The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.sp.Trolley.A491 - ~ CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: DATE COMPLETE: /f~~7~ 1 .e I J PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. J..?()7-6'73~q 2- - Z. ~ A4-91 STAFF MEMBER: LL PROJECT NAME: Aspen Trollev Conceptual SPA Submission Project Address: Rio Grande SPA - Old Impound Lot.Aspen.CO Legal Address: APPLICANT: Aspen Street Railwav Co. Applicant Address: 548 Race Street. Aspen.CO 81611 925-6431 REPRESENTATIVE: Jon Busch. 548 Race Street. Aspen 925-6431 and Representative Address/Phone: Roqer H. Hunt 925-4414 P.O. Box 3944. Aspen.CO 81611 ;~~~7=;ES=~=;~==~~~~7~7+f~r-l;~~-o; c~;i~;=;~~E~~~==~==== . f"-i(. . .. TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: P&Z Meeting Date.~c;/ crJ- PUBLIC HEARING: YES VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO PUBLIC HEARING:~ NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date Planning Director Approval: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Paid: Date: --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- REFE]mALS : V City Attorney ,_~~ity.Engi~eer ~Hous~ng D~r. Aspen Water City Electric Envir.Hlth. ,_ Aspen Con.S.D. DATE REFERRED: Mtn Bell School District ~ Parks Dept. Rocky MtnNatGas /Holy Cross State HwyDept(GW) \/ Fire Marshall State HwyDept(GJ) Building Inspector ~ Roaring Fork v otherP&4~/J Energy Center ~~ cr~~~~ //;2 3/9/ INITIALS: #. -/\),Vv\ cJ~, r.e<:...tj ~.o ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- FINAL ROUTING: DATE .ROUTED: INITIAL: . _ City Atty _ Housing _ City Engineer _Zoning _Env. Health Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: ~ ~ ~\o-Cbr'ir~^""t ~~;;2,.Q,,!"lL "l"l 'l~W ~. \ f20 ~~ '~"t~ ' MEMORANDOM THRU: Mayor and Council Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager Tom Baker and Steve Burstein, Planning Conceptual SPA, Roaring Fork Railroad December 4, 1986 ff Office M'- TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ================================================================ SOMMARY: The staff recommends approval of City Council Resolution No. 40, Series of 1986, Resolution of the City Council of Aspen, Colorado Granting Conceptual Approval of the Roaring Fork Railroad Proposal SPA. PREVIOOS COONCIL ACTION: At Council's December 3, 1986 Special Meeting for the continued public hearing of the Conceptual SPA Approval of the Roaring Fork Railroad, Council directed staff to make a number of changes to the draft resolution and prepare a final draft for Council approval at their December 8, 1986 regular meeting. BACKGROOND: The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission met on September 2, 1986 (regular meeting), September 9, 1986 (special meeting) and September 23, 1986 (special meeting) to discuss the Roaring Fork Railroad proposal SPA. As a result of those meetings the P&Z adopted Resol uti on No. 86-10 recommending Conceptual approval of the Roaring Fork Railroad proposal SPA. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTE: 6 for, 1 against. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Conceptual Approval of the Roaring Fork Railroad SPA. PROPOSED MOTIOH: I move to adopt Resolution 40, Series of 1986, Resolution of the City Council of Aspen, Colorado Granting Conceptual Approval of the Roaring Fork Railroad Proposal SPA. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: :r C.~J/CIAK, /1t;Jt.l7 J>lOR~ ~ ,> WIl-l.- W Ft-HfI€'C OVir ($7 ili... r;-Krr;rp/"rr~ ?I$/ oP' (~J/ Dllo/" ') YiP'" 1v(J(l1-1> /J~ /lVc(,~rI/f'/4 ",,,-('1/IV -7i ,> #f1(eovfU. tR()- NOTE: Changes in the Resolution are indicated by bold for additions and e~e~~e~ for deletions. tb. 33 8 AHI ATTACHMENT C ASPEN STREET RAILWAY COMPANY 548 Race Street Aspen, CO 81611 JAN . 5 \991 To: Planning Department City of Aspen 130 S. Galena st. Aspen, CO 816ll Subject: Conceptual Submission; Amendment to Rio Grande SPA Ref: Aspen Trolley Project, Trolley Barn Site Encl: I. Land Use Application Form 2. Aspen Trolley Feasibility Study 3. Youth center/p.C. Jail R.O.W. Site plan 4. Youth Center/p.C. Jail R.O.W. Section 5. Youth Center/R.o.W. East Elevation 6. city of Aspen letter dated 14 December 1990 7. city of Aspen letter dated 26 October 1990 8. pitkin County letter dated 22 October 1990 9. Gibson & Reno Architects letter dated 25 April 1990 10. various photographs The Aspen Street Railway Company hereby submits the enclosures for conceptual review of its proposal to install a trolley system serving the Rio Grande to Rubey Park corridor via Galena Street. The system is planned to be constructed and installedusin~.private donations and grants." ~ '~"'''''''''.. ",. J: ," :'tBeg;i:v:~tQ,"... .t~&i~i(.~".' Though this submission is required only to cover the car barn site as an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA, it is being used additionally as a procedure to review the entire route/ROW as the City has no other specific review process for this type of transit facility. with the exception of a small portion of the route crossing County property in the vicinity of the Jail, all development shall occur on City owned property or rights-of-way. Enclosures (6), (7), and (8) are preliminary approvals for the use of the City and County properties in order to proceed through the review process. The development plan is incorporated within enclosure (2); specifically, the site/route plans can be found on sheets I and 2 (Option I), the car barn elevation is figure 3, and the critical route configuration and elevations between the Youth Center and Jail can be found on enclosures (3), (4), and (S). All necessary utilities and pUblic facilities are immediately available to the car barn site. The trolley system itself becomes a public facility. Enclosure (IO) includes photographs of trolleys operatfng in various streetscapes in LiSbon, Portugal; these trolleys are the same class or identical to those available to this project. The car barn will be approXiJl\atelyt;OO(t:$l:,:w~i;cm:tn.~J,;!!'~:,~I;'()~~SF~;0' devoted to accessory office, storage'>B:nd7'Ellil-t'1iI!USesi The building could include a second leveldf'Sj7<lO sF~f'affordable housiri~~ The nature of the Trolley Project is such that it could design the housing into the car barn, but cannot fund the cost of it. Construction is anticipated to take place during the fall of 1991 or the spring of 1992, subject to completion of the review process. Though capital fund raising is an ongoing process, it is anticipated that it may take 2 to 6 months following approval to have funds in place. Utilizing modern rail laying technology and through coordination with the Consolidated San District, we anticipate that all street construction will be completed during one off-season. Responses to Review Standards for development in a Specially Planned Area: I. The Rio Grande was purchased with transportation funds for the primary purpose of supporting the transportation needs of the Community. The development of a trolley car barn at this si te is compatible with the uses in the vicinity. Additionally, the trolley system - a public facility - will enhance access to the Parking Facility, the Art Museum/Art park/Performing Arts Facility, the commercial and public facilities around Puppy Smith street, and a potential commuter rail facility all in the immediate vicinity. The project addresses the well documented North/South corridor transit need. 2. All necessary utilities and public facilities to support the trolley system and car barn are in the immediate vicinity. 3. The former Impound Lot site is well suited for the proposed car barn. There are no slope or other geological problems anticipated. 4. The car barn is nestled in a location with no significant established or informal view plane impacts. Trolley maintenance is relatively clean compared to any automotive, bus, internal combustion engine maintenance. The project will incorporate grease traps to prevent a POL spill or run off from impacting the environment. The trolley is intrinsically an environmentally sensitive transportation system. Being powered electrically, nearly 50% is hydro-electric in this area. Because of the vehicle footprint and speed there is nearly no PM-IO contribution expected. 