. Especially in the spring and fall before the road
markers are up. But all summer. Because there are no stop signs and
it is slightly downhill into town, they often go faster than the cars on
Main Street. The ebikes often go 30+ mph or more. It feels like an
accident waiting to happen. Thanks for your help with this issue.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:26 PM
Too many people in town, too much entitlement.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:27 PM
Drivers often don’t see pedestrians and pedestrians don’t see drivers.
Downtown driving is not safe
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:34 PM
People walk out and/or bike in front of cars all the time without
looking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:36 PM
Pedestrians walking in the street, having to drive around cars
dropping people off, and bikers not adhering to traffic laws.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:43 PM
Trying to cross Main St at the crosswalks and drivers do not stop.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 55 121
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:56 PM
Bicycles drive the wrong way with impunity to traffic laws. People
walk down the middle of the street and enter the street between cars,
jaywalking. Police and parking enforcement is a joke. Signs in the
core should say the laws and not be totally deceptive. Example Signs
say "NO Parking' on every corner, but it means 2 unregistered
unlicensed uninsured scooters, motorcycles or e-motor-cycles per
corner. No enforcement of basic traffic & pedestrian laws makes it
very unsafe!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:58 PM
Just ONE example? Lol. Let’s just say, as a local, I’ve been on both
ends of the spectrum. I truly get the feeling that stop signs in town
apparently don’t matter anymore, because people drive straight
through them ALL THE TIME, and everywhere in town. I see, on
average, 3 vehicles a day run stop signs, just on my commute from
my home on the east side of Aspen to my office in the West End.
Pedestrians also seem to think our roads in the core are just huge
sidewalks, but I usually just chalk that up to “tourist brain.”
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:59 PM
Bikers, including families with small kids, riding in the middle of the
street the wrong way like it is a bike trail. Cars going the wrong way
on a one way. Speeding. People cutting across the street from behind
cars and not at a cross walk. Bad driving.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:03 PM
1. People stopped looking around in the middle of intersections. 2.
People crossing streets on their cell phones!!!! 3. People standing at
intersections on their cell phones and you can’t tell if they plan on
crossing.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:04 PM
Pedestrians dis-obeying laws.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:06 PM
I never feel safe riding a bike through the core anymore. Too many
cars, too many cars driving fast/carelessly, too many blind
intersections. Walking also feels dangerous for the same reasons. I
was once almost hit walking in a crosswalk and then the driver yelled
at me.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:06 PM
1. A child jumped into my path on the Rio Grande trail causing me to
catapult over my handlebars. 2. Numerous close calls with cars while
on my bike. 3. Vehicles NOT stopping at blinking pedestrian
crosswalks.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 56 122
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:12 PM
As a pedestrian, it’s typically drivers not paying attention, either on
their phones or just unfamiliar with the streets (which ones are one
ways, when to stop or not, etc)
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:20 PM
The huge SUV's and pickup tricks both from in town and out of town
drive way too fast down Main street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:29 PM
At the original curve I’ve been almost hit at least 2 times as cars
scream around the corner and don’t see the crosswalk lights flashing.
Not sure what the answer is but there needs to be something else to
alert drivers coming around the corner that someone is in the cross
walk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:37 PM
Ride bike rider
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:41 PM
Many personal close calls while being a pedestrian and cyclist,
involving cars, in the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:47 PM
Cars, bikes, pedestrians not following basic traffic laws is pretty run of
the mill all the time. It’s a jungle out there. It doesn’t matter how you
are traveling, there’s always someone blowing a stop sign or driving
too fast.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:47 PM
Drivers running red lights at Main and Galena and Main and Mill
when the pedestrian crosswalk sign is lit.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:03 PM
Horrible out of town drivers, pedestrians jwalking, bikers behaving
badly you name it
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:06 PM
High Speeds of drivers including RFTA, limited visibility, intoxicated
drivers, and construction crowding the travel zones.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:17 PM
There are still too many cars in downtown Aspen. When we see cities
in Europe removing cars from the downtown core, I would hope
Aspen could do more. We live over on Hyman near Garmisch and
walk and bike through town. It's still awful to try to bike to the east of
Aspen trail. I'd love to see a priority for a safe route for bikes and
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 57 123
more efforts to make pedestrians have priority above vehicles in town
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:31 PM
As a pedestrian and a biker, I have nearly been hit by cars many
times.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:36 PM
Car pushing through pedestrian traffic.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:40 PM
My primary mode of navigating the core is on foot as a pedestrian.
Unsafe experiences come from cars that drive too fast or roll through
stop signs without yielding to pedestrians. The intersection at City
Market can get very busy with pedestrians, vehicles and buses.
Perhaps crosswalks with buttons/flashing lights like on Main Street
might help.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:49 PM
Cars not yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk and specifically cars
not yielding to pedestrians when turning right on Main Street from Mill
Street at the Hotel Jerome.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:56 PM
Bicyclists running stop signs. Drivers running stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 11:21 PM
Illegal parking that then resulted in corners being blocked from view
for oncoming cars and pedestrians; left turn issues from south Mill to
Main Street when oncoming cars can turn left or go straight from
same lane; angle parking on south Mill (across from MiChola and
Creperie) where cars/trucks are too large and tighten the street too
much. I could go on and on… I am a drivers ed instructor and spend
a ton of time focusing on safety issues in core area
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 11:23 PM
Motorists not paying attention, blowing through intersections, not
knowing that pedestrians have the right of way, busses pulling out on
me while I’m passing the stopped bus on my bike. Other cyclists
going the wrong way down one way streets (that last one is really
only a while rental issue I’ve experienced a few times).
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:03 AM
Crossing Main Street in front of police dept on the flashing light
button; visitors not sure where stop signs are and stopping in middle
of road..
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 58 124
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:04 AM
People darting out from behind cars and not paying attention to traffic.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:14 AM
Drivers not stopping at stop signs, on their phone, or driving too fast.
Bike riders acting like pedestrians and not at least yielding at stop
signs, riding on sidewalks or the mall.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 05:04 AM
Cars fail to slow down for pedestrians. Worrying about cars backing
into bicycle.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 05:11 AM
Aggressive drivers
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 05:28 AM
Banish - penalize who use a cell phone while operating a vehicle.
Take a stand!
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:01 AM
Aggressive driving. Turning across the street to grab a parking space
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:10 AM
Car did not stop in a crosswalk with flashing lights. Have had this
happen more than once.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:15 AM
Traffic goes too fast and does not stop At traffic signs. ( the roll stop is
not a stop!)
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:16 AM
pedestrians walking in the road outside of crosswalks. Bicycles in a
free for all in and out of cars.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:22 AM
No one stops at stop signs, confusing intersections and some signs
not visible for tourists
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:32 AM
Cars not stopping at Cooper & Hunter. Cars driving one way the
wrong way down Cooper Ave. Driving and cyclists, skateboarders, or
one-wheelers riding the opposite way on the one way.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:44 AM
Pedestrians walk slowly across streets, with no regard to crosswalks.
Oblivious to cars, they put themselves at risk, slow traffic. Visitors
seem particularly lulled into a sense that they are in a non-vehicular
"amusement park" environment.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 59 125
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:13 AM
Cars and bicycles not obeying traffic rules at intersections
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:30 AM
OUT-OF-STATE PLATES DO NOT YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:32 AM
speeding
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:42 AM
People who do not look before they walk across the street. Vehicles
that do not stop at stop signs
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:49 AM
Jaywalkers and cyclists pose the worst risks for anyone in a car, and
since the city favors and doesn’t enforce any jaywalking laws and
allows bikes to roll stop signs its almost impossible not to have a
problem.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:14 AM
Someone not obeying a stop sign.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:16 AM
I have almost been hit by a car while already walking in a crosswalk. I
have been rear-ended by a car while stopped on my bicycle waiting
to turn.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:22 AM
If you live here you often experience: Fast drivers with no intention of
stopping Drivers not yielding for crosswalk Being yelled at by drivers
for walking in crosswalk Crosswalk are not well marked
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:49 AM
Bicycles that don't stop at stop signs and don't look for cars when
crossing traffic. Pedestrians crossing diagonally at the s curve.
Difficulty crossing the bus lane (driving inbounds and trying to turn left
at 5pm) because can't see busses coming due to a line of traffic.
Completely random sidewalks that start and end with no logical sense
so constantly walking the stroller in the road.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:50 AM
Had near misses both while driving and walking with bicycles going
against the traffic (including police officers on duty) on
Cooper/Galena.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 60 126
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:51 AM
Drivers not paying attention to stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:54 AM
Trying to cross the street on a crosswalk and cars didn't stop
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:57 AM
I never feel safe crossing the street in town
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:58 AM
Many near misses especially during high season
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 09:16 AM
Walking across main street to parking garage from Galena Street
almost got hit by driver making left from Galena onto Main Street in
the middle of the day - female driver not looking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 09:50 AM
bicycles constantly going the wrong way on one way
streets/pedestrians walking in the street behind vehicles (not in
crosswalks)
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 10:18 AM
cross walks down town
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 10:50 AM
Biking is very unsafe. Cars don't see you and pedestrians walk out in
front of you without looking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:06 AM
I encounter people riding on the wrong side of the road. Bike running
stop signs.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:26 AM
Since I live here, I take great precaution when walking or biking,
especially at night since I know how dark it is in town and it is very
hard to see pedestrians, not to mention cars cannot always stop
safely if the roads are not dry. A friend of mine was just hit and
severely injured while crossing at night in front of the police station.
My biggest concern is when I'm driving and pedestrians do not use
common sense -- some walk in the road instead of the sidewalk; a lot
don't look both ways before crossing (even in a crosswalk this is
important because a car might not be able to stop if they walk in front
of it on a slick day); some don't look OR cross in the crosswalk! Also,
I've noticed in the summer a lot of people ride their bikes thinking that
they have the right of way which is incredibly dangerous.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 61 127
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:30 AM
Issues with vehicles backing out of parking spots, as well as general
crosswalk scary situations.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:32 AM
People that don't follow the traffic rules/regulations.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:32 AM
I feel most unsafe when cyclist and pedestrians don't know the rules
of riding a bike or crossing the street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:01 PM
I’ve almost been hit several times by vehicles while walking or riding
my bike
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:02 PM
Trying to cross on foot at Cooper/Hunter intersection and getting
beeped at for being too slow
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:20 PM
Ha, which time! Being on a bike or other mode of transportation
sharing the street with vehicles has presented many scenarios
including cars backing blindly out of a spot (swerve to avoid), cars
stopping at non-stop intersections (causes a cyclist to stop
unplanned), cars not stopping at stop intersections (causes a cyclist
to stop unplanned or swerve), Vehicles going into alleys (swerve to
avoid), vehicles coming out of alleys (swerve to avoid), and vehicles
in a hurry passing a cyclist. I honestly feel like it's become worse
each summer, year after year. I'm not sure if it's related to the
increase in tourism and more cars in the core or the types of visitors
and drivers (city people that don't drive regularly).
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 01:22 PM
E bikes that travel too fast with inexperienced cyclists. several times I
had a near collision with my bicycle or as a pedestrian
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:03 PM
Mainly cars failing to stop at stop signs and/or yield to pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:03 PM
I live near Original Curve, and I’ve almost been hit many times as I’ve
pulled out of my alley by people speeding, I’ve also nearly been hit
crossing my street (and I always use the flashing light to cross, but it’s
not very visible in the day). There need to be more stop signs (maybe
at Hymen so cars don’t get rear-ended by cars coming around the
curve) so people can’t get going that fast
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 62 128
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:05 PM
As a pedestrian, I've noticed that not all drivers are aware of
crosswalk locations and right-of-way laws - for example, driving
through the crosswalk while I'm still crossing. I've also noticed other
pedestrians eschewing right-of-way laws, for example, crossing on a
Don't Walk signal. As a driver, I notice that pedestrians will enter the
crosswalk while I am in the intersection, which is an unsafe practice
for all parties. As a cyclist and driver, I've observed many cyclists
riding through stop signs, though I believe Aspen law requires at least
a yield if no other traffic is present.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:17 PM
When walking west on the south side of Main Street, I often
encounter vehicles making a righthand turn who only look west, not
est in the direction I am walking from. Also, texting drivers have
become a non-stop presence everywhere. There has to be a way to
begin looking for this and enforcing it.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:34 PM
Tourist who do not understand how a 2 way stop works
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:45 PM
Parked cars backing out into traffic.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:04 PM
Tourist not stopping at stop signs. Tourist driving down the one way
streets, happens all the time !! People walking in the middle of the
street
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:24 PM
areas that are not 4-way stops the car doesn't seem to want to stop
for pedestrians; parked cars near intersections make it hard for cars
to see me and me to make eye contact with driver before stepping
into the crosswalk; bikers not stopping and looking for pedestrians
especially when they are going the wrong way on the one way.
generally visibility is the biggest challenge for crossing the streets
inside the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:32 PM
It was mostly bicycles who are often rude and think the traffic rules do
not apply to them. The second are mostly tourists or the new
residents from other places that drive like they do in NY or wherever.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:50 PM
Cars and bikes running stop signs. Cars backing out of spaces
without looking.
Optional question (326 response(s), 126 skipped)
Question type: Essay Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 63 129
Q5 Many techniques or safety measures are proven to increase user safety in the roadway
and provide safe, dedicated space for all users. Many of these measures have been installed
in downtown Aspen. These measures consist of things like curb extension...
Dedicated bike lanes (safe, dedicated space for cyclists in the roadway)
Protected counter-flow bike lanes (bike lanes run the opposite direction of one-way vehicular traffic flow)
Widened pedestrian walkways Shortened crosswalks (decrease time pedestrians are in the vehicle path)
Parallel parking (improve sightlines between cyclists and parked vehicles)
Question options
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
277
140
189
251
156
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Checkbox Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 64 130
Q6 Research and implementation show that providing safe, dedicated space in the right-of-
way (ROW) for all modal types in a multimodal corridor (pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles)
increases the safety for all users indirectly. When each user has a s...
269 (59.5%)
269 (59.5%)
183 (40.5%)
183 (40.5%)
Yes No
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 65 131
Q7 Over the past year, the City has considered several conceptual designs for the living lab
based on roadway design standards and innovative mobility options. The preferred living lab
concept is shown above and consists of widened pedestrian areas, c...
Definitely unfavorable
Somewhat unfavorable
Neither favorable nor unfavorable
Somewhat favorable
Definitely favorable
Question options
100 200 300 400 500
Please rate your
favorability level for
imple...
153905751101
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Likert Question
53.8% Definitely or Somewhat Favorable
12.6% Neither Favorable or Unfavorable
33.6% Definitely or Somewhat Unfavorable
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 66 132
Q8 In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown above
in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable interactions for
Pedestrians?
249 (55.1%)
249 (55.1%)
203 (44.9%)
203 (44.9%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 67 133
Q9 In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown above
in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable interactions for
Cyclists?
265 (58.6%)
265 (58.6%)
187 (41.4%)
187 (41.4%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 68 134
Q10 In your opinion, will implementing and testing temporary improvements as shown
above in the preferred living lab concept facilitate safer and more predictable interactions for
Vehicles?
227 (50.2%)
227 (50.2%)
225 (49.8%)
225 (49.8%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 69 135
Q11 Please select all the options you would support to offset parking impacts and maintain
current parking occupancy numbers in the core.
Increased hourly parking fees within the existing progressive parking fee structure
Implement a progressive timing structure where high demand parking areas limit maximum parking times (e.g., 3 hours instead of the
current 4 hours) and parking areas allow with less demand allow longer parking time (e.g., current 4 hours)
Install additional pick-up/drop-off locations near high-use areas (pharmacies, banks, etc.)