5. The project is in compliance with the Transportation Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Virtually all studies going back to Voorhees have identified the North/South Galena street corridor as an essential link in the transportation system of Aspen. 6. The Project will not require any significant expenditure of public funds to provide for supporting public facilities or for the capital installation. The system is planned to be given to the City to operate (possibly by RFTA). The City would have the option of utilizing space for affordable housing for which it could expend funds. 7. Slope reduction does not apply to this project. 8. The Trolley Project as an essential public facility is exempt from GMQS. Company TLYSPA.ASRrhh -11111 f if H ~ ~ n n ~ i . - g r i i .' I' i --. 'Il f.. I i ---..J.' . ---..J:. ~,. f.... ~ -.': ~ ", ~,.__L .- j'''' I . .. J, "- . . j aEEKEJlST. -"'t-<:.~ -- l; 10, l .... ~- ,.... ~.. -- T ..- _..- ""'ST. " r I MATCH LIE A , ., Ho. 0&.. _.."..... 000'0:'_ (6J ~"G_IIo.; . -ffi :::.-:~'~,~=- . ......-.0<1110': .....~IIl... Q....,.., ~ ASPEN TROLLEY OPTION 1 r . "".'.1"". ., . Barton-Aschman Associates. Inc. - .... .... .... .... .... .... - ... .... .... .... ... ... .... .... - ~ /Wa d Sf I. R. / .f' nsar ye "'" / C"'H7""'" Wall , I \ , " II Livin3, C}varler.s 1m Gmj I (Ap!>. ) .I?ai/;ny 1 m l!mmmm ~ I , l K II II - - - K I I 20' so' mm I--- 10' I .1 . DDO"- .DoDr f)oDr " ~ ,= ~ E3 TI - - - w /' \. 1 I I (Sfil;,..s ~ . Stillr.. \ ~ Track ;3 Ol"/'tce - LDwe,.Levd St"raye-U'fl'"r Level ~ Tra.ck 2 Trad: t FIGURE 3 FRONT ELEVATION CAR BARN / f-1EMORANDUM TO: Lesl Ie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: George Robinson, Parks Director RE: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA DATE: February 15, 1991 The Parks Department has several comments/concerns in regards to the proposed Aspen Trolley as follows: I. The site for the Car Barn is presently being used for the Recycle Center and snowmelt area - Are these areas to be relocated? Where? 2. The section between the Jail and the Youth Center looks to be below subgrade by approximately six feet. With very little exposure to sunlight, are there any special plans for any type of snow removal in this area? What type and wt\ose responsible? Installation of an ice melt system wittiin the sidewalk would be strongly recommended due to the lack of apparent sunlight. 3. presently, there is a pedestrian commuter route between the Jail and Youth Center. Will this be eliminated if the trolley goes through this area? The drawing Stiowlng this section StiOWS only a six foot margin between trolley and wall. However, in the adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan the recommend corridor' should be at least eight feet wide. It is also recommended that a fence/railing be installed between the tracks and the walkway for safety precautions. 4. At the north end of operations in option #1, I have some reservations about making the Rio Grande Athletic Field any smaller. If the city loses the Plumtree Ball Field to the four laning of Hwy 82, there may be a greater demand for Rio Grande Park for athletic events, such as softball, rugby, soccer, etc.. Will track and trolley become a problem with balls Flying into trolley cars and tracks? Aesthetically, the trolley is disruptive to the visual impact of the area. 5. If a pedestrian accidentally walkS in front of a trolley, how quickly can a trolley car stop in case of emergency? 6. Please eliminate any options for going up Mi11 Street. ! foresee many liability problems with a trolley passing in front of the Wagner Play Area and through the Pedestrian MalL 7. If trolley is to cross pedestrian/bicycle trails as indicated in drawings, the trails were not designed to support the weight of a trolley car. Tracks and trolleys would break down asphalt and probably create numerous potholes at intersections. 8. Extra construction considerations need to be made for tracks laid in mall area between Durant St and Cooper. Reconstruction of mall brick to accommodate weight of trolley and construction of track laid. 9. !f cable poles are to be installed in the middle of Galena street where tr'acks split as indicated by drawings, what considerations are being made for snow removal (ie. when Streets Dept does snow removal they make wind r'ows in the middle of the street and then tM snow blower comes by and picks up rows)? 10. What type of signage. signal markers are to be installed? II. Any estimates on breakdowns of trolley systems? 12. Double ended cars would be best option to keep congestion to a minimum, saving money and less open space wasted. 13. If trolley were to be constructed, it might be wise to start project in spring rather than fall due to time needed to construct railway. tf.d 2 7 MEMORANDUM FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office Reid Haughey, County Manage~ Rio Grande SPA Review. TO: SUBJECT : DATE: February 26, 1991 I am writing to express comments on behalf of the County concerning the Rio Grande SPA Conceptual Review and any impacts such review may have on the Rio Grande recycling facility. It is the County's intention to implement a recycling program that will be based on curbside recycling. As a result, the Rio Grande recycling facility should not be significantly expanded. We cannot at this time anticipate that the recycling facility will be diminished in any way though. Therefore, we are reluctant to encourage any encroachment on the area. We anticipate that we will have a permanent and consistent presence in our current facility for the foreseeable future. Please consider this in any proposals that come through this process. We look forward to cooperating with other tenants of the area. Please contact me if I can provide any additional information or answer any questions. Thank you for this opportunity to comment. pcsem/wp/rh2.336 ". Date: To: From: Re: Q~ .J/l ROARING FORK T"~ ASPEN, COLORADO FEe - 5 MEMORANDUM February 4, 1991 Leslie Lamont, Planning Office Dan Blankenship, General Manager~~ Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA I have reviewed the Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA and offer the following comments on behalf of RFTA: 1. In general, the overall project appears to have many benefits for the community and its sponsors are to be commended for identifying contributions to fund project capital costs. Evidently, once constructed, the system is to be given to the City of Aspen by the applicants, However, the applicants have not addressed how the ope rat i ng costs wi 11 be funded. The assumption, I believe, is that RFTA will operate and pay for the system once constructed. Unfortunately, however willing RFTA mi ght be to operate the proposed system, fundi ng the operating costs of the proposed system may pose a significant problem for RFTA. This year, RFTA was unable to fund the cross-town shutt 1 e, the off-season Ai rport/ ABC shuttle, and Silverking services, because of funding constraints. The $231,000 - $270,000 estimated annual operating expenses connected with the proposed trolley system, given the current revenue and expenditure forecast for existing RFTA services, will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for RFTAto absorb. In order for RFTA to operate the system at the levels envisioned, additional revenues must be identified or some of the existing RFTA services must be reduced or curtailed. Ultimately, the RFTABoard of Directors, and not staff, is respons i b 1 e for mak i ng recommendat ions to the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners regarding annual budget priorities, Therefore, it may be possible that the Board may view the trolley to be a higher priority than other existing services. .F~\ /' .. 