Enhance the existing valet parking program
Limit construction vehicle parking in the living lab area (Galena Street and Cooper Avenue one-way streets) for the duration of the
testing phase (approx. May to October 2022)
Question options
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
343
95
235
217
101
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Checkbox Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 70 136
Q12 On-demand service enhancement: Provide a hail system within the Downtown Core
rather than schedule through an app.
218 (48.2%)
218 (48.2%)
234 (51.8%)
234 (51.8%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 71 137
Q13 On-demand service enhancement: Dedicate an on-demand vehicle for service from the
Rio Grande parking garage to the core-specific route.
259 (57.3%)
259 (57.3%)
193 (42.7%)
193 (42.7%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 72 138
Q14 On-demand service enhancement: Extend hours of Downtowner services.
316 (69.9%)
316 (69.9%)
136 (30.1%)
136 (30.1%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 73 139
Q15 We-Cycle: Install station within the living lab boundary.
227 (50.2%)
227 (50.2%)
225 (49.8%)
225 (49.8%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 74 140
Q16 Increased Galena Street shuttle service: Additional bus stop locations.
243 (53.8%)
243 (53.8%)
209 (46.2%)
209 (46.2%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 75 141
Q17 Increased Galena Street shuttle service: Shuttle service during the summer season.
323 (71.5%)
323 (71.5%)
129 (28.5%)
129 (28.5%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 76 142
Q18 Increased Galena Street shuttle service: Extend hours later into the evening.
303 (67.0%)
303 (67.0%)
149 (33.0%)
149 (33.0%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 77 143
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 11:16 AM
It is great to see pedestrians and bikes prioritized in this area. It's very
walkable and drivers are often too distracted looking for parking
spaces to notice non-vehicular traffic.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 11:22 AM
85% for parking throughout the summer.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 02:40 PM
Nothing to add
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:33 PM
These are designed by people who do not spend time in Aspen.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:44 PM
1). Not sure a bike lane in the opposite direction of traffic is enough. If
it was in both directions. Is there enough room for a car to drive
slowly in the middle? (no parking). 2) Make it a no car zone during
the day and evening. (places in Europe do that)
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:48 PM
I have never felt unsafe riding my bike or walking in downtown Aspen.
I do not support any of these ideas with the exception of demand
based parking fees structures. Aspen does not have enough parking
spaces - most of these ideas will further reduce parking. Many of
these ideas will be unfamiliar to most drivers and pedestrians creating
confusion and increasing hazard. Pedestrians need to take more
responsibility for their own safety. No texting & walking!
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:49 PM
additional transit options to AVH, ARC, Senior center, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:55 PM
Do not take more parking spaces away. Removing parking spots
hurts local businesses by discouraging families with young children or
the elderly from shopping downtown.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 04:55 PM
I think it's very important to try to better ensure that bike shops are
properly educating/training their customers to safely operate the
rental bikes. I absolutely want more bikes (and ebikes) on the road
instead of cars, but there has seemed to be a massive influx of ill-
prepared riders, mostly on ebikes, that pose a danger to other riders,
Q19 Please provide the project team with any additional feedback regarding the Safety and
Mobility in the Downtown Core project and living lab ideas that you would like us to consider.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 78 144
pedestrians, and automobiles. I put the responsibility on the rental
shops since they're the ones profiting; I'd support aggressive
fees/penalties on the rental shop for customer infractions. That
seems like it would align the incentives between the city and bike
shops to ensure that everyone using the roads/paths is as competent
as possible. I'd also support a pedestrian only downtown, and
research has typically shown that business revenue typically
increases when such a measure is put in place.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:10 PM
This seems like an excessive amount of money, time and effort to
spend on managing what are presumably adults who are hopefully
capable of walking, riding a bike or driving safely. How many serious
accidents have occurred in the past 50 years with things how they
are? Perhaps eliminating traffic and creating a larger pedestrian core,
with expanded parking at the garage, and encouraging exercise by
having people walk two blocks to town rather than providing shuttle
services would be an alternative?
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:38 PM
think there are too many we cycle stations where there should be
parking. Those stations don't have to sit right on main streets. Need
better locations. And why were the bike lanes painted in the middle of
the road? It steers bikers to not stay to the side.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:38 PM
Parallel parking is not the answer. Car doors open onto peds and
cyclists. Plus, parallel parking movements are just as prone to
careless movements as backing from a diagonal space. Enforcement
is what is really needed for pedestrian protection, speed enforcement
and crosswalk enforcement.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:53 PM
I love the barrier to the bicycle lane. We biked in Berlin German and
we felt so safe. The cars were the barrier, parked cars were between
the bike lane and the auto lane. The bicycle lane even had stop lights
that coordinated with traffic. I never felt safer and never had to be on
the road. The more we can do that, would be great. The plant barriers
you are proposing would do the same thing. I would love that down
Mill St along the library and to Clarks and anywhere else that it would
work!
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 05:58 PM
I think what you're considering is fine, as far as it goes. But what I'd
really like to see is Hopkins turned into a pedestrian and cycling only
area from Monarch to Spring. Adding a couple of dedicated bike
lanes down the middle would allow for a rapid, safe route for cyclists
through the center of town.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 79 145
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 07:13 PM
I would love the mall to be extended west so that Galena St by
Wheeler on Hyman is pedestrian only as well as making Hopkins
restaurant row a pedestrian only street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 08:34 PM
My personal opinion is that we need to keep bikers off the core, and
have specific places to park bikes outside of this area we call the
core. It is way to dangerous to have walkers, bikers and cars, in this
area. I am in favor of designated bike parking, especially with the new
outdoor dinning areas that I am in favor of and consider a big
improvement to the vitality of our town.
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 09:01 PM
Please make more intersections in the core have 4 way stops. It will
make it safer for pedestrians!
Screen Name Redacted
1/05/2022 09:28 PM
Not sure we need an actual barrier , maybe just lines on the road or
the flexible piles. The barrier (planter)on mill street between clarks
and the park creates very narrow lane for both bikes and cars
together, especially if the bike has a kids trailer, and in the winter its
not wide enough for both at the same time.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 09:37 AM
By Kock lumberyard there is a stop sign totally blocked from view by
a huge bush in front of it so that bush needs to be cut down to size.
The street signs should be accurate and parking rules enforced.
Aspen is part of America and should promote rules that are accepted
around the country. Bike paths should run the same way as street
traffic. Pedestrians should walk on the sidewalks and cars drive on
the street. Sidewalks should not jut out into the street and curbs are
important for people to realize they are entering the street and it is
time to pay attention.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:03 AM
I don't like all the bicycles. They can be a menace without people
signally what they are doing. Older people often can't even hear them
and come close to being hit
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:11 AM
Additional stop signs. How can FARMERS’ market parking be made
easier?
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:13 AM
Sidewalks throughout the City and the downtown area should be
wider and the gaps eliminated. Better night lighting especially at the
intersections.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 80 146
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:25 AM
Create incentives for people not to drive into town, especially in the
summer.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 10:52 AM
Many of questions asked are technical in nature and best addressed
by those with expertise in enhancing street functions.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 02:03 PM
Hoping this survey language isn't too industry specific. I work with you
all and we have used these phrases plenty, also these terms have
been in the news. Still, it might have felt like insider lingo.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 02:38 PM
Carless Core
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 02:59 PM
If more cyclist end up on the streets which could be a good thing the
need for additional bike racks at key locations should also be
considered.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 03:17 PM
I feel that Living Labs are an excellent starting point for future
concepts. You get to hear citizens viewpoints as they interact with
these labs and understand what does and doesn't work via trial and
error for 6 months. I've seen all modals slow down as they need to
comprehend what they're seeing before proceeding.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 04:51 PM
Install additional 15 minute parking locations near high-use areas .
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 05:10 PM
I know that 4-way stops have their drawbacks - but i think that making
all intersections in downtown 4-way would go a long way towards
enhanced pedestrian safety.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 05:14 PM
Okay so hear me out, I believe that any measure that includes raising
the cost of parking is just going to get rid of every day people using
parking. Rich people can withstand higher rates easier than poor
working class people. I think any measure that involves increasing the
price of parking at peak times is a terrible measure.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 06:24 PM
just reduce the amount of parking in the core to accommodate users
that aren't a danger to others. it is going to be ok. cars are dangerous,
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 81 147
and the core is for people and commerce.
Screen Name Redacted
1/06/2022 09:08 PM
Seriously - You all need to go to NYC and try out the bike lanes you
proposed, try being a pedestrian with them - you fear for your life as
either, it's guaranteed you have an accident between bikes and
pedestrians - and the cars are too close when it happens. Bike
commuters who use those lanes have all had multiple issues. CLOSE
THE CORE TO CARS, increase electric downtowner and limo service
as the only cars allowed in the core, bicycles use the streets, widen
pedestrian paths, change out pedestrian path paving to FLAT
pedestrian -friendly paving for both summer and winter months. That
would be a good start, but there is plenty more that can be done in
tandem with a new mall plan. As this is successful, move all cars
outside of the City, shut it down to cars completely - no issues with S
curves, no 4pm traffic jam, no smugglers sneak, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 09:07 AM
There is nothing that can be done to protect pedestrians and
bicyclists when they are careless and enter ROW without looking first
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 09:09 AM
Given the overall negative tone of my survey, I understand what an
undertaking this is and applaud the efforts to create a solution! The
difficult part is you'll never be able to control people with policy or
traffic mitigations. Ultimately its up to the individual to look both ways
before they cross and cyclists to not blindly run stop signs. I think
increasing parking solutions and helping traffic flow better will be a
better solution, not curtailing to pedestrians and cyclists.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 10:52 AM
I think there are a lot of public transportation options in Aspen and
within reasonable walking distances. Some stops are not easily
identifiable or known. I don't think there is enforcement for the current
traffic and pedestrian laws in place. You can create more systems,
but if you don't enforce them, why does it matter?
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 11:29 AM
I think it's great that your team is tackling this, and it's definitely a
huge task. I do however think that cyclists in the core are a bigger
problem than anyone is admitting, especially with the gaining
popularity of e-bikes.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 12:42 PM
I am in favor of almost all of the proposals except the parallel parking.
One of the things that increases danger in the core, I believe, is
circling cars, and a sort of "race" to open spots. Eliminating the
amount of parking in the core will not make this situation better, and
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 82 148
will probably make it worse - not to mention the challenge of tourists
attempting to parallel park gigantic SUV's.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:05 PM
Decease cars in the downtown core- some streets that are car free
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:15 PM
Increase parking fines for overtime parking (more than 3-4 hours) and
try a progressive fine system, increasing the amount with each ticket.
This will encourage circulation of vehicles and discourage employees
who park downtown all day.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 02:46 PM
Avoid parking and unloading spots on the corners of intersections. It's
hard to see around a large vehicles while trying to cross the
crosswalk.
Screen Name Redacted
1/07/2022 04:21 PM
No cars on Galena and Cooper from Hyman to hunter - bike and
peds only.
Screen Name Redacted
1/08/2022 04:59 PM
It doesn’t need fixing
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 10:51 AM
I think it is time to get the restaurant street buildings gone. They
make it difficult for everyone. Redoing everything is not going to make
anything that much better. Bikes will take the shortest route,
pedestrians will walk where they want, cars are already going slow
because they don't know where anyone is walking, biking or trucks
backing out of tight spaces. We all wish for safer things but that is not
reality for what people do with whatever vehicle/non vehicle they are
in.
Screen Name Redacted
1/10/2022 12:00 PM
Better enforcement of existing traffic rules, and increasing fines for
speeding, reckless driving and DUI, would be the best improvement
to safety. Visitors need to slow down and understand this is a small
town. Reducing the amount of available parking will make the
problem worse because drivers will spend more time driving around
searching for parking. Visitors will not be incentivized to park farther
away and take a shuttle since they are here on vacation for a limited
time. Also, this hurts retail: if visitors have packages to carry, using a
shuttle will be considered too inconvenient.
Screen Name Redacted I'd like to see the galena shuttle on a more set schedule.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 83 149
1/11/2022 09:47 AM
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 04:28 PM
no cars, making it all walking. tourists already walk in the middle of
the road taking photos with no regard to anything that is going on.
people are on their phones driving constantly and it is so tight in the
core. it work in other places, it would work here.
Screen Name Redacted
1/11/2022 04:45 PM
keep 300 E Hyman and 200 S Mill a one way --- much more orderly!
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 03:22 PM
Install parking garages under Paepke and wagner parks.
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 04:03 PM
We love the work you are doing! Make Aspen great again
Screen Name Redacted
1/12/2022 04:41 PM
Thank you!
Screen Name Redacted
1/13/2022 08:45 AM
I am in support for whatever the staff recommends to expand safety
and mobility in the core! Less cars and more avenues for
pedestrian/bicycle travel should be a top priority for the City after the
recent pedestrian/car encounters in the last several years.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 04:37 PM
bicyclists mostly ignore one way rules and bike lanes. they ride
wherever they want and in all directions that they want regardless.
they also ride bikes on the pedestrian malls. skate boarders also ride
wherever they want and on the malls.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 05:45 PM
Parking is a major issue. When people don't know where to park they
drive around more which is not safer for the cars, pedestrians,
cyclists, or environment/
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 07:40 PM
There seems to be a basic problem with how both drivers and
pedestrians see the core, everyone is just too casual/entitled about it.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 08:12 PM
The very limited In-Fill housing for employees…. What is there is old
or poorly constructed. Better parking in core….. no local energy in
town as everyone goes down valley, large housing complexes are
rammed down employees throats and told to be grateful…… real
estate tax revenues are what runs Aspen now….. greedy landlords,
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 84 150
loss of an usable stable workforce, and catering mostly to the wealthy
has changed Aspen and not for the better!
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 08:28 PM
The site picture makes town look like a communist nanny state …
town is loosing its charm, leave it the way it was in the 90’s
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 09:27 PM
Enforce safety guidelines with bike and ebike rental providers,
including wearing helmets, using lights at night, and riding single file.
Continue policy of banning electric scooter rental companies from
providing business in Aspen.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 09:31 PM
Taking away parking spaces by doing away with diagonal parking is a
very bad idea. Even though I very often take the bus into town and/or
walk, I am opposed to any ideas that take away parking spaces from
the downtown. Some of the questions in this survey don't allow for a
response other than yes or no. Not a good idea for those people who
don't have a preference for one reason or another.
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 09:45 PM
I applaud the bold thinking and experimentation!!!
Screen Name Redacted
1/14/2022 11:22 PM
While I understand the desire to minimize vehicles in our downtiwn
core, we do still live in the age of vehicles. It is just wonderful to think
about not being in this age, but we are in it. And for quite some time
still to come. The idea of front to nose parking when we have so little
parking in this town is just unbelievable to me. The loss of spaces is
the loss of the ability to drive a vehicle into town to do what we need
to do, when vehicles are in fact, by far, our primary mode of
transportation. It is my preferred, and I do not expect to change. Yes,
I’m a local.
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 06:00 AM
Speed bumps
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 08:36 AM
I think the shared bike ways with cars has been successful.
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 09:25 AM
Lower speed limits in town would provide for safer bike and
pedestrian safety. Designated bike/skateboard routes around the
outdoor mall would be great. Solar panel roadways !!