2. If double trackage is used on Galena, I would recommend that, at a minimum, diagonal parking be eliminated on the west side of the street. However, consideration should be given to totally el iminating parking on Galena. Given the width of Galena, it seems likely that the trolley system wi 11 contribute to increased congestion. As planned, Galena will continue to have parallel parking on the east side of the street and diagonal parking on the west side of the street. Additionally, the trolley system will require sufficient room for two trolleys to pass each other and for there to be "safety zones" to load and unload passengers on both sides of the tracks in the middle of the street. Add to these space requirements the substantial number of large vehicles which double-park in order to unload freight, along with normal two-way automobile traffic on Galena, and it would appear evident that some or all of the parking on Galena must be eliminated in ordered to mitigate the congestion that wi 11 result from adding a trolley system into a corridor that is already significantly congested. In conclusion, please let me know if you have questions or if I can be of additional service. FES 1 it 1991 ~~~~~[O}?~ 420 E. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925-5532 TO: Carol 0' Dowd, City Manager .____. Leslie Lamont, Planning Office'-- FROM: Peter Wirth, Fire Chief"f'~ Comments, Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA RE: DATE: February 13, 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The following are comments on the "Aspen Trolley" project with specific regard to firefighting, fire exposure protection and fire rescue on buildings adjacent to the proposed Trolley route. History - in 1987 Aspen Fire Department supported the City of Aspen's action in the undergrounding of all electrioal and utility lines within the City of Aspen. This support was based on the eleotrioal hazard reduction to firefighters and resOue victims when working around power lines. There was also a hazard reduction in the form of tree limbs contacting high power lines during high winds or heavy snows that Aspen receives in early fall or late spring when the trees were in blossom. Since the undergrounding of utilities, the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department has had a signifioant reduotion in the number of responses directly related to overhead power lines. There are a number of large buildings that are situated along the proposed trolley route. In reviewing the drawings of the track layout in the streets and the eleotrical lines and their approximate location in the air, the Aspen Fire Department would have a diffioult time performing building rescue and exposure protection for those buildings located along the proposed corridor. All building rescue operations would require the use of ground ladders. All aluminum ladders on fire trucks would need to be replaoed by wooden ground ladders. The fire service over the years has phased out the use of wood ground ladders due to their weight and laok of strength. I believe that there is only one manufacturer left that builds a NFPA compliant wooden ladder. The San Francisco fire department which has similar problems builds their own wooden ladders. The location of the overhead electrioal lines in this projeot are in a direct line of contact with any aerial unit that we would use to perform building rescue or exposure proteotion in a defensive fire attack mode. The fire department operates two pieces of apparatus that would servioe the area, a 48 foot articulating boom with buoket, and a 75 foot water tower. Both of these aerial devices are approximately 12 feet in height. It appears from the drawings submitted that the overhead power lines are approximately 15-16 feet off the ground. This distance does not provide sufficient clearanoe for use of our aerial devioes and seriously compromises firefighter safety and rescue efforts. There should be a safety margin of 15 feet between firefighters and power lines. The power lines would also interfere with any ground water monitors that we would use in building exposure proteotion or for defensive fire attack. Setting up our ap- paratus in the middle of the street between the power lines provides insufficient reaoh for both of our aerial devices and insufficient clearance between the apparatus and the power lines. At this point in time it would be difficult for the Aspen Fire Department to support this project unless an alternative method other than overhead eleotrioal power lines were used to power the trolleys. I strongly reoommend an alternative method of power. If you have any questions regarding our comments please contaot me at 925-5532 or 925-2303. " - " Tele.130JI9Z5-3601 Aspen eonsolidated Sanitation !])istr;et 565 North Mill Stl'W't AsJWn, Colorado 81611 FfB I 4 TeJe.iJOJI925-2537 February 12. leEt1 I...ll" LamClnt PJanninrOftlce 130 S. Gal"m. Allpen. CO 81611 Re, Aspen Trolley Conceptual D...r LOIsJI", Jon Busch has kept us abr....t of this projeot'. progress 50 that ..e Can schedul. our eventual r.habllltatlon ot the Galen. _tr..t line to colnolde with the I..pl....ent.tion of th" Tral ley .Ylt... mlnlmlzlnr disruption to th" ellntral busln...e district. Th. Gallln" str..t 11n. laone of th.old....t Iln.. in OUr syst"..whloh I.. being mo~.d up on Our line rehabllit"tion .cneauJ. in an att...pt to shere coets, maximize benefits, and minimize impacts during the Implem.ntatlon ot tn"Trolley .y.t..... Th.. ,"o~t crucial conOern of the Di.trict'. inVOlve. the alignment alternative chosen as thla ISRue BURt be resolved prior to our preliminary engineerinl' Every etfort ahould be made to looate the Trolley traok. lna manner that 10'111..11010' tneDistrlct to maintain our oolleot!on syate" without the need for ahutting down the trOlley. Th.. placement of tracks In R:loGrande lIay (the exten.lon of Spring .traat) may conflict with the sewer line .nd loop into Mill str...t Off of Dean .treet. In reviewet th..pplioatlon, the car barn deRl(n must Inolud".n ACSD approved 011 and ,rea.e ."perator, and cleer water oonneotions cannot be directed to the sanitary seWer system as 1s eugleet..d on pa,a 7~ of tha IOppl1cation. AI I 11ft ItaUons required to connect the project to our .y~tem will remain the property ot the Trolley Company for malntensnoe and operation. The appl1cant '"culd inClude the costs of pavement replacement as would be r..quired In Srea. where the DJstrlct's collllction systell is relocat..d toaceomodat.. th.. Trl>lley. lo'. appreciate Jon implementation with to continue to work Busch'. efforts the Ofst.ri"t and olo.elywlth the to coordinate the TrOlley', IIn"ourale the Troll..y Iroup Dlqtrlot In the tuture. Sino.rely, z.... _ '__CL. ( Brue. Matherli') Dtstriot Manaler . MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~ DATE: February 12, 1991 RE: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA ===:=~=========================================================- Having reviewed the above application and made a site visit, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. The alignment of the trolley line as it passes between the County Jail and the Youth Center does not allow the required wi.dth for bicycle and pedestrian movement. The engineering Department agrees with the trolley consultant's view that there will be a small amount of conflict time between the trolley and pedestrian/cyclist. However, we recommend that warning signs be placed an adequate distance away from this area to allow the pedestrian/cyclist to prepare in case there is such a conflict. 2. The applicant needs to coordinate the construction schedule with the Electric Department. They will need several months lead time to order a special transformer or any other special equipment. 3. The State Highway Department has indicated a warrant study will have to be done if an interrupt signal for traffic is proposed for Main Street. The plan for the trolley crossing at Main will also have to be approved by the Highway Department. 4. The applicant will have to discuss the tracks crossing the snow dump road and what it will do to the grade of that road with Jack Reid of the Streets Department. Detailed plans and a cross section of the area need to be submitted so that the grade changes to the road can be evaluated. 5. The applicant proposes to place poles in the center of Galena Street which could create a problem for snow removal. If a 3 foot wide island could be constructed in the center of Galena to accommodate these poles, snow removal would be much more efficient. 6. There has been some concern about the steepness of the grade near the Youth Center and County Jail. The applicant needs to describe in more detail the capability of the trolley to negotiate steep grades. r .7. Construction projects in the public right-of-way should be timed to coincide. if at all possible. The Sanitation District plans to cQnstruct a new sewer line in Galena Street this fall and the Streets Department plans to do an overlay on Durant street this summer. The applicant will need to coordinate this project with these projects if that is possible. 8. There is potential for the proposed access to the recycling center and for the parking spaces that are proposed to be in conflict with the movement of snow dump trucks, especially since this road is fairly steep. This problem, along with the problem of the tracks and grade of the road, brings up the question of the compatibility of the Snowmelter with this project. If the answer is to move the snow dump site, then the applicant needs to share in the responsibility of finding a workable solution to the snow disposal issue. jg/trolley cc: Chuck Roth ......-. -- FROM: MEMORANDUM Mayor and Council N\~ Amy Margerum, City Manager\jY Leslie Lamont, Interim Planning Director TO: THRU: DATE: August 8, 1994 RE: Consent Agenda - permission for Aspen street Railway Company to Submit an Application for specially Planned Area Review for a Trolley System and Facility on the Rio Grande Property ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Aspen Street Railway Company is preparing to submit a development application for the installation of a trolley system throughout the commercial core and the construction of a trolley barn on the Rio Grande Property. Before the Railway Company can submit the land use application beginning the review process, Council must first grant permission to file an application which includes City owned property. The Railway Company proposes to develop an electric trolley car system with the support facility located on the Rio Grande property in the present location of the recycle center. This type of use and location was considered in the Rio Grande Master Plan as well as the alignment of trolley track on the Rio Grande property. Consent to submit an application does not imply an approval for the project. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to direct the city Manager to grant permission for the Public Works Department to submit a subdivision app1i~tion for the Rio iff" property.' CIOY .......... ""0VllL' tJtgw 1"'" 1"""\ MEMORANDUM TO: City Attorney City Engineer Housing Office Aspen Consolidated sanitation District Parks Department Fire Marshal Commercial Core and Lodging Commission Roaring Fork Transit Agency Jim Duke, Public Resource Manager Pitkin County FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office RE: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA DATE: January 23, 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Attached for your review and comments is an application ftl'Dm Aspen Street Railway Company requesting Conceptual SPA approval for the Aspen Trolley. Please return your comments to me no later than February 15th. Thanks r--. A ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 January 23, 1991 Roger Hunt P. O. Box 3944 Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA Dear Roger, This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is incomplete, however, we have scheduled it for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, March 5, 1991 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm. In order to keep this agenda date, Leslie would like you to submit by February 15th additional elevations for the Trolley. She would like to see how the building will look from the Jail/courthouse side of the parcel and she would like a better site plan showing employee parking (if planned) and where the recycling facility will go, etc. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application ~s available at the Planning Office. If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont, the planner assigned to your case. Sincerely, Debbie Skehan Administrative Assistant X V\\ ~. . r\~" . V'\;.:;I I \\ ,\ I \ '\ ,"""" ,,-,. CIT 130' ..". 'C;."..,,, ...tr~e t . " :".:,.. ;,....1' ..'..'-..."d...:.... "\01611 asp e Jli' co 'o;r.a: 0.<.:.. 'j(;3:'.92 5:~ 2020 '. December 14, 1990 Hoger Hunt Aspen Street Railway Company P.O. Box 3944 ~spen, Colorado 81612 Re: Land Use Application for Trolley Dear Roger: This letter will serve as permission for the Aspen street Railway Company to submit a Land Use Application on the City owned Rio Grande Property. Please be clear that this letter does not constitute approval or an indication of approval, but rather grants permission for your group to make application. Very truly yours, Carol D'Dowd . city Manager ,~ USE APPUCATICN FORM ,...-, 1) Project Name 2) Project IDeation Aspen Trolley Froiect Rio Grande SPA - 01 d Impound Lot, Si tE'> (iIrlicate street address, lot & block rnllnhE'r, legal'descript:i.cn whel:e awropriate) 3) Present Zoning SPA - Transportation 4) lot size Apnrox. 12,700 SF 5) Applicant's Name, lIddress & Ib:lne # A~ppn ~trpp.t Rnilwny ~n. 548 Race si., Aspen, co 81611 925-6431 6) Representative's Name, lIddress & Ib:lne # Jon Busch, above' address & phone or Roger H. Hunt, Box 3944, Aspen, CO 81611, 925-4414 7) Type of Application (please check all that awly) : O:>ntitional Use ~~SPA Final. SPA _ COOOepblal Hist:or:i.c Dev. Final Hist:or:i.c Dev. _ Special Review' 8040 Greenline ~, 0:Il1bept:1la1 RID Final. RID Minor, Hist:or:i.c Dev. .> stream Marg. -.,-, ID Historic Denx:>litian z.umt:a:in view' Plane , SUbdiVision _ Historic Designation O::lrrlani.niumization ~ TextIMaP Ameniment _ lot SplitjIot Line Mjustment X~ R.O.W. Review 8) Description of Ex.isti.ng Uses (rnrri",'l:" an:i' type of exi.st.inJ' strucbn:es; awroximate sq. ft.; )'1111ThF>T of k.lu"....'6;any previals awrovaJ.s granted to the property) . '-- G07 AlluLu.../t _ G07 Exenpti.on Re-Cyclinq activities. No permanent structures. 9) Description of Deve1~lt Afplication The application is for the construction of a trolley system on City (ane a small portion of County) property ane riqhts-of-way inCluding an approximatelY 7,000 SF (footnrint) Car barn attheformerimpoune lot site. 10) Have you attached the followiJ:x]? ~ Response to Attadl1l""uL 2, Mini.num Snhrri",-c;ian contents ..-lQL Response toAtt:adlment 3, Specific Snhrri""c;ion contents ~ Response to Attad:nnent 4, Review' standards for Your Afplication r-,. ,-" SUMMARY .... CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE PROJECT: ~f.ofl~ APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE' S- OWNER'S NAME: J .../ SUMMARY Type of Application: ~5(})~ - r M(>tfU .~ 1. 2. Describe action/type of development being re ested: >~,~>-~~x~~-i~;~ p~ sM . \ . , , ~?l ,. ~ \1 Wl0; ~ f?e}{'V'f-Jv\A'J .. r~~'V\t ,,0 (?nln/. I { deJu '\~ 3. .Areas is which. Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: ~ Comments ~\) e.. Jj~ ~ ~ l , . r':C. ~~J: Ad/ pia,,^, u~:tiEd ~:J:l;i:%t~t:f~ . 5. . . (~nlJ:") (CC On,ly) (P&Z then to CC) ~~v-<...(jtc.."rce,,~ Public Hearing: \~ (NO) , .: .' \ .. ':'-"'5vv--Mo~"-'..,-".........), f~\C /31!!::J Number of copies of the application to be sUbmitted~~ What fee was appiicant requested to sUbmit:D,.;)h-tbZ~S''''t:;;(/ t../3~ rA 1, .Q.oO' -t .5::> II: Anticipated date of submission: \.JC::;if, / 1 ~6) Cf'1 <6 ~~ :),.Q..~ _J,.J~.t5'''''''.{' J j\ '"\.... 'j 'It -C-v-...,(_ ~v- 6; 7. 8. frm.pre_app ,j >- Cf), 'U tI:l Z ~ ;:u o ~ ~ tI:l ~ l), ~ o ~ tI:l n ~ '" - --. '" " - ,..., .... :ti >- IJl tIj C) '1J r c ;:I:I IJl ;> ..,... ..... ..... r'" ~ ;l:! >- >- r () ...., '"" o V1 '.fJ IJl ,tIl () ..., ..... o Z IJl /""..,,\ YOUTH . CENTER ODD ~ o ;-~ 1"0 128" T 10" 6/ SECTION A-A ~":: il 0/' ~ ~) ASPEN TROLLEY PROJECT .