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 85 151
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 09:38 AM
Love the concept Good luck
Screen Name Redacted
1/15/2022 06:32 PM
I live in Carbondale and support Aspen's program of public works
improvements because (1) I visit there often and (2) I have a
background in civil engineering, including "public participation" efforts,
and would like to see Aspen set an example for communities
elsewhere (including Carbondale) as to how to intelligently
incorporate public participation into improvement plans. I strongly
support surveys of the general public in that they encourage
participation by people who lack a strong PERSONAL interest for or
against proposed improvements to devote a great deal of their time
and effort to commenting -- for example, by speaking at public
hearings. Including me in your e-mailed surveys is a good example,
and in responding to them I am careful to point out that my comments
are from a non-resident of Aspen and should be weighted
accordingly. My problem with this survey is that it has numerous
questions that REQUIRE a simple yes/no response when there is
insufficient background information to permit conscientious people
like me to give an informed response. In particular, I greatly support
your concept of a "pilot program" in a limited, physically defined area
to test various ideas for improving safety and environmental
ambiance, but have no idea as to what many of your proposed
changes would actually be designed, what they would cost, or how
they would be financed. As one example, I am an experienced
bicyclist and know that it is generally very unsafe for dedicated
bicycle lanes to run counter to the flow of automotive traffic. I don't
know how you would be implementing them in this proposal. To
complete the survey, I played my "cooperative" side and marked "yes"
to many proposed changes, but to be entirely honest would have
preferred to either respond "No Opinion," "Maybe," or to have
expressed a qualified opinion. Therefore, by forcing respondents to
give a simple "yes/no" response to many questions, you are
introducing a bias in favor of people with superficial understanding of
the issue and against those who -- like me -- understand some if not
all of its nuances.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 10:35 AM
Bikes can have separate lane but need to follow all rules of the road.
No flow against traffic etc. current problem with bikers is they create a
hazard to all by not following traffic rules as required in rest of the
country, especially in the commercial core. Aspen has become like
Disney Land with groups etc taking over all the public ROWs si
probably best to accept and ban cars, scooters, electric bikes and
motorcycles in the commercial core. Al least during june - sept, and
Dec - March. Just like paid parking, relax in off season to cut the
locals a break.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 86 152
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 01:14 PM
Design aesthetics and comfort for pedestrians matter too. Galena and
cooper should be attractive spaces to spend time and not pass
through routes for cyclists. frustrations of people seeking parking will
not be calmed without a desirable destination provided as an
alternative. The planter median is not well thought out as an urban
design and ecological features. Mobility and safety as engineer
solutions are too narrow of a focus for the opportunities of these
streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 01:26 PM
Too many cyclists who don't follow the rules and don't agree with
replacing current parking with parallel parking
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 06:30 PM
Galena / where are the delivery trucks going to park at the Elks
building with your dedicated bike lane in the way. Before trying this
why not properly maintain what you already have, what happened to
the mall improvements. Yet another different experience. Nothing in
the core is consistent. It is a patchwork of past incomplete projects.
Screen Name Redacted
1/16/2022 06:35 PM
We need a parking lot closer to Ajax than the Rio Grande, one higher
up than Main Street. If there were more public parking LOTS there
would be more room to remove street parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/17/2022 09:35 AM
Increase the Downtowner service area
Screen Name Redacted
1/17/2022 10:37 AM
Underground parking under the big parks that would spill people into
the core vs. cars driving round and round and round looking for spots.
The City refuses to accept that fact that people DRIVE and USE
AUTOMOBILES for transportation, especially at night to go to dinner.
They believe that choking off parking will discourage people from
using their vehicles and choose alternative. That does not happen if
someone is determined to come to town. Instead, people have
avoided town which hurts local businesses, gone more and more
Down Valley or just deal with the problem and drive round and round.
Screen Name Redacted
1/18/2022 08:27 AM
Expand pedestrian (no cars( in core to 2 x 3 blocks !! Deliveries only
until 10AM, then car free !! At least Friday through Sunday.
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 01:07 PM
Anything that promotes walking, biking and bus riding and improves
safety for pedestrians and bikers is great. Vehicles should be straight
up prohibited in the core, period.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 87 153
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 03:31 PM
Eliminating more parking pushes cars into our neighborhoods putting
pressure on locals. The garage is full almost every day in the summer
so it can't be relied on as a backup plan. If continuing to eliminate
parking spots in the core, the city needs to consider building another
parking garage. The cars will not go away.
Screen Name Redacted
1/19/2022 04:45 PM
Very confusing the bike lane vs car flow.
Screen Name Redacted
1/20/2022 03:24 PM
I feel it’s more dangerous for cars to circle the block over and over to
find parking. You’ll never get rid of the cars. We should keep the
angle parking and stop wasting money on all these studies & “labs”!
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 04:35 AM
People get exasperated when they're stuck in traffic. Easing traffic
flow throughout Aspen is a must. Simply decreasing traffic won't do it
by itself.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 06:42 AM
Limit the # of Farzin downtown I don't know how you do this but too
many cars Walking town only??
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 07:14 AM
Please consider leveraging technologies like video cameras with AI
(e.g., to detect and notify unsafe interactions), sensors (e.g., to
measure bike, vehicle and pedestrian traffic), etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 09:57 AM
All these measures seem a bit silly and feel-good, there is nothing
you can do against cellphones in hand and pedestrians not paying
attention, much less about "tour de france" wannabes riding their
bikes looking backwards. Educate people on road etiquette, build a
median in main street, put more street light on main and mostly on
the intersections.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:26 AM
As a long time citizen, avid cyclist, environmentalist and former City
OST board member, thanks for recognizing our clear and present
safety concerns for locals and visitors and trying out real solutions! I
hope retailers and restaurateurs, who currently strongly oppose
measures that will influence parking realize this is also very good for
business as we learned with our pedestrian malls when they were
created, in spite of similiar (selfish & ignorant) opposition. Ped/bike
friendly has proven to benefit business here and many other similiar
towns in the U.S. WIN-WIN! Above all, this (living lab) addresses a life
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 88 154
and death safety concern for those choosing to move in a way
healthier for humans and the environment. Cars need to be put in
their place, hopefully parked outside of Aspen at some point. We are
not a big city, but a small town in the mountains. Small towns in
Europe and elsewhere are much more healthy and attractive without
cars. Aren't we all here to escape big city trappings and pollution and
safety issues?
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 10:31 AM
Do it! Safety for all users should be a higher priority than parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 11:42 AM
Please do not remove anymore parking. Families with small children
and the elderly need parking to patronize local businesses.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 12:59 PM
I love the ideas. I would love to see Hopkins get safer. You get to
town on the bikeway and then you hit the most dangerous section of
the core: restaurant row. I find there is no safe and efficient way to
avoid it.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 02:00 PM
More pedestrian crossing lights where there are no stop signs. Right
now streets in the core are a mess. Icy and side streets are 1 lane
now.
Screen Name Redacted
1/21/2022 04:27 PM
When there are dedicated bike lanes on a street, the street marking
indicators should be where the bike lane is (e.g., on the right side of
the street) and not in the middle of the street. It seems that bikers
interpret these bike lane indicators to mean that they can ride down
the middle of the street. This results in altercations with cars and
buses.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 04:54 AM
Do not remove parking spots.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:14 AM
Add back parking spaces from the Art Museum - take out the very
cumbersome bike rental areas on the corners - make parking more
expensive - have 3 hour parking on side streets - including the West
End - build a parking garage under Wagner Park - turn the restricted
parking by permit back to regular paid - start making all of this less
restrictive and it might work better - Business owners do not need
more restrictions - Move the Pitkin County jail and turn that into
parking - do we need that particular building right in town? Let’s think
about what people need - instead of restricting - when it’s $20.00 an
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 89 155
hour to park - that might get someone’s attention. Most of the bikers
peddling around need to go to bike driving school - and learn to be
courteous -
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:45 AM
Stop micromanaging. Bike lanes will make vehicular worse.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 06:48 AM
Well intended, but terrible plan. Pedestrians are fine when they pay
attention. Make them - even if it means having crossing guards.
Bicyclists have responsibility to pay attention too. The “bikes can roll
through stop signs” was a terrible decision. Until we figure out a
larger scale solution to vehicles and parking (intercept lot!!!!!!),
clipping back bit by bit parking spaces and road width is only going to
make driver behavior worse. Can you say “road rage”???
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 07:04 AM
The downtown core is currently too busy with too many cars. Overall,
widening cycling and pedestrian walking areas is a good idea. It
would contribute to a more peaceful, less chaotic experience in
downtown which would lead to a more pleasant experience in
downtown Aspen.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 07:55 AM
It is not appropriate to remove parking spaces without better
alternative. All of this is a little band aid on a big problem. We need
gondolas between mountains and a train or monorail from
downvalley.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:09 AM
Many of these questions are leading questions in that you need to put
in a response even if you disagree with all of them.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:11 AM
This is absurd, have you been to Morocco, France. Portugal or
Spain? I have spent time in all of these places before COVID and
found ROW TO BE DANGEROUS at best. What I have observed is
that bicycles (electric, pedal or other sourced powered; dangerous
because of the lack increased speed and not observing bike riders by
pedestrians and the other way around. I personally believe that as
proposed 20 some odd years ago; close off the down town, make it a
pedestrian center and build a free parking structure under Wagner
Park. To me(?). Ultimately proposing, eventually, if a person who is
not wealthy will not be able to park in the core (valet parking, whoops
there goes at least 20-40 spaces) I am positive that pay to park will
go up exponentially. In turn mere human beings will be eliminated
from feeling comfortable visiting “Aspen” . Oh well, that’s the end of
what we who used to be Aspenites considered home. Oh yeah, I
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 90 156
remember how this started in 1986, expand the Aeroport, have free
parking. Oh my the free parking was short lived,it basically in a short
time it was needed. I see similar things happening down town and the
poor people, will only be left if it is available(?) take a bus from some
parking area 5 - 8 miles away from town.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 08:40 AM
Counter-flow bicycle lane seems dangerous to pedestrians crossing -
they may infer the car/truck vehicles' "one-way" as applying to all and
step in front of a bicycle. Also, many businesses need parking. Have
you considered a progressive (increasing) price structure for parking?
For example, $1 for first 30 minutes, $2 for second thirty minutes, $5
for second hour, $10 for third hour.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:24 AM
I fear that Aspen is bending to far towards solutions that do not serve
the local community but rather the transient visitors. Folks that live
here or own a second/third home or condo in Aspen know the rules
of the road. But I understand the need for safety. My concern: far
fewer parking spaces for folks like me who come into the core (year
round) for an hour during the day to shop, take a fitness class, have
lunch or pick up kids. And no, I don’t want to walk from Rio Grande
garage to shop at putting county dry goods or get skis tuned at
Gorsuch or hair cut. It’s not worth the trip. I also feel that this lab on 2
blocks is but the beginning, it will just push the congestion out to
other blocks and then you will be asking for input on extending the
bike/pedestrian lanes to other areas of the core. I do love the
extended curbs/shortened crosswalks be it allows for both
pedestrians and drivers to see each other more quickly
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:37 AM
Those that wrote this, and I reading this, were all raised in the age
when you had to parallel park to get your driver's license. That is no
longer a requirement, and fewer and fewer driver's know how to
parallel park. Parallel parking will create even more congestion and
accidents. Keep the pull in parking. Do not allow employees to park
on the street. They should park offsite and there should be a Aspen
trolley that goes around continuously. The Rio Grande parking lot is
ALWAYS full. I have tried many times. Utilize alleys for deliveries and
construction trucks. Create one way traffic flows with drive in parking.
PLEASE CONSIDER having all down valley commuters park in
Intercept lot and take the bus in, then have the trolley pick up for
various drop off points. It looks like 99% of the cars driving in are
commuters with only one person in the car. We simply cannot have
that many cars coming in daily with only one driver, not only to ease
congestion, but also to protect the environment.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 91 157
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:55 AM
This is yet another terrible idea from anti business groups at the City.
Taking away parking spaces is a self defeating idea - do you want to
kill business in Aspen? The City earns sales tax revenue from all the
downtown businesses - it should be fostering business, not impeding
it. The main problem in downtown Aspen with pedestrians and
bicyclists is that they don’t look, don’t obey traffic rules and generally
wander about on the streets. Have you thought of ticketing jaywalkers
and cyclists who ignore street signs/usage? It would be more
effective than penalizing businesses.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 09:57 AM
As someone originally from New York City, bike lanes have been a
huge disaster for traffic and public safety. Bikers use the bike lane to
abdicate all personal responsibility for awareness of their
surroundings and end up hitting pedestrians. No bike lanes, they
have to pay attention.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:01 AM
I have seen how these well intended “improvements” have messed
up other towns and cities - increased traffic, increased (or no
reduction) in pedestrian/biker and vehicle incidents- I am strongly
opposed to the proposed plan. I believe in personal responsibility for
pedestrians, drivers and bikers and know that physical modifications
to the grid will have unintended and negative consequences - with
little if any gain.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:41 AM
The way this survey is set up is incredibly slanted. Obviously a
counter bike lane would make it safer for bikers. But it is it better? Is it
necessary? Is it worth losing the parking? What about ticketing bikers
who are going the wrong way? That would also make it safer for
them. How about ticketing jay walkers or people walking down the
middle of the street? That also makes it safer. Giving up nearly half
the available parking is a terrible solution. The parking garage is
already nearly full and inconvenient. Valet and ride share just add
costs and create more striation in the local community. At some point
we will give up to much parking to be a viable place to visit or own a
locally supported business. The one suggestion I have is to make the
Galenea Street shuttle really stand out. I’ve lived here for over 20
years and I still don’t know which shuttle it is or where it stops. Paint it
bright red or something and put some kind of marker (bronze aspen
leaves?) at all the stops. That will at least drive engagement.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:15 AM
Please help the CCLC understand that parking is NOT critical to
business viability, in fact its the opposite. Walkable and bikeable
neighborhoods are better for business!
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 92 158
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:50 AM
Better signage
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 10:55 AM
Your survey is slanted to your desired conclusion. What if we don’t
agree with any of your ideas?
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:20 AM
Don’t allow all advertising boards and signs blocking the walkways of
businesses
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:30 AM
Law enforcement should watch the crosswalks more carefully and
cite drivers for violating the flashing lights
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 11:53 AM
This is completely not needed. One option to increase safety for all,
cyclists, pedestrians and, vehicles is to enforce the current laws.
Bikes should obey all traffic laws, including not going the wrong way
on a one way street. Super simple but ignored in this survey. If you
get hit by a car going the wrong way on a one way street has anyone
in the government asked APD who gets the ticket? The bike will,
because it was not following the laws on the books. Lets simply
enforce the laws, safety will improve as a result. How about Jay
walking? How about doing what every parent teaches their kids, stop
at the intersection, look both ways, assume the car does not see you
and then when it is safe you can cross the street. If a 6 year old can
do this we should all be able to do this. Again safety is improved. No
need for this "living lab" and the loss to business parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 12:21 PM
Please don’t make parking more expensive. It is already insane for
locals. With Covid I don’t feel safe taking public transportation and
many others feel the same. We need parking spaces. My older
parents can’t ride a bike in the winter and bring grocery’s home. It’s
barely safe for them to walk around in the the winter. The walkways
get SO icy. It’s winter more then it’s summer here. It doesn’t make
sense to make this a biker/walking focused community. So please,
don’t take away parking spaces and make getting around harder. For
those who are older and injured. Please
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 02:35 PM
Your team created the current problems, I am sure you can figure out
how to fix them. No more one way streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 03:38 PM
Please stop removing parking spaces. Enough have been removed.
We are a winter community 1/2the year and local people and
businesses do not want reduced parking nor increased parking fees.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 93 159
Enough is enough
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 04:54 PM
While this is a good idea in theory, taking away 40 parking spots and
having those cars continuously circling town for parking only makes
the problem worse.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 05:04 PM
Hearing that you want to remove 44 parking spots has to be the
dumbest idea I’ve heard to date.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 05:26 PM
Everything is fine..you can't take away 44 spaces, when you already
have reduced parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/22/2022 07:50 PM
More parking spots not less.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 08:55 AM
Cross streets on cycling routes should have stop signs. The west end
route has this almost entirely. Hopkins bike route needs help too!
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 09:33 AM
Space isn't the issue, it is people not looking where they are going
which causes these accidents. Traveling but foot, bike, motorcycle,
and bus for the past 16 years and being aware of my surroundings, is
what has kept me safe.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 09:47 AM
I'm a cyclist by trade and at heart. Yes, the living lab would make for
a slightly better cycling experience through the core. However, I think
44 spot reduction in parking is absolutely not acceptable. Mitigation
efforts all revolve around increased parking costs or shuttle services -
all of which add ADDITIONAL obstacles for a consumer/shopper to
overcome. This will all add up to a hugely negative impact for local
retailers. Aspen is a great town where cyclists, pedestrians, and cars
have to learn to coexist on the same small streets. It is what it is, and
I think driver education (tourist education) will have a bigger impact
than anything else, without all the negative consequences.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 10:17 AM
My parents, like many long-time residents, are 84 and 85 years old.
It’s EXTREMELY difficult to find handicapped parking in the “core”.
Eliminating 44 parking places is absolutely terrible for them.
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 03:40 PM
Cyclist should obey traffic rules always! Cyclist should not be biking
against the traffic! Pedestrians should not be walking on the middle of
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 94 160
our streets. We do have sidewalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/23/2022 05:28 PM
Please nix the idea of parallel parking on Galena ,forget the We cycle
stations in the Galena, Cooper area ,they already take up TOO
MANY parking spots. We need some law enforcement/ presence
back in this town, bicycles have over run the brick sidewalks, bicycles
FLY down Cooper, the wrong way on to Galena north. As a person
who works in the ACRA CHAMBER KIOSK I see it all. Behavior is the
worst. Has been for Two years now. Police presence NEEDS to be
stepped up.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 10:17 AM
it would be insane to reduce parking in any way. I bicycle all the time
and have no safety concerns. bicyclists need to pay attention and
take responsibility.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 11:52 AM
Consider impacts of hotel shuttle vehicles and private transportation.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 02:34 PM
I think bikes are the biggest problem, even with bike lanes painted on
the street pavement. Using protective barriers for bikes traveling in
BOTH directions would be safer, maybe by not widening sidewalks for
pedestrians. If the barriers were implemented between the sidewalk
and cars as in many large cities, you might be able to keep diagonal
parking spaces -- if only one one side of the one-way street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:01 PM
I am Not in favor of losing 44 parking spaces, but I do think that
parallel parking on the east side of Galena St. between Hyman, &
Cooper is a must, keep all of the west side head in. Also get rid of the
Street restaurants, for example Spring Cafe, Silverpeak, Meat &
Cheese, etc.Also all of Mark Hunt's construction parking !!! Also NO
We cycle stations in town, they take up enough spaces at City Market
on Cooper.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:47 PM
Limit car travel - lower speed limit
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 03:55 PM
The plans carbon footprint which is not inconsequential is mostly, like
98% in ripping up the curbs and probable parts of the sidewalks and
then laying down new concrete, not green, and pavement using a
bunch of stinky diesel machines. Do not do it, keep the current
sidewalks. Improving the cores safety and efficiency is good. Your
statement about one-way pedestrian lane does not make any sense.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 95 161
Pedestrians using sidewalks don’t need one-way lanes. You can
narrow the one-way bike lane that way, it doesn’t need to be
maximized. The narrow barriers separating the new bicycle lane from
cars look marvelous. Plant them with native xeriscape hummingbird
and butterfly friendly perennial flowers, please. Connecting the three
blocks of new bicycle lane makes sense. It would make even more
sense to think big, finish the whole project by transforming the 600
east block of Cooper into one-way east and adding a counter-flow
bike lane so that the four blocks line up for both cars and bikes. The
600 block of Cooper’s bike lane starts on the north side kitty corner
from City Markets parking lot, it takes the space of those first two or
three public parking spots there on the corner, then there’s Chateau
Aspens three car wide private parking where the bike lane could
meander a bit to the left for parallel parking on the north side of the
block in front of Mezzaluna. From the centerline of Cooper to the the
bike lane put in a permanent raised urban park with more butterfly
perennials, obviousness improves safety and a two foot wall on your
only possible lane is a pretty good deterrent. That block is not safe for
bicycles. There is little difference between transforming three or four
blocks. Make it right. Converting residential parking into commercial
parking makes sense to keep everybody happy. The 500 block of
Cooper should have angle parking on the south side and parallel
parking on the north. The 600 block should be the same. Consistency
helps safety. Do not expand the Galena St. Shuttle unless you use
only EVs. Upping the frequency of the Galena St. Shuttle from the
parking garage to downtown is a total waste of money, energy, and
pollution. Put in a big easy to read signage inside the parking garage
directing people to the elevator with a diagram of the G S S pickup
spot on the corner of that alley and Galena. People exiting the
elevator will see this city shining like a diamond (it’s actually a
challenge to make it more beautiful and why wait the average of five
minutes when you can walk and take in the historic architecture along
the way.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 04:52 PM
I''l say it again, Aspen is Disney World with cars....we know how they
manage their "Park"! I think you have to decide if a street will be a
street or a street will become a mall and that those collection of
streets need to be integrated. The inconsistent mix of these different
corridors within the core combined with pedestrians who ignore their
surroundings (distracted walkers) surroundings as well as some
cyclists who want to be when it suits them but often ignore traffic
rules meant for them, too....makes a very dangerous situation.
Screen Name Redacted
1/24/2022 09:13 PM
Pedestrians safety yes Bicycles safety NO. We need to protect
pedestrians from bicycles who go thru stop signs willy nilly.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 96 162
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:34 AM
Please consider a way to limit the number of aloof, out-of-touch,
entitled, self-righteous, drivers who cars happen to be registered out-
of-state despite calling themselves locals, from endangering the lives
of our year-round community while over-compensating for their lack of
substantive existence with large, gaudy vehicles they use to transit
the core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 01:10 PM
How are you going to monitor the bicyclists going the wrong way in a
one way street. That is so dangerous and I watch it done all day long
while sitting in the information kiosk in Cooper and Galena. Head in
parking is dangerous for everyone driving or walking or riding a bike
and should not be allowed in town.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 02:37 PM
Parallel parking is going to take away spots for vehicles. It’s going to
cause people to just continue to drive around and around and around
until they find a spot which is going to create a dangerous situation
for pedestrians and cyclists.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 03:43 PM
I would support moving more of the downtown core to all pedestrian
and no cars. Nobody talks about the favorite places they visit as
being accessible by car. The best places in the best cities are public
areas without vehicles. Additionally, please expand Downtowner
service to Hunter Creek & Smuggler! Thank you.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 03:52 PM
Too much focus here on vehicles and bicycles and not enough for
pedestrians!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:41 PM
Educate drivers to SLOW DOWN and take it easy on the roads for
everyone's safety.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:42 PM
Do not remove any additional parking spots. Enough was removed
during the COVID for restaurant Pick up.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:44 PM
this survey is flawed in that it forces to an answer when I didn't
support any of the choices. Bottom line is this - too many vehicles
cause too few parking spots. you cannot take away yet more parking
and not add a parking ramp. put a ramp under Wagner park and all
will be solved. RAMP UNDER WAGNER PARK AND ALL WILL BE
SOLVED.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 97 163
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:48 PM
Eliminating vehicular traffic in the core should be goal #1.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:48 PM
I think the bus is great and service every 1/2 hour on cemetery lane is
perfect. I only use cemetery lane bus and my own bike, so no
comment on other buses or the bike share program.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:49 PM
I think the downtown core should be pedestrian favored, followed by
bikes, and lastly cars. The core is small enough to walk, especially
considering all of the transit options.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:50 PM
Biggest problems in the core are people walking in the street…people
biking the wrong way on the one way. Also, people can’t even angle
park so good luck with them parallel parking…and losing 44 core
spaces is just plain stupid
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:50 PM
forbid the use of cellphones by pedestrians in crosswalks
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:51 PM
Add walk/ don't walk signals in the core. People walking and riding
bikes do not follow the rules and often walk or ride out in front of cars
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:53 PM
More pedestrian/cycle only areas
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:53 PM
bikers are not entitled. People renting ebikes need to read and sign,
initial each safety rule so that they know the rules of the road for
ebikes. For their own safety and for others. ebikes are great. I am not
against them. Often new riders should have a quick how to safely
drive lesson.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:55 PM
I live at Obermeyer place and it is difficult to use the bus system for
there is no way to get into town by bus easily. It would be wondeful to
have a stop on N. Spring Street/
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:56 PM
As I see it your greatest safety issue is ice on the side of the roads
you do a very poor job of cleaning the streets of ice. Very dangerous
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:56 PM
people, biker & drivers are messy, which is part of the vitality of a city.
let’s not overreact.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 98 164
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 05:59 PM
Please do not reduce the number of parking spaces in the Core. In
the past this has increased parking pressure on nearby residential
neighborhoods.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:03 PM
The questions in this survey are too narrowly defined, and seem to
have an agenda on shaping the answers you receive. Some of the
key issues have been overlooked. For example, as we succeed in
getting more residents and visitors to walk and bike, and ebike, why
not have questions about the importance of adhering to common
courtesies that one finds in multi use trails, for example, such as in
highly trafficked areas of CA? Installing signs that ask
cyclists/ecyclists to demonstrate intent to turn and to stay in the bike
lanes could make the lab safer and more successful.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:05 PM
Do not remove any more parking spaces!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:07 PM
Cyclist can walk their bikes in the core just like the walking malls.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:09 PM
more per crossing lights
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:09 PM
I think its critical the free 15 min parking rule remains in tact to
encourage locals to run quick errands without paying to park and
without having to go down-valley to accomplish
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:10 PM
Think of the residents and where we live. If you continue to limit
parking in the core, you have to improve “shuttle” service in some
form from hillside residences to Ruby. Service that works in all
weather. Bikes can’t climb Mountain Valley or Aspen Grove
neighborhoods in winter. We need to TRUST that a shuttle that takes
us to the core, will take us back. RAFTA gas failed at that year after
year.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:12 PM
People are barely able to parallel park in a timely fashion or at all so
this is NOT a viable option for less cars or greater visibility
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:19 PM
extend pedestrian mall
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 99 165
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:21 PM
If you want to make it safer for pedestrians on sidewalks and
intersections before you do fancy studies and experiments, GET RID
OF THE ICE ON SIDEWALKS AND AT CURB CUTS. In questions 5
and 11 if "none of the above" had been an option I would have
chosen that. Obviously this survey is designed to get answers you
want
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:22 PM
Eliminating 40 spaces (or whatever the number is...) without
replacement parking spaces is not a good plan. The City cannot
continue to eliminate parking spaces and assume vehicles will
magically disappear, and there won't be a demand for parking. the
the living lab experiment will work IF the city can identify other parking
spaces, and I do not support the city encouraging parking in
residential areas, which already has a high demand for parking
spaces. Each year, we watch more and more spaces disappear in the
commercial core, and while I walk to town, ride the shuttle bus or ride
my bike all summer long, there are times when we need to park in the
commercial core. Due to lack of parking, I have stopped shopping in
Aspen and either order online or go down valley where the hassle
factor is less. It's shame as I want to support our businesses. The
"original" Aspen Area Community Plan from the 1990's was always to
provide another city parking garage on the east side of town while
offering transit and other options for residents and visitors. You still
need a certain amount of parking to make it work in our town,
especially for businesses. And please please get rid of the
construction vehicles (and their city issued permits) that take up all
the spaces in town. Let me shuttle in from the intercept lot or
somewhere, they create a lot of the issues in town.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:24 PM
I do not like the counter flow bike dedicated space. It should be used
for parking. We can navigate our bikes on the streets the same as
autos.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:26 PM
Auto-free downtown.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:27 PM
parallel parking is a bad idea. tourist in rental cars who dont know
how to parallel park will be a complete disaster and may create more
problems with cyclists
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:31 PM
There is so much construction and service vehicles, reserved spaces
for rest. pickups and rest decks that between van drop offs and
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 100 166
people circling for existing spaces it is almost impossible to ride you
bike through town
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:32 PM
Please DO NOT allow/encourage bicycles to ignore traffic regulations
by installing a wrong-way bike lane on a one way street. The distance
bikes have to pedal to circumnavigate those 3 blocks is not worth the
headache and confusion.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:35 PM
I don’t like having less parking available with Parallel parking. This
means there will be more distracted drivers searching for a parking
spot
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:37 PM
Reducing parking means people circling around and around looking
for a spot. I would look at actually INCREASING parking. A garage
closer to the core, underground, etc. Stop taking spots away for the
experiments and bike racks. Plenty of space in pedestrian areas (the
mall) for bike racks, seems silly to remove parking spaces for them.
Been here 23 years, less and less parking is making people drive
around more looking for a spot, causing more accidents, etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:50 PM
I think most of the living lab experiments are too costly and too
confusing. If only there was someone to st could stop folks and
politely let them know the errors of there ways and in turn educate
how to: properly cross a street; properly drive a car, properly ride a
bike, or even properly drive a bus. Parallel parking is more dangerous
for bikers. It might be ok if you could rely on the driver of the parked
vehicle to check a mirror before opening a door. I’d rather take my
chances reading the tail, brake & reverse lamps & hope there not all
burnt out at the same time, than rely on doors flailing open without
warning.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:51 PM
Cyclists won't follow the designated route but the focus should be on
driver-to-driver relations and driver to pedestrian interactions. The
cops should cite more bikes on road infractions to make them ride in
a safer manner but the issue in the core is of vehicle and pedestrian
safety. Make the directional traffic more intuitive to tourists and
increase the line of sight for drivers.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:52 PM
As a local that was born and raised here, I am incensed about the
number of parking spaces that have been eliminated due to WE-
cycle, dining tables, storage of rental equipment, dedicated valet
spots and each year the city is allowing more and more objects to
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 101 167
take up parking spaces. Unfortunately, I have to drive into work 6
days a week. I live in the city limits but I have to be at work by 5am;
at that hour it is too icy, dark and cold to walk or ride a bike, the
buses are not in operation at that hour. I do not make enough money
to pay for a taxi or parking daily. At that hour it is also impossible to
find a parking space if the city is plowing the roads. It is clearly
marked no parking between 3am and 7am. Walking to and from the
parking structure at 4:30am is a bit dicey in regards to the ice, snow
and darkness. I find myself having to move my a car a couple times
per day to avoid a parking ticket. I’m not able to get a car pool pass
that early in the morning.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:53 PM
Removing parking space will have a negative impact: drivers will
spend more time driving around looking for parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 06:59 PM
These are some good ideas, however, enforcing the rules regarding
riding bikes on sidewalks and in the Mall is very important. A greater
police presence would be helpful. They could at least educate the
public.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:05 PM
Removing 44 parking spaces will be bad for retail business.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:17 PM
The downtowner is a crock of shit because it doesn't include
centennial and hunter creek its for tourist and fat people for the $300k
the city tax payers are paying the local citizens should be able to use
it . The tourists are not our Guests. they are the customers of the
corporate commercial tourism business. the downtowner should be
paid for by the ski co and the hotels. its a scam
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:20 PM
Only parallel parking would be a disaster!