<. l>''' .........~ ~' ~~~ ;~~:;' , 18% JAIL -"1902..5 ~ , 1"""'\ ~ ../- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and city council Carol O'Dowd, city Manager ~I\~ Amy Margerum, Planning Director~- Tom Baker, Assistant Planning Director THRU: THRU: FROM: DATE: August 14, 1990 RE: Downtown Transportation Modes Financial Information ================================================================= SUMMARY: At Council's July 23rdlUeeting, a memo was reviewed which gave a general evaluation of four modes for a north-south shuttle for downtown Aspen. These four modes are: Electric Trolley, Horse Drawn Trolley, Dedicated Shuttle Bus, and Shuttle Corridor Using Existing Fleet. Council asked the Planning Office to compile fUl:'ther data on cost requirements for these mode options. Please see the, attached Planning memo dated July 10 which was reviewed at the July 23 meeting. FINDINGS: Planning contacted representatives of the three modes for cost summaries broken down into two categories: Capital Costs and operating Expenses. The Operating Expenses are stated as cost per hour and cost per mile, for ease of comparison between the different modes. Dan Blankenship with Ef1:A has submitted capital cost: estimates for a dedicated shuttle bus system of $140,000 (two buses at $68- 70,000 each.) Operating expenses are estimated at $14.18 per hour (fixed driver's expense) and $.78 per mile (fuel, parts, maintenance costs, etc.) The Planning Office contacted Jon Bush for information on' the electric trolley mode. As of the date of this memo, the estimates for capital and operating expenses have not been submitted. Current information, as available, will be presented at the meeting. As with the electric trolley mode, information on the horse drawn trolley mode was not submitted in time ,for this memo. Jack Kaufman indicates that, the information will be available for review. Jack discussed that the critical issue regarding this mode is the problem of locatIng a stable and carriage house facility close enough to downtown to facilitate its operation. Further discussion on this subject should take place at the meeting. jtkvj/trolley.ccmemo , t"""\ ^ .J MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council Carol O'Dowd, City Manager Amy Margerum, Planning Director' Tom Baker, Planning Office Downtown Shuttle: Mode Evaluation THRU: THRU: FROM: RE: DATE: July 10, .1990 ================================================================ PURPOSE: The purpose of t~is memorandum is to generally evaluate four (4 r different modes for a north-south shuttle in downtown Aspen. The modes are: 1. Electric Trolley This mode is a fixed rail system utilizing traditional trolley vehicles and overhead wires as the source of electric power. 2. Horse of horses. tube below Drawn Trolley - This mode is a wagon pulled by a team This mode has a braking system which consists of a the street surface and a cable connected to the wagon. 3. Dedicated Shuttle Bus - This mode is a dedicated shuttle bus which is distinguishable from all other buses in the city. 4. Shuttle Corridor using Existing Fl.eet - This mode is the existing fleet of RFTA buses. The existing fleet routes would be modified to produce service on the shuttle route at the desired frequency. ASSUMPTIONS: L All modes will be evaluated on the same conceptual route. This route serves the parking structure, the post office, the mall and RUbey Park us'ing principally c;alena and Mill streets. 2. A north-south downtown shuttle has been shown as desirable in numerous transportation studies. 3. No fare will be charged on the shuttle. EVALUATION CATEGORIES: In this section of the memo staff outline evaluation categories and generally comment on differences between modes. At the end of this section staff summarize these comments in matrix form. will the will Capital Costs - In this category two mode have a distinct ~. r-" advantage from the city's perspective because no capital outlay is required. Using the existing RFTA fleet allows the community to implement shuttle service with some but not major capital expenditures; it can be expected that minor operating expenditures will be made along the lines of identifying shuttle vehicles and information dissemination. The electric trolley system is being proposed bya local group; included in their proposal is a plan to capitalize the electric trolley system without f1.l.nds from the city. The other two modes will require significant capital expenditure from the City/RFTA. Operation/Maintenance Costs - In this category the existing RFTA fleet has a clear advantage because the facilities and labor are already in place. ~ll the other systems will require additional labor and maintenance. The two trolley systems will require maintenance expertise different than bus maintenance. In the past, staff has reviewed professional literature which states that when rail and bus systems are compared the rail system has lower operating and maintenance costs. Addi tionally. the price the city pays for electricity is lower than the normal residential rate and can be a further cost savings. In discussions with Jack Kauffman (Horse Drawn Trolley), he made ,it very clear that his system will have the highest operation and maintenance costs of all the modes. Flexibility This category addresses the issues of ~.~ flexibility in terms of routing and system capacity. ~. Clearly, the two bus modes have the advantage in terms of -t' ...}" flexibility in routing and the dedicated shuttle bus is the Cu./' ,1'" ) .~ dlIost flexi. ble. The two trolleYSyst,e ms have fixed apparatus ~ v' \J / in the street (track or brake system) and require additional .rI" .).t' ,\ V ~ construction to change routes. P&Z raised the point that 'xV..r' Aspen has a tur a ern of land uses .. ' ex~ ility may not be important; the CCLC disagreed with 'b" this concept and viewed routing flexibility as important. In terms of flexibility regarding system capacity the two trolley modes can add trailers to there existing operations; the dedicated shuttle and existing fleet will need additional vehicles and drivers. Availability/Proven Technology - All of these modes are proven technologies. Trolleys were in use during the 1800's; horses were invented in the 40th century B.C.; and buses are the newe.st mode, only 70 years old. All modes seem to be available. However, the braking system proposed on the horse drawn mode is not a'traditional transportation technology and therefore is not proven for street use. (See attached sketch). Required Speed/Transit Times - This category was touched on 2 r"""', ~, in the operation/maintenance cateqory. The is at a clear disadvantage is the horse Further, routing realities concerning the likely cause additional traffic conflict longer transit times at eertain, times of the only mode which drawn trolley. bus . modes will and therefore day. 