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:23 PM
Local parking permits for employees in the core. Or local discounts at
meters. Tourists should not be parking in the core. Encouraged to
park at their hotels or homes as they do not know how to park, where
their even going and uneducated on the heavy foot traffic within core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:25 PM
It would help to limit the size of vehicles (or length of vehicles that
angle park downtown. Many reach out to the center of the street so
that drivers have to cross over into the oncoming lane to get around
them. This is especially evident on Mill Street (in front of Bandana
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 102 168
and ANB) but also on other streets. Some have bike racks or other
racks that are crossing over the middle of the street. Maybe not allow
any larger cars or trucks to park on the downtown streets?
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:33 PM
Too many long trucks, SUVs and big vehicles with racks are parking
all day in the core and sticking out into the streets or blocking the
streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:37 PM
Retail stores need parking spaces
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:38 PM
You can do all the experiments you want. You need enforcement out
of there cars, walking the streets and interacting with people. Cyclists,
pedestrians and drivers need to be off their phones.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:50 PM
Crosswalks! Holy moly. This is a great walking city.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 07:53 PM
People are running errands and need their vehicles Mark city market
spots accordingky
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:02 PM
All streets inside the core should be one way. Parallel parking should
be eliminated. Angle parking is much more efficient.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:03 PM
I've lived in Aspen for 29 year and in my opinion, the entire core of
the city should be pedestrian only. that is the only way people will
remain safe in this city. Vail does it, why can't we? enough with the
greed of parking x amount of cars in the core. we need to keep
children and adults safe in our city. in addition, every stop sign should
indicate how many stop signs exist in the intersection. 2 way or 4
way... why not? tourists are driving in our city and we need to keep all
other drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians safe. I believe there needs to
be more police monitoring the violations with cars and rfta bus drivers,
running stop signs, lights, etc. crack down on the bad drivers and bus
drivers and give them real consequences for their actions. people
drive in the wrong direction down cooper to galena st all day long - no
enforcement. what are our police officers doing all day long? we need
to protect people and uphold the law in our city.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:03 PM
Aspen Police do absolutely nothing about this issue. Possibly they
can help out with traffic mitigation.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 103 169
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:04 PM
I think eliminating parking/driving in the core would be preferable to all
the options.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:10 PM
Tourists simply cross at leisure with no regard to cars and bikes. Bike
lanes work. It is insane to take away parking spaces and or charging
more money to park.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:11 PM
greater intersection illumination
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:26 PM
Just leave it be. All these changes do nothing but impede our
roadways more. If you want less congestion stop the construction.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:26 PM
And the number one reason that people say they do not visit my
business on a more regular basis especially during the summer is....
LACK OF PARKING!!! We rely on repeat visits and high volume to
sustain
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:27 PM
I would support closing part of downtown to cars. Increase space for
pedestrians, cyclists, kids and even restaurants! Like Italy :)
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:34 PM
These ideas negate the fact that people coming to work, people who
are coming for Dr appointments, etc will always bring their car. A
landscaper is not going to take a bus. A parent is not going to take a
bus from school with their kid into town. These ideas are ridiculous
and do not grasp real life solutions. Do something to allow for parking
in the outer part of the core. Make a walking mall for the rest of the
core and stop all cars-they are only driving around looking for parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:36 PM
Lime Scooters. That would be awesome.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:49 PM
All the saftey stuff is great, but the consequense to our clients may be
too much to bare. There is already too little street parking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:56 PM
Go through the core and add parking to corners where there are
sidewalk bump outs into the street. Remove all handicap parking in
the core on the streets as handicap cars can park anywhere in the
core for free. Remove all police reserved parking spaces as they park
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 104 170
anywhere anytime anywhere. Make bikes travel the same direction as
cars. Follow national standards for safety. Don't try to re-invent the
wheel. If you have a safety idea and it is not implemented elsewhere
there is a reason. Enforce the laws and replace signs that are not
accurate. Ticket unregistered unlicensed e-motor cycles, scooters
and motorcycles traveling and parking in the core and the streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:58 PM
Build large, underground parking structures, and just make the core
walking/biking only.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 08:59 PM
Putting futher stress on drivers in the core is going to make the core
less safe. Narrowing the driving lane down Galena is going to give
drivers less room for error and make more conflict. Because our
speed limits are so slow, i thinknit is safer for bikers to be in the same
lane as a car. I feel that way when I am a biker and when I am a
driver. I would rather have the biker right in front of me or right behind
me and when Im a biker I want to be totally visible. Squeezing a
dedicated "bike lane" on to our street where bikers can zip up on cars
blind spots and pass them is making the core unsafe. We need
everyone in the middle of the lane where you can see what they are
doing and nobody can pass the other. The extended curbs just
encourage pedestrians to go out in the middle of the street and
decrease cars reaction times. All of the tinkering in the teeny core
streets is just jamming everyone on top of one a another and making
it worse. Stop making it all more difficult
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:00 PM
With the initial spread of covid a few years ago and restaurants
encroaching on our current streets there are less and less parking
spaces for anyone visiting or coming into town. I personally am not
impacted so much because I live a couple blocks from the core I walk
everywhere and bike in the spring/ summer time.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:03 PM
Your questions are loaded. How about banning bikes from central
core or making people walk them.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:04 PM
Cozy Point should be a parking lot. Then shuttles bring people into
town. Turn Aspen into a primarily pedestrian town.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:06 PM
1.Peds and bikes are not the same and should not be required to
share paths. 2.Visitors should be directed to garage parking (I know
we need more…) and encouraged to GET OUT of their CARS. 3.The
east end is a disaster for peds AND bikes.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 105 171
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:20 PM
Find a way to get drivers to slow down.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:29 PM
I think you guys are on the right track.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:30 PM
Mixing bikes and cars in the limited core space is not a good idea. No
matter how well thought out, there will be a serious accident as you
add more bikes. Especially bikes ridden by visitors who haven't been
on one in years
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:41 PM
I think the living lab is a great idea and the components of the lab's
design are well designed and crucial to improving mobility and safety
in the core. I have worked in the core, on and off, for the last decade
and firmly believe that these are the kinds of improvements that need
to be made. The outcry from the business community is selfish and
short-sighted. Our town's quality of life is not predominantly or solely
based on financial success, but rather on the actual health, well-
being, safety and happiness of our citizens. I think these are core
values that should be balanced and considered when designing how
our town flows and manages transportation. Yes, we're a destination
that needs to work with tourists, visitors and components of a resort
economy, but no: we shouldn't avoid difficult changes or
improvements to keep a small percentage of revenue in our pockets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 09:47 PM
A couple comments on this survey: 1) Questions 5 and 11 needed to
have a 'None of the above' or 'Other' option. Without it you're
directing the responses to a pre-determined outcome (what a
surprise - not). 2) Question 14 regarding the Downtowner only asked
about hours of operation. What about expanding the service area?
The city has almost killed off local taxi service, so it should let the
Downtowner expand to the North side of town. Do not remove or
reconfigure (to parallel) parking spaces in the core. All that will do is
cause more cars to circle the blocks looking for a space. If the city
hates cars so much, then just turn the whole downtown into a
pedestrian mall and make everyone park at the intercept lot and bus
in. Or ride a bike, or walk - again, not. Do you recall when Mayor
Scadron proposed biking in from Buttermilk? Total fiasco. Wonder
how much money the city wasted on that ridiculous mobility
experiment? Thanks for asking.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:03 PM
Teach tourists how to use and share the road; ticket offenders, cyclist
pedestrians drivers alike.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 106 172
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:06 PM
Please Stop cramming the sidewalks and open air mall. Encourage
pedestrian traffic and bring back the music festival students to play in
the mall. Plan into our space with Mind, Body and Spirit at the
forefront. Keep it simple and elegant. (This questionnaire had
required (*) and limited response options, and therefore not all
responses provided accurately represent my views.)
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:17 PM
I recognize that there could be high costs with some elements of the
plans like increasing transit. use of hail service as with the
downtowner is a great way to offset lower vehicle access to the
downtown. I firmly believe that downtown areas are more attractive
with fewer vehicles. Aspen can and should be a place where people
see cutting edge approaches to trip reduction which they might take
home and request in their own communities.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:36 PM
Reducing bike traffic in the core will help.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:40 PM
When I'm navigating the core in a vehicle, I try to avoid the Galena-
Cooper corridor to avoid pedestrians.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:49 PM
Taking away parking in the core is a terrible idea in general and
especially harmful to business owners who have suffered enough.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 10:56 PM
Eliminate automobiles in the downtown Aspen core.
Screen Name Redacted
1/25/2022 11:23 PM
In my experience the issue lies with motorists who seem to be in a
hurry hunting for a parking spot. People doing fast laps around the
core. If we remove parking spots I imagine it would increase the
number of these circling sharks, which is a negative. How do you
plan to convince people to take the bus or downtowner instead of
driving. I feel like it’s going to be a real hard sell to some people.
Another thing I’m nervous about is my work situation. We run a
service company and do on average 2-3 hour jobs in the core. We
need to shuttle ladders and several loads of tools for each job. Will
there be a place for us to park. Or if not park could we have a reliable
set of places to drop off tools and then have a secondary reliable
place to park the vehicle for a few hours?
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 107 173
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:04 AM
Allow for better pedestrian traffic on hopkins near Monarch. Close off
the street?
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:14 AM
Implement stopping at stop signs and stop lights for bikes. I live on
the Hopkins bike way. Bikes hit pedestrians and keep going. Why
don’t they have any rules?
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:42 AM
I don’t think cyclists will use that counter flow lane. They will continue
to ride on street.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 05:11 AM
Less autos into aspen is a must
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 05:28 AM
RFTA needs to provide full service to the new City Hall, Obermeyer
and Eagles- to year round.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:10 AM
I believe driver respect of others is critical.to safety. Not surenhow
you can instill this. Downtown needs more parking to alleviate
problems.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:15 AM
People don’t cross at designated Cross areas and they make it
unsafe for vehicles as well as vehicles not abiding by signage and
speed
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:16 AM
I would like to see a monorail system to remove many of the cars in
downtown. A system that would serve all the way to Glenwood with
park and ride enhanced along the way to encourage use.We need a
big change for the future not a band aid.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:22 AM
Extend the Downtowner boundaries will help more people get into
town safely and extend the Downtowner hours. This will help 100%
more than any other more costly idea. It will help more people safely
get into town and home.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:32 AM
How does the proposal address cars circling looking for parking
spaces. The parking garage is uninviting and an unpleasant
experience, how will the reduction of parking spaces in the core be
balanced?
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 108 174
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 06:44 AM
Protect parking access to the local business during 9a-6p hours Mon-
Fri to ensure easy parking for customers.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:42 AM
Don’t do anything. Just enforce rules that are in place. Losing parking
spaces discriminates against seniors.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:47 AM
Large signs reminding people to be patient. Large signs reminding
pedestrians, and cyclists of their specific rules of the road/manners
and to look up from their phones and pay attention.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 07:49 AM
You guys just keep chipping away at a persons ability to park and do
business in downtown Aspen, people live here it it not Disneyland.
After 33 years and tons of property taxes to pay for your ridiculously
expensive studies, that you farm out, you have gained nothing but
more confusion for everyone. And, sadly the death of a five year old.
Now your’e proposing housing out of the core, so we have more
people driving to town. Return our streets to wide open spaces, with
ample parking, stops signs must be obeyed and Jay walking not
tolerated and enforced. It’s not that somplicated.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:10 AM
More stop signs. Some streets are a bit higher and when tall cars are
parked you must creep out so cautiously to see if a car is coming-one
without a stop sign. Please NO speed bumps, they are loud and
disruptive
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:14 AM
Eliminating large numbers of parking spots is not ideal.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:16 AM
This looks like a worthwhile experiment. Could be complicated by
parallel parking timing and expertise. Many people struggle with that
and it will likely lead to more vehicles just blocking the street, “double
parked”. Am concerned with the planters that separate the opposite
traffic bike lane. Material? Visibility? Looks like a great improvement
for cyclists.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:22 AM
Educating visitors more about safety
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:50 AM
When you accommodate pedestrians and bicycles with widening
sidewalks at crosswalks, they still manage to stand in front of it
instead of standing on it and are now in direct path of traffic.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 109 175
Pedestrians walk wherever they feel like, in the middle of the street
instead of on heated clear sidewalks. Bicycles go wherever they feel
like, sidewalks to crosswalks to streets. They go against traffic (so
dangerous) without any ticketing. Bicyclists should abide by the same
law as other vehicles! I am a pedestrian, cyclist and I drive both car
and motorcycle. I am lucky to live 10 minutes from downtown and can
walk or bike but so most people don’t, they have to drive and need to
park their cars to shop and eat in restaurants. There is no public
transportation to Red mountain, Starwood, Buttermilk etc.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:51 AM
It won’t change anything and is a waste of time
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:57 AM
please consider business owners who need vehicle access, e.g. for
cleaning crews, pick up or drop off at business location, don't make it
harder for business owners to operate their downtown business
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 08:57 AM
All of the proposals here seem to only help the wealthy that are
already in town. We need light rail or some other more efficient way
to get people up and down the valley
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 09:06 AM
I think biking through downtown core should not be allowed in
summer. To many bikers are tourists who don’t know how to bike
safely. They don’t want to stop because that means getting off and
starting again. They cut in front of pedestrians and vehicles making
the environment unsafe for everyone. The city could install bike
storage locations or people could just walk with their bikes.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 09:24 AM
Comments not necessarily related to this project... 1. Would love to
see WeCycle's season extended. 2. Would like more enforcement on
W Hopkins and W Hallam to prevent vehicles from traveling more
than one block. These areas are where I have had the most negative
interactions with cars as a cyclist. 4. Would like improved street
maintenance during dry periods of the winter to remove ice grooves
from city streets.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 10:18 AM
Remove cars and have walking the priority
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 10:32 AM
Better pedestrian crossings & tell the pedestrian tourists to gett off the
road & onto sidewalks. Tell Florida drivers to obey the street signs!
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 110 176
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 10:50 AM
Aspen is such a small town and easily walkable. The City should
continue to find ways to limit personal cars in the downtown area.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:06 AM
Implement a system for getting pedestrians to use crosswalks.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 11:32 AM
While the project looks nice, I think educating pedestrians and cyclists
would make the core safer.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:01 PM
There should be stop signs on every intersection that crosses the
Hopkins bicycle path. It’s pointless to have a bicycle path that bikes
have to keep stopping on to let cars cross— bikers need to keep their
momentum, cars do not. If Aspen is really serious about climate
change, we should make it much easier to bike and much harder to
drive
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:02 PM
Parallel parking is inefficient. Head-in parking in designated (striped)
spots can accommodate more cars, resulting in less "circling" to find
a spot.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 12:20 PM
I commend the City of Aspen for their attention and efforts towards
pedestrian and alternative transportation safety throughout the core
and around town. I have seen conflicts of use increase in the past two
decades and it seems to be related to more traffic, more vehicles in
the core (and town), and more pedestrian/cyclists/alt transportation.
This is clearly evident in the constant traffic lines coming into and out
of town in both directions all day, not just 7-9AM for incoming traffic
and 3-6PM for outgoing traffic as in the past, The proposed Galena
mobility definitely favors everything except for parking by changing
streets to parallel. I personally only use my car for work or if I
absolutely need it, otherwise I chose alternative transportation.