'Y\ ,I' )~ (" Co11ectionjDistribution This category evaluates the ability for each mode to adequately collect and distribute passengers. While there may ultimately be a difference between modes because of routing realities, staff's assumption is all modes will travel the same general route. During discussions with P&Z the point was raised that this category should also evaluate whether or not riders could get on and off the mode easily. It was then pointed out that the two trolley modes could have open sides making access very easy. Compatibility with Pedestrian and Historic Character - In terms of pedestrian compatibility the electric trolley has the advantage of a clearly defined route which allows it to operate in very close proximity to pedestrian traffic, i.e., Detroit's, trolley operates on City sidewalks for a portions of their downtown route. The horse drawn mode naturally avo.ids pedestrians and operates at a slow enough speed to be compatible with pedestrian traffic. The dedicated shuttle could be made compatible with pedestrians traffic if the scale of the vehicle were appropriate, however, operation inclose proximity to pedestrian traffic may be uncomfortable. The P&Z found the existing fleet to be incompatible with pedestrians. In terms of compatibility with the downtown's historic character only the trolley modes qualify. This is a very subjective category because what is historie to one person is Disneyland to another person. Pollution This category is intended to address all pollution aspects of the different modes: visual, noise, odor and chemical. In terms of visual pollution the existing RFTA bus fleet would likely be the most offensive because of their size. The electric trolley will also have a visual impact because the overhead wire which is the trolley's power source. In terms of noise pollution, the modes will all generate noise (measurements of electric trolley and diesel bus noise are virtually the same), but in staff's opinion the dedicated shuttle bus has the potential of being the quietest due to rubber tires and the smaller propulsion system. In terms of odor pollution, the existing RFTA fleet has a distinct diesel odor and the horse drawn trolley has the potential of substantial odor depending on the disposal system employed for animal waste. In terms of chemical pollution, RFTA's existing fleet will emit diesel 3 ,......., r"\ . fumes; the dedicated shuttle bus can use a fuel like compressed natural gas (RFTA will experiment with this fuel this summer) or electric; the. electric trolley will be ~irtually pollution free and the horse drawn trolley will emit methane gas. It can also be argued that the bus modes will contribute to the PM10 problem to a greater degree than either of the trolley modes. Ridership Appeal - In this category the trolley modes have a clear advantage and the existing bus fleet has the greatest disadvantage. Institutional Coordination -In this category the existing fleet and dedicated shuttle bus have a clear advantage because RFTA operates and maintains buses. The electric trolley can be operated and maintained by RFTA although it is not an identical system.' The horse drawn trolley is at the greatest disadvantage and will not be part of the RFTA system. compatibility with community compatible with Council's goals meets additional non-polluting trolley and shuttle bus (except polluting modes. Handicapped Access - The dedicated shuttle bus is likely the only mode that can be modified to accommodate wheelchairs. In .reality none of these modes deals with this category effectively and the ~&Z found that perhaps the best way of addressing this category was through the provision of handicapped parking in the downtown. Goals All modes are and the electric trolley goals. The horse drawn for PM10) can be very low Both trolley modes will require beyond RFTA's bus maintenance expertise beyond the scope of Liability - The P&Z added this category to during , their discussions. The P&Z found that the existing fleet could be covered under existing RFTA insurance policies; that the electric trolley and dedicated shuttle would need some additional coverage and the horse drawn trolley seemed to have the greatest risk potential. 4 ,-.,., "-, Intangibles - There are two additional factors that were' difficult to incorporate in this evaluation, but should not go without explanation. First, is the potential fragile nature of any fossil fuel system. As Council is aware and has expressed on many occasions, Aspen should look to the future and use transportation teohnologies which are non- polluting and renewable. clearly the two trolley modes have these qualities. Second, is the replacement schedule of these shuttle vehicles. Compared to buses the electric trolley vehicles have a useful life of 2-3 times. MATRIX: Attached is the evaluation matrix, that staff has completed. I have provided the Counoil with a blank form so that you can score the modes independently and bring your results to our meeting. I encourage, the Council to bring' all ideas about evaluation categori~s and scoring so that we have a full discussion. I will invite proponents of all the modes to the meeting so that we can hear all points-of-view. Planning and Zoning Commission and CCLC Findings - Staff has met wi th both P&Z and CCLC and gone through this exercise. The results of those meetings were generally the same: the electric trolley is the favored mode. I have been informed by Jon Busch that the final draft of the electric trolley proposal is virtually complete. This document will be needed if the electric trolley group is to pursue their system and amend the Rio Grande SPA. CONCLUSION: The matrix which is in this packet reflects the P&Z's position. During discussions with the P&Z it became apparent that the specific route of an electric trolley had to be justified during the development review process. The reason that staff undertook this mode evaluation was in response to the electric trolley group's need to inform the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District about the timing regarding sewer line replacement in Galena Street. While the electric trolley mode was identified as the most favorable, staff feels that the Galena Street routing issue is uncertain. 5 r--, ~ - - EXERPTED FOR CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION --.--.----.-._.__e____ '__'_'_'__'~____ - - FINAL REPORT - ASPEN STREET RAILWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY - - - PREPARED FOR THE ASPEN STREET RAILWAY COMPANY - - .. Prepared by Street Railway Associates Barton-ASchman Associates, Inc. - Gales Creek Enterprises of Oregon, Ltd. MAy 3, 1990 ,. r""-. ~ - - CON'l'ENTS - r"" CHAPTER ~ - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 - 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 ALIGNMEN'l' LOCATION OPTIONS 3 - 3 ENGINEERING AN.ALYSIS & CONSTRUCTION COSTS 5 4 VEHICLE REFURBISHMEN'l' REPORT 10 - 5 CAR BARN MAIN'l'ENANCE FACILITY COSTS 73 - 6 SYSTEM OPERATIONS & OPERATING COSTS 75 7 TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENT.AL IMPACTS 77 ... - . i ("". r'""\ - - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... ... The Aspen Trolley Feasibility Study was undertaken to update, refine and expand upon prior work by The Aspen street Railway Company relating to a proposal to implement a historic trolley system in Aspen. The specific purposes of this project are: 3. To act as a local transit circulator system between the parking garage at the north end of Aspen with the businesses and hotels at the southern side of Aspen; To act as an added attraction for the tourist to Aspen and to relieve the limited parking problem and traffic congestion in the downtown area along, and near, Galena Street. To restore a historically significant portion of Aspen I s past as an operating museum for the enjoyment and education of Aspen's citizens; 1. - - 2. - ... - The feasibility of a historic trolley system in Aspen depends as much upon the degree of community interest and financial support which is demonstrated for the project, as upon the technical criteria. This technical report is limited to the feasibility of certain criteria and the cost factors associated with the selected criteria: - . Route Alignment options Engineering Analysis and Construction Costs Vehicle Refurbishment Options Car Barn Options and Costs Operational Costs Traffic Considerations and Environment Impacts. Other factors, such as market demand/ridership potentials, funding needs, or revenue sources, have been addressed in other reports and are not considered in this particular study. - ii t"""'\ ,~, - - - Trollev Svstem Alianment The basic route for the proposed trolley was pre-established along Galena street from the parking garage now under construction to the vicinity of Rubey Park as a result of earlier investigation and discussions with local officials and citizens. This decision was based upon the fact that Mill street, located one block west, is a much more heavily travelled street and contains a large number of underground utilities. A number of variations in aliq1\lllent at both ends of the route were considered