Unfortunately, most people do not have the same no-vehicle options
that I do. And if these vehicles can't park in the core due to reduced
parking in the core, where will they go? Rio Grande Parking Garage
used to be an under utilized facility for quite a while. In the past few
years, there have been many many days where the garage is full
(which is great it's being used!). But if the garage is filling up under
our current conditions and we reduce parking in the core, these
vehicles will push into other locations like residential neighborhoods in
the West End, Hunter Creek area, Hyman/Hopkins/Cooper
residential, and Ute Ave. Trying to divert vehicles from the core to
alternative parking like the Brush Creek lot to ride a bus is tough to
get people to do without some sort of incentive. I know the focus here
is mobility in the core, which I think these options are worth
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 111 177
investigating and trying/testing, but I also think
helping/reducing/solving this issue is going to compound the ongoing
issue of parking and congestion of automobiles. Just because Aspen
would have less parking in the core does not mean that people will
not drive. They will continue drive, circle downtown burning fossil
fuels and polluting, while also contributing to more congestion. Or
they will come up with creative new places to park, likely in places
close to downtown. This is definitely worth an experiment this
summer, but I do not see this changing vehicular behavior, just
relocating them to different locations.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 01:22 PM
Education. Many cyclists don't understand the rules of the road
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 01:52 PM
I have noticed since the start of the Icon Pass, the residential streets
around the core are PACKED with cars of day skiers. Perhaps if there
was another place for them to park, the core would be safer. I’m not
sure why SkiCo is benefiting at the City’s expense. People are
ignoring stop signs, driving on snowy streets without proper tires,
along with increased pedestrian traffic going through the core to get
to the gondola. I honestly wish SkiCo would remove Aspen Mountain
from the Icon Pass (keeping Buttermilk and Snowmass) since it
seems like an extra burden to our city and infrastructure.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:03 PM
Parking is a huge problem on the blocks adjacent to the core as well
& that needs to be taken into consideration. I live on Hopkins and my
block is always full to the point that I can’t have guests during the day.
Free parking anywhere downtown should be for residents, their
guests, and workers who need to drive (like bar staff who work
outside of RFTA hours). Day skiers should not be using my
neighborhood to park for free on weekdays or weekends. This has
also gotten worse with the IKON pass. SkiCo is stealing local
residents’ parking for their customers; the city should be protecting
the rights of locals who actually live here by making it inconvenient &
expensive for non-locals to park in town. Also, the emissions from
constant traffic is unhealthy for everyone. Anyone who doesn’t live
here or absolutely need to drive (carrying equipment, etc) should be
parking at Intercept and taking the bus.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 02:17 PM
Really appreciate your efforts. We need to build for the future we
want, not constantly reacting to the present we have. Keep thinking
big. Feathers will be ruffled, but people will adapt.
Screen Name Redacted How about the City stops using so many parking spaces for them
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 112 178
1/26/2022 03:04 PM selves with city cars in the parking garage? Or how about the city
stops letting employees park in the garage for free all the time, from
employees who don't live far away ?
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:24 PM
How will the proposed changes improve safety in the crosswalks?
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:32 PM
It is not just about bikers. People are going to drive their cars so work
with that instead of trying to eliminate all cars.
Screen Name Redacted
1/26/2022 03:50 PM
Do not eliminate parking spaces
Optional question (254 response(s), 198 skipped)
Question type: Essay Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 113 179
Q20 Would you be interested in participating in a 60-minute focus group (virtual or in-person
TBD) in late January to further discuss the Mobility and Safety in the Downtown Core living
lab preferred option and enhancement ideas?
124 (27.4%)
124 (27.4%)
328 (72.6%)
328 (72.6%)
No Yes
Question options
Mandatory Question (452 response(s))
Question type: Radio Button Question
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 114 180
Q21 If you answered yes above, please provide us with your contact information, including
your name and phone or email (optional).
Those who provided contact information were contacted about opportunities to participate in
an upcoming focus group discussion. The screen names and specific contact information
provided has been redacted in this public-facing report.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 115 181
IDEAS AND COMMENTS
Comments Collected via ACV or Direct Email
## DATE RECEIVED COMMENT /RESPONSE
1 01-22-22
ACV
Parking is NOT critical to business viability, in fact its the
opposite. Walkable and bikeable neighborhoods are better for
business! Business owners should be begging for bike lanes
and walking malls to cross in front of their store fronts. 4
parking spots in front of a store = 4 potential patrons. Bike
lane/walking mall in front of a store = hundreds of potential
patrons per hour. I support increased bike/ped infrastructure
for safety of all road users AND increased vibrancy in the core.
2 01-22-22
@ 6:52 AM
Email
Responded
01-24-22
@ 12:53 PM
I am trying to complete the survey but find no room for
dissenting opinions.
There are several questions about “which solution do I
support?” but no way to select “none”. The survey cannot be
completed without answering the question and answering the
question only supports an opinion that I do not share.
Next time you create a survey, please include opportunities for
dissenting opinions.
Project Manager Responded:
Thank you for the feedback regarding the Safety and Mobility
in the Downtown Core questionnaire. We will keep your
feedback in mind for future questionnaires.
3 01-25-22
@ 6:39 PM
Email
Responded
01-25-22
@ 9:29 PM
Could not progress with questionnaire after #6 - no way to
respond to #7. I tried!
Communications Lead Responded:
I’m sorry that you encountered trouble with the questionnaire.
I’d love to collect your input for our project. I’ve looked and
can’t seem to find an issue with the questionnaire. It sounds
like you got stopped around the questions asking for input on
the proposed living lab. I did a quick check and don’t see this
email in the survey respondent database – so I think you
should be able to start it again. Can you try and see if you can
complete the survey this time?
If you still have trouble, perhaps we can talk tomorrow via
phone or on a Zoom call and I can capture your responses that
way. We want to make sure your voice is heard on this project.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 116 182
IDEAS AND COMMENTS
Comments Collected via ACV or Direct Email
## DATE RECEIVED COMMENT /RESPONSE
4 01-28-22
@ 10:27 AM
Email
Responded
01-28-22
@ 10:32 AM
I´m mom of a 3 years old and a 7 months baby. We love
walking around town, and using our bikes during the summer.
Most of the times we feel safe, but I've had a few situations
where we didn't when crossing the streets. I think it was
during the holidays, so my guess is that maybe it was visitors
driving. So, my suggestion is to reinforce the communication
towards that we are a "pedestrian friendly" town, for the
tourist and visitors to know and apply while they are here.
Last year with Covid I remember the signs about bikes,
mountain lions, skiers, etc. being 6 ft apart; something catchy
like that could be great!
Thank you for all your work in benefit of the community!!!
Communications Lead Responded:
Thank you so much for adding to our input. I’ve got this and
will include it in our comments collected.
5 01-31-22
ACV
Dear City Staff and City Council, I'm writing to express my
support for your Safety and Mobility enhancements as
proposed in the Downtown Core Project. I recognize that you
must balance community needs with regards to coveted and
limited space. On behalf of the bike commuters and
individuals committed to reducing their car use, thank you for
making decisions that enhance safety and access to the
commercial core by non-vehicular meals. The safer and more
welcoming we make the core, the more individuals will choose
to walk or bike to access commerce. Let's follow the goals of
the AACP and prioritize bike and ped mobility and accelerate
the positive cycle of safe routes which in turn create more use,
reduce congestion and parking challenges and support thriving
commerce.
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 117 183
FOCUS GROUPS
Participant and Session Overview
This summary intends to share the general sentiments at the focus groups, not to
interpret what this feedback means.
Of the 452 questionnaire respondents, 124 indicated a willingness to participate in a
follow-up focus group. An email invitation was sent to approximately 102, and 23
responded that they could attend on at the scheduled times or were interested in a
potential future session. The project team hosted two virtual focus groups on January
31 at 4 p.m. and 5 p.m.
These sessions involved 16 participants and included a mix of residents (17), business
owners (3), and down valley commuters (1); participants could identify as being more
than one category (e.g., resident and business owner).
Each focus group followed the same discussion format:
Welcome
Purpose of Meeting Review
Meeting Agreements
Introductions
Brief Project Background
Discussion on Thoughts and Feelings about the Proposed Living Lab
Rapid Response Round (Thoughts and Feelings about Education, How to Balance
Multiple User Needs with Limited Space, and/or What Do you Want to Make Sure
We Hear Today)
Next Steps
Response Documentation
Staff took written notes during both sessions. These feedback notes combined from
both sessions are listed below in groupings of related subject matter. The notes below
are participant comments, not staff as project team members attended strictly to share
project overview and then to listen.
Thoughts about the Proposed Living Lab:
General
Safety in the core is important to all
Need to consider seasonality and differences in how many people are in the
Downtown Core and how they get there during the different seasons
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 118 184
Consider seasonality in design – for example, will snow plows make the rubber
bumpers for bike lanes invisible in winter
Like the approach to take the changes in baby steps, see how it works, but
keep big picture in mind
Population is diverse and has different needs/preferences (e.g., younger
demographics may like as bike or take transit, older may not like as car
facilitates safe travel door-to-door
Works great on paper, and like the idea of going completely car-free in the
core; however, there is no such thing as a free lunch and need to be respectful
of others’ needs like businesses
Not a fan at all, like an expensive consultant developed without considering the
stated problem - safety in the core, solution doesn’t solve this problem at all
and just has negative impact on local businesses
Lab doesn’t address that multinational stores operate at a loss; need
owner/operator establishments to maintain Aspen’s sense of place
Need to maintain loading zones for businesses
Like the clear definition of space for different types of users
Appreciate the City working on this and making the effort
Good idea, let’s give it a try
Why can we not consider having no cars in the downtown area at all - get rid of
all cars
All for safety, but there must be a better solution that doesn’t lose parking
Overall, the living lab would be a good improvement
Definitely need to compromise to meet multiple needs
There is a difference between safety needs and space plans – safety of
pedestrians is one issue, but taking parking for bike lanes is another if there are
other ways to achieve safety for vehicles of difference types
In a perfect world, want a walkable core but understand different people have
different needs
A trial run is a good way to test it
Parking
Concerned that parking is being removed and that alternates to fill that gap
need to be considered more, including enhancing dial-a-ride services
Parallel parking can cause complications as not everyone is skilled at this or
learns how to do it
Like the parallel parking and support this most in the living lab proposal a head
in parking is scary for all with less visibility
Parallel parking doesn’t equate to bike safety as car doors open into lanes
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 119 185
Like the parallel parking and separate bike lines as less chance of bike/car
collision
Removing parking in the living lab will push problem elsewhere as people will
still want to park somewhere
We are an auto nation, people drive, want to drive, and want to park those cars
somewhere – commuters, tourists, independent contractors –loss of parking for
businesses in the core is a concern
There are areas to make-up loss of specific parking spots such as the carpool
only spots by the church, pick-up other core parking spots
Loss of parking in the core will create more traffic as cars circle looking for
spots
Reclassifying parking spots outside the core just kicks the can down the road
and impacts residents
Residential parking without a permit is already hard with commuters and skiers,
don’t like the idea of taking some to compensate for business/core parking
Need to de-incentivize parking – people parking can afford it, so needs to be
more expensive to encourage less use and other types of transit
Concerned of impacts on residential area if loss in the core – becomes
competitive (e.g., Ute trail area and skiers parking)
Recognize loss of parking, but still need to try something – people want to park
in front of the spot they want to visit, but not always possible currently either
What is long range parking plan – garage often fills up – consider parking
underground structure at other locations (Wagner, by Citimarket)
Hotels required to build garages, but guests don’t have to park there – change
that
Like parking in front of the store they want too, but would also park elsewhere
if needed
This has been studied extensively in many unique cities – businesses fronting
on a bike lane don’t see an impact, this is an outdated idea that parking is a
catalyst for business
Impact on Business
Livelihood of business, and town, depends on tourists; parking proposal will
negatively impact
Tourism benefits from foot traffic as well
Pro-business does not mean being pro safety or pro local – can be all
Service drivers’ jobs become hared with less parking, forced to get permits
Questions around impact of loss of parking on businesses – some have heard
that Hyman and Cooper spots make the most money (or is it Galena)
Participant shared information on comparative rents for the pedestrian mall
versus where you can park in front of a store
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 120 186
Bikes
Need education around ebikes in particular as numbers of users growing, but
riders don’t know their way around town
Work with local bike shops on education, partner with other tourist/visitor
spots like hotels and airport, work with ACRA
Confusion with right of way and cycles and cars
Feel safer when in a protected space
Systems are great to get cyclists into town, but then dump them without much
guidance and force them to be “brave”
Like the protected lanes, sends a clear message of where different users need
to be
Like the yield to stop practice
Seeing larger and larger ebike groups through and in town
Pedestrians
Once people get to the core, they mill about in huge crowds, clear definition of
safe space for all users makes it safer
85% of access to area is not vehicular – could we not maintain all the area as a
pedestrian mall and have space for outside cafes, etc.
All love walking the mall, but people need to get there first and that frequently
involves parking somewhere (garage full by 10 am)
Traffic Patterns
Counterflow is fantastic
Counterflow bike lane is sticky – people are already confused with one-ways
and cut corners; maybe keep flow with traffic
Need to reconsider the counterflow bike lane – need to get cyclists to develop
consistent habits of working the same way cars do – act like cars and builds
better long-term success
Like experimenting with dedicated bike lanes to see how that works for all
Have some concerns on the one-ways, people don’t understand those know
and we see people driving the wrong way all the time
Make every intersection a four-way stop
Transit
Environmental concerns – how do we address not brining all this congestion
into town to begin with
Balance traffic/parking in town concerns with keeping cars down valley and
push people to transit while also accounting for construction vehicles/delivery
vehicle needs to serve area
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 121 187
Increase shuttle areas and hours
Some homes (vacation rentals?) have 7 or 8 people coming in separate cars,
incentivize fewer vehicles or transit services rather than dependance on cars
Bigger Picture
Need to not just look at the Downtown Core, but both ends as this is how
people/traffic enters the core, can it be controlled better before it gets into
town
Need to manage speeding in town, drivers fly down the street
Consider other transportation modes we see and how these fit in the picture
now or what future trends may be (e.g., skateboards, one-wheels, etc.)
Education for all users on everyone being as safe as possible
Currently plan extra time when coming into town (or have clients coming into
town), if fewer parking spots in the core happened, people can handle and
adjust to that too
What is the goal – safety – but doesn’t this include climate change and having
to address the car culture as well
Rapid Response Round
Thoughts and Feelings Regarding: Education and/or Enforcement, How to Balance Multiple User Needs
with Limited Space, and/or What Do you Want to Make Sure We Hear Today
What Do You Want to Make Sure We Hear Today?
Account for business and resident needs for large truck access (deliveries and
commercial deliveries)
What impacts will the living lab or parking changes have on alley usage/traffic
Consider seasonality – don’t make something that may only work in one season,
must work year-round
Enhance services like dial-a-ride as few alternative to your car when on the
mountain in winter
“Cacophony of stuff” – all mixed together, everyone forced to slow down and
be more aware
Want to be idealistic, but there need to maintain a sense of realism – especially
on potential impacts to business with less parking
This is a nice effort, need to start somewhere
Need to address bigger picture –continued growth in the valley, how do we
incentivize using cars less
Was not an original Downtowner supporter, but fully onboard and see it being
successful now for certain shareholders – look at enhancements to frequency
and areas
Need compromise, but a single car on the road dominates its use – you can no
longer have trees, cafes, etc. on that road and as a bike or pedestrian you are
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 122 188
always looking over your shoulder – we need exposure to a different world –
ask about no cars at all as an option on future surveys
If you take away core parking, you still need to put the cars somewhere
Parking close is a convenience and the living lab will ask people to change –
change can be hard, and transition can be hard, but people learn new ways
Education will be need – for lab if implemented and on other issues, comes first
Thoughts on Education and/or Enforcement
Awareness around parking options before you get to town and those available
in town
Leverage existing materials like the cards parking enforcement gives out with
citations to share other parking information
Keep it consistent across all modes and keep it extremely simple so people
hear the same thing everywhere (ACRA, bike shops, car rental spots, airport,
City, etc.)
If we can be proactive on prevention, less need for enforcement
Develop understand of the system as it is
Develop better wayfinding so users, particularly bikes, can navigate from trails
into town better – blue arrows entry points and for most popular destinations
More bike and ebike education are needed, get on rental slips, talk about why
ebikes are different
More incentives to use alternate transportation (carpool, take the bus) as there
will never be enough parking spaces for everyone who wans to drive a car to
park and there are too many single occupant vehicles coming into town
You are not stuck in traffic – you ARE traffic
Need a carrot and stick approach – if you do this, here are the benefits, if you
do that here are the consequences (parking fees should be higher/stick)
Need more safety officers in the core issuing tickets; particularly on parking
illegally or wherever (drop-off spots), but also for drivers, pedestrians and
cyclists exhibiting reckless behavior (not stopping at stop signs, speeding,
jaywalking, etc.)
Balancing Space for Multiple User Needs
Need more stop signs and flashing signals to cross
Maintain awareness of other tech and future modes of transportation and how
that may work in this space
We can’t reduce the number of cars as we’d like so need to be careful to not
kick the can down the road – e.g., move parking problems from core to
residential areas
Services need people to access them, and people need access to these
services – need to find balance
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 123 189
Ideally would like to get rid of parking in the core, but also hear and see the
other side - perhaps look at other garage options in town
Like other cities, create an underground parking center in town – funnel cars
there, and drivers then walk up to a pedestrian core
Comments Shared Outside of Project Scope:
Need a crossing light at Hyman and Original
Build a parking garage down valley, encourage transit into town
Need parking garage at intercept lot
Follow-Up Email Submissions
Following the focus group sessions, several participant had thoughts emerge they hadn’t had time to
share in the discussion, or that the discussion prompted for them upon reflection. Highlights from those
emails are included below if the notes were not captured above or if the participant expressed additional
information on a topic or thought.
Concerns about the project
Think this demonstration plan is going to backfire on the City.
Vehicular traffic and downtown parking are overwhelming during the summer.
Reiterate strong opposition to the Living Lab and removing 44 parking spaces
from the core
Belief that there was a noticeable lack of business representation.
The City of Aspen runs on sales tax revenue. Businesses pay a majority of sales
tax (referenced in potential comparison to other participants in the focus
group). Question if all input should have equal weight or if input from
businesses in the core should be given greater weight, and have direct
outreach from the city on the process.
Project’s state purpose is safety - this plan doesn’t offer that. The plan would
not have done anything to help in two recent serious accidents. Incidents with
cars that fail to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk are daily occurrences. This
plan would do nothing to prevent these interactions. Making all intersections in
the core 4-way stops would be a far better plan to make people safer.
This plan is a slap in the face to implement a "safety" measure that is simply a
subterfuge for a utopian fantasy of people who want to live a lifestyle
subsidized by other people.
Desire for additional focus groups and more business representation as this
directly affects them and most are unaware of removal of parking spaces
Need to find balance for all that live and work here, along with the tourists that
stimulate the economy. The core is made up of retailers, offices and
restaurants, if parking is lost it will hurt these businesses.
Need to broaden scope to include stopping traffic before it arrives in the core
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 124 190
Parking
Loss of parking spaces is going to upset the business community.
Taking away parking spots hurts local businesses. One customer in a car is
worth one hundred customers on a bike.
Removing parking will not keep people and cars from coming to Aspen, and
more come every year; but if plan to remove parking, need to be able to
replace those spaces (and growing problem)
Taking residential parking in the surrounding area for core creates a deficit in
local residential parking; where do these residents park when their spots are
reclassified
Education
Can only educate people that want to be educated, how can this really be
accomplished
Environmental Health
Planter maintenance may be costly (watering, winter weathering, damage, etc.)
Implement low emission zone requirements for vehicles that create smog and
smog checks or separate parking areas
Implement congestion charging at the entrance to Aspen past the roundabout
for single use drivers on busy days
Additional Ideas
Telluride has taken a different approach. Not only did they build a downtown
parking garage but they allow parking in the center of the street (Colorado
Blvd). They also have a free parking lot (“Car Henge”) at the edge of town with
a free shuttle. Its primary purpose is to accommodate workers as it's hard to
find. There are numerous bicycle racks on virtually every corner. They do have
trouble in that sidewalks are too narrow.
Cacophony as an option. If downtown is a free-for-all it can be festive and slow
traffic.
Bike racks. If we want to encourage bikes over cars we would need more racks.
Street lighting. The City Electric department is gradually increasing the
wattage of our streetlights and while it has limited effect in the demonstration
blocks it does need addressing in the overall downtown.
Use of alleyways for bikes and deliveries only with one-way routes and
restrictions
Propose businesses, independent contractors, and construction companies
require commuters to take transit through incentive or discounts
SITDC Engagement Report | Winter 2021-2022 | 125 191
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
TO:City of Aspen Mayor and Council
FROM:Jack Danneberg, PE –Project Manager III
Mike Horvath, PE –Division Manager
Lynn Rumbaugh –Transportation Manager
Pete Rice, PE –Director of Transportation
THROUGH: Trish Aragon, PE –City Engineer
MEMO DATE:February 8, 2022
MEETING DATE:February 15, 2022
RE: Information Only: CDOT Highway 82 Resurfacing Project
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
The intent of the memo is to inform Council on the construction plan for the CDOT Highway 82
Resurfacing Project.Staff will be requesting direction from Council on specific transit mitigation
measures that will reduce the impact on the community.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND;
During the spring of 2018, the Aspen roundabout asphalt pavement began to fail, and potholes
developed that created a dangerous driving condition for vehicles entering the city. The persistent
maintenance of asphalt pothole repairs is a yearly occurrence that can unexpectedly impact the
already heavily congested traffic flow. Council directed staff to address this issue in a more
sustainable and safe manner in 2018.
Figure 1: 2018 Potholes
192
Page 2 of 5
At a November work session in 2019, Council directed staff to pursue the option of placing
concrete to help alleviate the emergency conditions that occur when the asphalt fails. Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) planned a project to replace the top layer of asphalt
pavement in coordination with a larger highway resurfacing project. Council directed staff to work
with CDOT to pursue better alternatives and placement of concrete pavement at the roundabout.
In December of 2019 City Council approved a contract with Kimley-Horn to study the Aspen
Roundabout for design improvements. The goals of the traffic study were to obtain traffic data,
assess the existing conditions at the Aspen Roundabout and to identify ways to improve traffic
flow.
During the July 2020 work session Council approved the geometric and signage improvements
identified by the Kimley-Horn traffic study. The traffic study assisted CDOT in the design and these
improvements have been incorporated into the CDOT resurfacing project.
Council voted to approve an operational-level agreement with CDOT in the amount of $980,000
for the placement of concrete pavement within the Aspen roundabout. This vote took place at a
regular council meeting in June of 2021. The project is designed and managed fully by CDOT
with input from stakeholders including city staff.
DISCUSSION:
Project Overview and Scheduling:
During the summer of 2021 City staff worked with CDOT to refine the design for the resurfacing
project where it was within City limits. The pieces within the City limits are a replacement of the
Castle Creek Bridge joint and approach panels and the reconstruction of the Aspen Roundabout
with concrete. The project includes a considerable amount of maintenance work along highway
82 outside of the city limits, such as, the upgrade of multiple ADA ramps at the intersections of
ABC and Buttermilk, Tiehack and Maroon Creek Bridge deck replacements, guardrail work, and
asphalt resurfacing work.
In the fall of 2021, the resurfacing project was put out to bid. In December 2021 a bid was received
for approximately $11 million. This bid is approximately $4 million over the CDOT allocated
budget. As a priority project, CDOT received permission for the additional funding. The Executive
Director of CDOT identified this project as crucial maintenance work of a critical transportation
corridor and approved the full amount of additional funding. The project was awarded to United
Construction Inc. an experienced, western slope, public infrastructure contractor.
The project will be phased per the table below:
Project Portion Time Frame
Aspen Roundabout Beginning of April to Mid June
Castle Creek Bridge Joint Three weeks in September
Other Corridor Construction April to July
Project Schedule Summary: Table 1
Public Outreach and Impact Management:
Tracy Trulove, Principal of Trulove Strategic Communications, has been hired by CDOT as a
consultant to manage public outreach. CDOT is utilizing a specified outreach plan to the project
and the community. The outreach plan includes a webpage and call-in line dedicated to
193
Page 3 of 5
responding to public comments. The webpage will be updated with detours, lane closures and
other pertinent information. Stakeholders are being coordinated with directly and will have
meetings in the coming weeks. Emergency agencies will have a coordination meeting this month
to notify of impacts and plan on how to mitigate risks of delays.
This project will begin with the Aspen Roundabout reconstruction in April with estimated work on
the roundabout being completed in early June. At the request of the city staff, CDOT worked the
schedule of the project around this community’s construction schedule and off season. Staff
worked with CDOT to complete a traffic control plan that utilized local lessons learned and best
approaches for emergency access, bus priority and accounts for Maroon and Castle Creek
Roads.
During the Aspen Roundabout construction there will be a single lane in each direction available
for use. During times of single lane availability within the Aspen Roundabout, bus traffic will join
the general-purpose lane just outside of the Aspen Roundabout. To mitigate major backups,
flaggers will be on site to prioritize one leg of the Aspen Roundabout if necessary. CDOT will
continually work with staff to assess the use of flaggers that meets the needs of the public as the
project develops.
CDOT has included within the project the repair of Castle Creek Bridge joint which is scheduled
in September to avoid peak season business access. During the bridge joint reconstruction there
will be one general purpose lane coming into town that alternates with outbound
transit/emergency vehicles similar to the work that was done in 2018 on the bridge. General
purpose vehicles headed out of town will be directed through the West End and Power Plant
Bridge. An emergency access plan will be developed with the project team prior to the start of
construction with input from the appropriate agencies. The bridge joint work is scheduled to take
three weeks. This period will present the greatest impact to the Aspen Community congestion and
uses the similar system utilized in 2017 during the Hallam Street Improvements project.
During the duration of the project there will be an optional detour using McLain Flats Road. CDOT
will utilize flaggers along the route as necessary to optimize the safety and functionality. Traffic
light timing at Brush Creek Road will be adjusted to enable up-valley vehicles time to turn onto
the detour route at Smith Way.
Night work will be utilized for the asphalt resurfacing from Aspen Business Center (ABC) to Castle
Creek Bridge. This will decrease traffic impacts and the overall duration of the project.
For most of the project, two lanes in both directions will be maintained during the day for the entire
corridor except during the Aspen Roundabout construction and night work. At a minimum, one
lane of traffic each direction will remain open throughout the construction corridor for the entirety
of the project. Two lanes of traffic in both directions will be maintained during the Maroon Creek
Bridge resurfacing.
Businesses along Highway 82 project corridor will have maintained access for the entire duration
of the project. Special communication and coordination will be conducted with businesses to
inform of upcoming impacts.
Staff is concerned with the traffic congestion that may occur along Cemetery Lane that CDOT is
not responsible to mitigate. To decrease the negative impacts to citizens in the Cemetery Lane
neighborhood the City of Aspen is requesting Council provide funding for additional traffic control
194
Page 4 of 5
to help local traffic access homes and substantially help pedestrian movement safely. By using a
flagger on the downhill side of Cemetery Lane in the AM and on the uphill side of Cemetery Lane
in the PM, gaps will be created to enable access by local traffic. During spring supplemental
$20,000 will be requested for this purpose.
During peak traffic impacts the RFTA transit schedule could be delayed due to construction work.
The full impact on the bus system will not be known until full construction has started because
there will be two lanes that mimics the existing Highway 82 corridor now. Staff requests Council
consider allocating funds for additional bus services in the case that bus service occurs delays
due to construction. The recommendation would be to add two busses cycling between Intercept
Lot and Ruby Park. These buses can moved to other impacted routes if needed. Staff estimates
that three months of additional service for two busses would cost about $250,000.
Trees will be required to be removed around the perimeter roundabout that include mostly older
Aspen to assure the center of the roundabout remains undisturbed. A variance has been given
by CDOT to replace trees around the perimeter within a typical clear zone, but will not be included
within the project budget. The City is responsible for planting trees after CDOT is finished with the
project to assure the aesthetic feel coming into town is similar to the existing conditions. This work
will be performed by a separate city contractor. To plant 84 trees and 81 shrubs it is anticipated
to cost $90,000. There is currently $55,000 appropriated within the budget under project 51257
CDOT Joint Project on Concrete Roundabout Design and Construction. Staff will request the
remaining $35,000 through a spring supplemental. Staff will take recommendations from council
and return with a consent resolution for final approval of funding.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
Council approved an OLA with CDOT for $980,000 in June of 2021 and this was appropriated in
the 2022 budget under project 51257 CDOT Joint Project on Concrete Roundabout Design and
Construction. CDOT is responsible for the outreach to the community.
Additional mitigation expenditures will be requested as consent items at a future date with council
direction.
Mitigation Expenditures
Additional Local Traffic Control $ 20,000
Transit Mitigation $ 250,000
Tree Replacement $ 35,000
Total Mitigation $ 305,000
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
This is a standard maintenance project for a section of highway that receives high levels of traffic.
The Aspen Roundabout is being reconstructed in concrete to increase the design life and prevent
future maintenance. Avoiding future maintenance will decrease material in the landfill and
decrease greenhouse gas emissions associated with construction activities.
ALTERNATIVES:
This project is managed by CDOT and set to occur this summer. There are no available
alternatives at this time.
195
Page 5 of 5
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the amount of $20,000 for local traffic
control measures at Cemetery Lane?
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the amount of $250,000 for transit
mitigation?
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the amount of $35,000 for tree
replacement around the Aspen Roundabout?
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
196
CDOT Resurfacing Project 2022
Trish Aragon, P.E.
Pete Rice, P.E.
Jack Danneberg, P.E.February 15th, 2022
197
BACKGROUND
•Spring 2018: Large potholes in Aspen
Roundabout
•November 2019: Council directed staff to
pursue concrete in Aspen Roundabout
•December 2019: Council approved contract
analyzing Aspen Roundabout
•July 2020: Council approved direction of
geometric and signage improvements for
Aspen Roundabout
•June 2021: Council approved agreement
with CDOT for the amount of $980,000
198
CDOT PARTNERSHIP
•Incorporated information from Aspen Roundabout Analysis
•Changed plans to make Aspen Roundabout concrete
•Construction schedule modified to accommodate local events and
businesses
•Modified construction methods to limit disturbance area
•Allowing variance of clear zone for tree replacement
•Contributed additional funding when project came in over budget
•Maintaining corridor critical to local economy and safety
199
200
Mclain Flats Road - Alternate Route
201
Connect to the project
Hotline#:970-457-0782
Email: CO82AspenRoundabout@gmail.com
Website: https://www.codot.gov/projects/co-82-aspen-roundabout
Tracy Trulove, Public Information Manager
For questions or to be added to the stakeholder list
to receive project updates, please email us at the
address below:
202
ASPEN ROUNDABOUT WORK
Schedule: April to June
Scope: Reconstruct Aspen
Roundabout with a more
durable concrete surface
Impact: There will be one
lane available around the
Aspen Roundabout
through the project.
203
CASTLE CREEK BRIDGE WORK
Schedule: September
Scope: Replace Western
Bridge Joint
Impact: One lane of
useable traffic for a period.