and eliminated on the basis of cost, operational constraints, and/or negative environmental impacts. The options presented within this report will offer three alignment choices at each end of the route. All options assume double-ended operation of the trolley vehicles. The selection of any option at either end of the route will be reflected in the construction cost estimates developed in this study. The northern end options includes a loop around the playing field and two different stub-outs, all with a lead track to the car barn. The southern end options include two stub-outs and one loop. The north end option completely around the playing field and the south end option via Durant, Mill, and Dean Streets are recommended for implementation due to the optimization of service and least overall complexity in construction and system operations. - - - - - - .. . Enqineerina Analysis and Costs Each option is discussed in detail in the Engineering Chapter as it relates to the complexity of construction, costs, traffic and utility conflicts and as the option would affect the operations of the trolley. The report describes the trolley operations resulting from each set of route options. In evaluating the options, consideration was given to the fact that the double ended controls will allow reverse operation of a trolley on a single dead-end track with the maximum safety. Vehicle Refurbishment The refurbishment requirements of the trolley vehicles were documented in a separate report divided into five sections. They are the purpose and scope, the physical evaluation, cost and time evaluation, spare parts list, and the supplemental construction requirements. It is the recommendation of the consultants that the folding doors and heaters be added since these components are necessary for operation in the Aspen winter period. The operational flexibility and safety of the system will be greatly improved by double ending all cars. It is further recommended that serious consideration be given to the installation of a low voltage lighting system which would include tail, stop and turn signals under the anti-climber. The trolleys had turn signals in portugal Hi ,.. ,.. - ,.. ,.. ,.. ,.. ,.. - - r, ..-... and recent experience in Dallas has demonstrated the decline of traffic conflicts when the lights are used in mixed traffic. Car Barn Construction The Car Barn requirements include a development site which can be made available by the city of Aspen, a building which will adequately house the present vehicles with the possibility of future vehicle acquisition, adequate room to perform the daily maintenance as well as the usual heavy maintenance required on a periodic basis, a service pit for under car repairs and maintenance, a storeroom, a space for the power supply rectifier, an office, and the space for storage of a line truck to repair or adjust the overhead power system and/or act as a tow vehicle in cases of need for removal of an inoperative trolley from the flow of traffic. . An additional requirement, not usually included in a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, is the need to address the required employee housing problem. Within the limits of the land site, this housing requirement will mean the location of the employee units on a second level of the building directly over the maintenance shop. In view of the industrial nature of the car barn, the noise factor of the adjacent snow melter when in operation (with the arrival, operation and departure of dump trucks at all hours of the day and night), the limited access to the living units, and the lack of private yard space, the cost associated with the housing units may be better spent by participating in the local housing authority's program of a cash payment in lieu of construction. iv ,-,... I"""". - - CHAPTER 1. . INTRODUCTION A proposal for an electrified light rail system in Aspen originated with a group of local businessmen who had purchased ten classic trolleys and delivered six of them to Aspen. The sponsors incorporated the Aspen Street Railway Company, Inc., in 1977. The company has c01lllBissioned this study to develop a route and operating plan which will address needs of the c01lllBunity, mesh with present and planned circulation patterns and is consistent with other past Aspen studies. The intention is to provide a high capacity transit link between peripheral parking, the center city, and other major destinations that could not be served effectively by busses, if at all. The plan would maximize to the greatest possible extent the inherent advantages of light rail over other transport modes, which include the use of less costly and less polluting fuel, smoother and quieter operation, higher potential capacity, and greater public appeal. Although the trolley cars on hand are of classic design, the system proposed will be compatible with other and newer types of equipment. Successful light rail operations in Detroit, San Jose, Dallas, and Yakima employ similar classic vintage equipment, some of which are as old, or older, than the trolleys in Aspen. The intention and expectation are that a major benefit to Aspen would be that the trolley cars might achieve the same sort of symbolic image identification for the city that the narrow gauge trains have for Durango, the trolleys have for New Orleans, and the cable cars have for San Francisco. - - -- - ,.... - - ~ The City of Aspen has made a decision that public transit should be fare free, and a fleet of busses is currently operated in this fashion. While it is ultimately desirable that the rail system be so operated, all presently available funding is currently allocated to bus operations. The nature of the rail project, however, indicates that its operating costs could be met from revenues that would not be available to the bus system. Unsuccessful ventures with space age technologies elsewhere, as well as unfortunate past failures of a novel transit undertaking in Aspen may have a skepticism toward new transit proposals, but the fact that the vehicles on location are in relatively good condition and that the technologies envisioned are both simple and well tested provides assurance that these problems will not be encountered with the proposed system. Clearly, a fare charging trolley would not compete with the free bus system for most c01lllButers and business travelers. However, Aspen caters to large influxes of tourists during both winter and summer seasons. Most of these come in search of new experiences, for which they are well prepared to pay. Prices in Aspen, for both 1 - "-, ,.-." - - exotic and ordinary gOOds and services, are among the highest in the nation, yet the City'S tourist facilities are Usually booked to capacity during the long peak seasons. People who will pay as much as a hUndred dollars a night for a hotel room or over ten dollars for a gOOd meal should also be willing to pay to ride a streetcar, either for its intrinsic enjoyment or as the easy way to reach their favorite ski area. - - The proposed vintage rail trolley system is consistent with past Planning efforts and responsive to earlier proposals and plans, some of which have been Officially adopted. The system is compatible with the scale of Aspen development in terms of bUilding heights, accommodation of pedestrians, and the overall character of the environment. It is also appealing to merchants by not being as Subject to relocation or termination. The details of this stUdy will support the conclusion that the costs presented for the construction of the trolley system are a reasonable investment in the Aspen community and will increase the ambiance as well as be an attractive and functional asset. - - - - . 