Detour using West End and
Power Plant Bridge.
204
HIGHWAY 82 CORRIDOR WORK
Schedule: May to July
Scope: Asphalt repave, bridge deck replacement,
guardrail replacement, ADA ramp replacement
Impact:One lane each direction. Includes night work.
205
ADDITIONAL LOCAL TRAFFIC CONTROL
Impacts:
•Local vehicle access
•Pedestrian and bike safety
Mitigation: Additional flaggers
for Cemetery Lane as needed.
Create breaks in traffic for local
access.
Cost: $20,000 for one flagger.
Downhill in the AM and Uphill
in the PM
206
TRANSIT MITIGATION
Impact: Possible delays in
transit time
Mitigation: Two additional
busses during peak periods
of the project
Cost: $250,000 for three
months of additional
service
207
TREE MITIGATION
Impacts: Decreased
aesthetic
Mitigation: Post project
aesthetic improvements.
84 trees and 81 shrubs
planted by City contractor
Cost: $35,000 for trees and
installation
208
Questions?
209
COUNCIL REQUESTS
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the
amount of $20,000 for local traffic control measures at Cemetery
Lane?
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the
amount of $250,000 for transit mitigation?
Does council support a spring supplemental request in the
amount of $35,000 for tree replacement around the Aspen
Roundabout?
210
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Hailey Guglielmo, P.E., Engineering Senior Project Manager
THROUGH: Phillip Supino, Community Development Director
Nicole Henning, City Clerk
Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk
Trish Aragon, City Engineer
MEMO DATE: February 15, 2022
RE: Restaurant Activation - Temporary Structures and Installations in the
ROW
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
Staff asks that Council provide direction for permanent implementati on of aspects of the
Restaurant Activation Program. A long-term Restaurant Activation Program would
establish permanent guidelines and regulations for installations in the ROW and on
private property.
Does Council support the continued use of structures on private property and/or in the
ROW as part of the Restaurant Activation Program?
Does Council prefer the codified ROW land lease program and rates or does council
support increased use of the public right-of-way for business activity?
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
The Restaurant Activation Program has been implemented over the last 22+ months in
support of the local business community during the challenges presented by COVID -19.
The program was originally established in Resolution 52 Series of 2020 as a strategy to
“proactively and swiftly work to minimize further economic disruption and actively
encourage its recovery". The program gave businesses the opportunity to utilize exterior
space to account for lost interior space due to capacity limitations required by Public
Health Orders.
The program has also been referred to as the Roadway for Restaurant and Retail
Recovery Program, the Winter in Aspen Vitality (WAV) Program, and the Summer in
Aspen Vitality (SAV) Program.
211
2
Each season the program has been modified. The 2021/2022 Winter portion of the
program is set to expire on May 1, 2022.
The activation program is broken up into the following types of installations:
1) Temporary Structures on private property (e.g., Ajax Tavern, Local, Jing)
2) Temporary Structures in Public Parking Spaces (e.g., Meat and Cheese, Kemo
Sabe, Creperie)
3) Activations in Public Parking Spaces – No Enclosed Structures (e.g. Spring Café,
Poppycock’s)
4) Use of parking spaces to facilitate “take out” service (e.g., Big Wrap)
5) Activations on the walking malls (e.g., Ellina)
6) Activations on the sidewalks (e.g., Aspen Tap, Bear Den)
7) Short term retail activations (e.g. Sky Gallery)
DISCUSSION:
The following discussion explains the existing codified code and the allowances within
the Restaurant and Retail Activation Program for each type of activation. The goal is to
understand Council’s preferences on measures done through the Restaurant Recovery.
Council has the ability to either revert to existing codified code or work toward
implementation of permanent changes on each type of installation.
The summer season is defined as May 1 to October 31. The winter season is defined as
November 1 to April 30.
212
Summary Table
Existing Codified
Code
Current Restaurant
Activation Relief Program 2022 And On - Decision Point
1
Temporary Structures on
Private Property
Commercial Design
Review
Temporary Use
Review
Growth Management
Review
Temporary
Structure/Tent
Permit
Administrative Temporary Use
Review - GMQS
Temporary Structure/Tent
Permit
No requirements for
Commercial Design Standards
nor compliance with Energy
Code.
1. Revert to Existing Code: All installations go to council for a Temporary Use Review.
Design Standards are applied.
2. Continue Temporary Program: Community Development performs administrative
temporary use review. Structures are permitted in both the summer and winter months.
Neither Design standards nor Energy Code requirements are applied.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: Alter Title 26.450 and develop a new
Temporary Structures Program incorporating what we have seen and learned over the
past two years.
2
Temporary Structures in
Public Parking Spaces Not permitted.
Same as temp structures on
private property plus a ROW
Fee of $1,047 for 150-day
activation (construction rate)
1. Revert to Existing Code: No structures permitted in the ROW
2. Continue Temporary Program: ROW fee for summer season of $1,000. GMQS assessed.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: An updated program will be developed
after public engagement and brought back to Council. This includes an updated analysis
on ROW fees. Alter language within section 21.12 for temporary encroachments and
occupation of the ROW.
3
Activations in Parking
Spaces - No Enclosed
Structures Not permitted.
Summer – No ROW fee thus
far
Winter - No installations
permitted
1. Revert to Existing Code: No installations within parking spaces.
2. Continue Temporary Program: Installations permitted in the summer, removed in the
winter. ROW fee will be construction rate $1,000 per 150 days.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: An updated program will be developed
after public engagement and brought back to Council. This includes an updated analysis
on ROW fees. Alter code to always allow installations in parking spaces in the summer.
4
Use of Parking Spaces for
“Take Out” Service
No short-term take-
out spaces
No fee for the first spot and a
rate of $0.59/sf/month for the
second spot.
1. Revert to Existing Code: Remove all take out parking spaces
2. Continue Temporary Program: One take out spot per block.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: No code changes needed. City can sign
parking spaces at Councils direction.
5
Activations on the
Walking Malls
Mall leases available
for the summer
season.
$4.43/sf/month
Summer – Mall lease fees
waived in 2020 and 2021
Winter - ROW Fee - $1,047 for
150-day activation
(construction rate)
1. Revert to Existing Code: Mall leases available for the summer months. Structures not
permitted.
2. Continue Temporary Program: Mall leases available for the summer and winter
months. Decks permitted; structures not permitted.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: Mall leases available in winter.
6 Activations on Sidewalks $2.50/sf/month
Summer – No ROW fees thus
far
Winter - No installations
permitted
1. Revert to Existing Code: Temporary Encroachment Fees. Allowances for the time of
year is at the Engineering Dept Discretion.
2. Continue Temporary Program: Summer installations allowed. No programming in the
winter.
3. Alter Current Code for Permanent Programing: An updated program will be developed
after public engagement and brought back to Council. This includes an updated analysis
on ROW fees.
7
Short-Term Retail
Activations Not permitted. Not permitted. Prohibit retail activations. The only applicable activations are for restaurant use.
213
1) Temporary Structures on Private Property
Regarding temporary structures, should the Restaurant Activation Program be
terminated, and all existing Land Use codes reinstated? Or should staff work to alter Title
26.450 Temporary and Seasonal Uses to allow the installation of temporary structures on
private property and/or in the ROW as has been done over the past two years within the
temporary Restaurant Activation Program.
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code: The following is required for any
temporary structure to be considered on private property: Temporary Use Review,
Growth Management Review, Commercial Design Review, Temporary
Structure/Tent Permit.
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program: Temporary Structures
require an Administrative Temporary Use Review which incorporates Affordable
Housing Mitigation Fees.
There are no requirements for Commercial Design Standards nor compliance with
the Energy Code. The requirements of pedestrian amenity spaces are not
considered.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming: Staff recommends that
the temp structures program be discontinued starting May 1. The program is an
administrative burden, the structures don’t meet energy and land use code
requirements, and the need for expanded space has ended as Public Health order
occupancy limitations are no longer in place.
However, with Councils direction staff will look to alter Title 26.450 and develop a
new Temporary Structures Program incorporating what we have seen and learned
over the past two years. The new program will consider how to apply Commercial
Design Standards, Building Energy Code, Growth Management Review criteria,
and pedestrian amenity spaces. Alterations to existing Title 26.450 will require
significant public outreach to bring fairness and equ ity to a refined Temporary
Structures program. Code would not be altered prior to May 1 when the existing
temporary program sunsets.
An alternative option is to extend the temporary Restaurant Activation Program for
temporary structures on private property through summer 2022 and require
removal of all structures by October 31, 2022.
Challenges for Permanent Programming of Temporary Structures:
Building Code Flexibility – particularly Energy Code compliance
Whether made of tent material or constructed with lumber and solid roofing
materials – no temporary structures (when enclosed and heated during the winter
months) can meet even the most basic of requirements for insulation and energy
214
5
efficiency. As Council contemplates extending these structures in a permanent
program, the energy consumption and inefficiency of these structures should be
considered and weighed against any benefits of their continued use.
Commercial Design Review
For structures on private property, one issue that has been waived during the
COVID response, has been Commercial Design review requirements. Most
obvious has been flexibility granted to requirements for materials a nd the
relationship of these structures to the entrances of the adjacent buildings. In
general, the code prohibits tent like materials – including fabric, plastic, etc. While
some of these temporary structures have been approved by Council for temporary
use pre-COVID, and others were grandfathered due to their existence prior to
changes in the Land Use Code, in general these structures are prohibited. If they
have been approved at some time in the past – they have been established as a
temporary use and have been required to pursue issuance of a tent or temporary
structure permit.
Also contained within Commercial Design Review requirements are definitions and
expectations for “Pedestrian Amenity” space. Prior to 2017, these areas were
named “Public Amenity” spaces and had a slightly different definition. Pre -2017,
these areas did have some requirement to be open for public use, but the concept
was not evenly applied and often conflicted with the operating realities of
commercial enterprises – most notably restaurants and lodges. Today, the
concept and requirements of “Pedestrian Amenity” is to encourage a street scape
and urban form that promotes interest within the pedestrian experience and a
sense of openness. The LUC does not require unfettered public access to these
spaces. However, there are design requirements for these existing areas, and
they are prohibited from being reduced in size - typically this means covering the
space with a permanent roof or canopy. If they are proposed for reduction in size,
there is a required review and a Fee-in-Lieu of $100 per square foot. One of the
things that can cause a reduction in size of these areas are structures that enclose
or permanently roof these areas.
Restaurant Activation in the ROW:
Regarding the use of the public right-of-way for business activity should the Restaurant
and Retail Activation Program be terminated and all previously existing land lease
programs and fees be reinstated? Or should certain aspects of the Restaurant Activation
Program be implemented on a permanent basis? Aspects include b ut are not limited to
the use of public parking spaces and expansion of ROW use in the winter.
2) Temporary Structures in Public Parking Spaces
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code: Temporary structures were not
permitted in the ROW.
215
6
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program: Structures in the ROW pay
a land lease fee equal to $1,047 per 150 days. All Temporary Structures require
an Administrative Temporary Use Review which incorporates Affordable Housing
Mitigation Fees.
There are no requirements for Commercial Design Standards nor compliance with
the Energy Code.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming: The same process
would be followed as laid out in the previous section “Temporary Structures on
Private Property” for installations in the ROW.
3) Activations in Parking Spaces – No Enclosed Structures
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code: Use of public parking spaces was not
permitted for commercial business use.
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program: Thus far no ROW fees
have been applied to summer activations in Parking spots. Following fee rates
established in fall of 2021 activations within parking spaces would have a land
lease rate of $1,047 per 150 days. All installations must be removed for the winter
season.
Restaurant and bike shop installations are permitted, all other retail activation is
not a permitted use.
Installations within Parking Spots that do not have an enclosed structure do not
require a Growth Management Review and do not pay Affordable Housing
Mitigation fees.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming: With Council Direction
staff will implement a permanent program to allow business operations within
public parking spaces with a land lease fee equal to $1,047 per 150 days for the
summer months.
With Council direction applicable affordable housing mitigation fees could be
applied to the leased area for the duration of the installation.
Decks could be permitted within this activation type however enclosed structures
are not applicable in this category.
Challenges for Permanent Programming:
Propane heaters will not be permitted. Installations will need to find an electric
source if heating is desired.
4) Use of Parking Spaces for “Take Out” Service
216
7
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code:
No short-term take-out spaces
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program:
In both the summer and winter the City has allowed two pick up spots per block for
restaurants. There is no fee for the first spot and a rate of $0.59/sf/month for the
second spot. There must be a request for a parking spot and The City chooses
the location on the block.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming:
A permanent parking space take-out program will follow the guidelines of the
existing Activation Program.
Challenges for Permanent Programming:
There has been a question of equity in the take -out parking program. The parking
spot best serves the business immediately adjacent to the parking spot.
5) Activations on the Walking Malls
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code:
Mall leases available for the summer season with a land lease rate of
$4.43/sf/month.
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program:
In the 2020 and 2021 Summer months all Mall lease fees were waived. One
winter activation paid $1,047 for the 21/22 winter activation.
Restaurants are required to serve lunch and/or dinner, and to operate at least 5
days per week. Staff ensures there are some areas between any adjacent
activations for pedestrians to cross from one side of the mall to the other.
GMQS Review and affordable housing mitigation fees have only been applied to
enclosed structures and thus have not been applied to any installations on the
Mall which consist of solely tables and chairs.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming:
With Councils direction the mall lease program could be extended to the winter
months.
Mall leases have never been subject to a true economic analysis. This effort would
require a third-party consultant with experience with economics and cost of service
studies.
Challenges for Permanent Programming:
Installations will need to account for snow removal. No installation should impede
current snow removal operations.
217
8
6) Activations on Sidewalks
2019 and prior - Existing Municipal Code: Activations along sidewalks are
permitted during the summer months at a land lease rate of $2.50/sf/month at the
Engineering Departments discretion. All installations must be removed for the
winter season.
Installations on the Sidewalk do not require a Growth Management Review and do
not pay Affordable Housing Mitigation fees.
2020-Present – Current Temporary Relief Program: Activations along
sidewalks have been permitted during the summer months without a land lease
ROW fee. All installations must be removed for the winter season.
Installations on the Sidewalk do not require a Growth Management Review and do
not pay Affordable Housing Mitigation fees.
2022 and On: Possibility of Permanent Programming: The City will continue to
permit sidewalk activations in the summer months. Installations in the winter
season could be allowed with Council direction.
Land lease fees will be applied at a rate $0.59/sf/month. With Council direction a
Growth Management Review and associated affordable housing mitigation fees
could be applied to the leased sidewalk area for the duration of the installation.
Challenges for Permanent Programming:
Businesses must provide adequate pedestrian walkway widths. This is not
available in all locations.
In the winter the issue of snow removal would need to be addressed should the
program be extended year-round.
Retail Activation:
7) Short-Term Retail Activations
Short term retail activations are not permitted however special use permits may be
allowed.
Environmental Impacts:
Energy Code compliance - Whether made of tent material or constructed with lumber and
solid roofing materials – no temporary structures (when enclosed and heated during the
winter months) can meet even the most basic of requirements for insulation and energy
efficiency. As Council contemplates extending structures in a permanent program, the
218
9
energy consumption and inefficiency of these structures should be considered and
weighed against any benefits of their continued use.
The use of propane heaters will be prohibited in any future installations regardless of
temporary or long-term programming.
Financial Impacts:
The City will gain additional revenue from land lease fees and affordable housing
mitigation fees. The determined amount will vary.
ALTERNATIVES: Council could consider modifications to any of the permanent
programming identified above.
219