2 I"" ,-" ,.. ,.. - CHAPl'ER 2. ALIGNMENT LOCATION OPl'IONS - The proposed trolley route generally along Galena street has been identified as the only north-south track alignment. The requirement to reverse the trolley direction at either end can be accommodated through several options. Four options at each end of Galena Street are considered. The options below have been grouped according to comparative features~ however, it is possible to match different north and south options and the Aspen community is urged to study the traffic, utility/construction conflicts, vehicle configuration possibilities, and the operational aspects before a final selection is made. The final cost will be driven by the option selections agreed upon. ,.. - - ,.. Option 1 This route alternative is depicted on sheets 1 and 2 of the enclosed drawings. It begins at the Rio Grande area as one-way counter clockwise loop, completely encircling the playing field and goes past the north side of the parking garage where it turns right and proceeds up the hill onto Galena Street. The route then splits into a double track configuration located in the center of Galena Street and proceeds to the vicinity of Cooper Avenue where it merges into a single two-way track to Durant Avenue. From this point, a single track turns onto Durant Avenue, and circles the block in a counter clockwise direction, connecting with the Galena Street tracks at Dean Street. - - - - option 2 This route alternative is depicted on sheets 3 and 4 of the enclosed drawings. It begins at the northwest corner of the playing field near the Art Museum in the Rio Grande area, proceeds in a counterclockwise direction around the playing field past the parking garage where it turns right, and proceeds up the hill onto Galena Street and into a double track configuration located in the center of the street. At Cooper Avenue, the double track merges into a single two-way track and proceeds to Dean Street where it turns to the right and proceeds to the end of the line at Mill Street. - - ,.. - - ~ 3 - - - - ,.... - ,.... - .. ~ ~. Option 3 This alternative is shown on sheets 5 and 6 of the enclosed drawings. It is identical to the configuration of Option 2 in the vicinity of the Rio Grande area except that it begins at Mill Street at the southwest corner of the playing field. It extends eastward past the parking garage and tUrns south onto Galena Street where it proceeds up the hill in a single track configuration. North of Main Street, it divides into a double track configuration located in the center of the street. At Cooper Avenue, the double track merges into a single two-way track configuration and proceeds southward to an end terminal located on the west side of Galena Street between Durant and Dean streets. 4 - - .- - r-. r-. CHAPTER 3. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS The purpose of the engineering analysis is to determine the impacts and corresponding solutions to construction of the trolley tracks and overhead power system. The analysis addresses four distinct segments of the trolley system route: The northern end of the alignment which will either be a loop around the playground or a stub Wye starting at the intersection of the bicycle trail and Spring street extension. The car barn facility and the connection to the northern operational track. North and south options have been combined for ease of discussing an operating scenario. However, any combination of north-south options is feasible and can be selected according to the desires of the community. - ,.... - - - - 4. 1. The Galena Street portion from the Spring Street extension to Durant Avenue. This includes the bicycle trail section. The southern end of the route from Durant Avenue to the end, or a loop, whichever option is selected. All options are shown with the associated operational comments and the related construction costs. 2. 3. 1. GALENA STREET This section of the construction will be discussed first since it is common to all other elements. The section begins at the north end of the bicycle trail at Spring Street and proceeds south to the Durant Street intersection. The track will be located within, or adjacent to, the paved bicycle trail as shown on the plans. It is recognized that pedestrians and trolleys do not usually mix well in the same space, but Detroit and other cities have found that the small amount of conflict time and the pedestrian/cyclists' acceptance of the necessity to grant right of way to the trolley vehicles in a restricted area is recognized. In addition, the training of the trolley operators and rigid enforcement of safety regulation will maximize protection of the users. 5 I"'" r-. - - - After the track enters Galena at the junction of the alley and the bike trail, the track is routed to the center of the street where a Wye switch splits the rails into two separate routes: north and southbound sets of tracks. The tracks cross Main street with the automobile traffic, the trolleys will be controlled by the existing momentary interrupt signal at Main street, and proceeds southbound along the centerline of Galena to Cooper Avenue. At this point, another Wye switch is placed to permit a single track to pass between the street lights and planter area of the pedestrian mall. All trolley overhead support poles ("o/h poles") along the bicycle trail are of the bracket support arm style which requires only one pole to support the trolley wire (see Figure , 1). At the Wye switch north of Main street, a span wire overhead support will be strung between two opposite poles in order that the wire and wire frog may have adequate support. This configuration is shown on all option drawings. The o/h poles from this point south will be double bracket arm poles as shown in Figure , 2. The Cooper Avenue area of the double track has a single bracket arm support pole the same as is located along the bike trail. This o/h pole is used here instead of the double span wire support since the pole can be located off street and away from vehicular traffic. - ,.... - - - - - The Wye switch at each end allows the trolley to move in the desired direction from single track to double track and back again without the need of'the trolley operator making any adjustment to the switch. In case of a problem, a manually thrown switch for contraflow movement is possible so that a trolley could utilize the opposite track in emergencies. . 2. THE SOUTH END OPERATION There are three options to consider for termination of the trolley system at, or near, Durant Avenue. Each option has advantages and disadvantages. The main question of necessity is to determine the practicality, and possibility, of access to Dean street. This access to Dean Street is dependent upon negotiations with the property owner and obtaining an easement for any of the options which enters this space. option 11 (see drawing '2) will have the trolley loop the south end via Dean, Mill, Durant and returning to Galena. This will allow the removal of the trolley from Galena without any restriction of traffic blockage as would happen with other options. It will also allow better service to the new hotel under construction and any improvements made on either side of Dean Street. The trade-off is the extended trackage and four span supports systems which would be required for the corner turns. There would be a need for a momentary traffic interrupt signal at Galena and Durant for trolley access to the north bound route. This momentary interrupt signal would be tripped by a sensor located on the overhead and wired to the signal controller. All parking along the south side of Durant 6 ~ r-. - - - between Mill and Galena would need to be removed to allow a restricted trolley lane and no interference with normal traffic along Durant. Option '2 (see drawing '4) will have the trolley turn from Galena onto Dean where it would dead end before reaching Mill. In this option, a momentary interrupt signal would need to be operated so that the Durant traffic is not unnecessarily delayed. The disadvantages are: 1. The contra flow operation of the trolley along Dean to at least north of Durant with a transition from side of road to center of road occurring in the Durant/Galena intersection 1 - - - - 2. The requirement that only one trolley occupy the area north of Cooper street at any time. Otherwise, the reversal of trolleys would become a traffic hazard on Galena street. - - Option #3 (see drawing '6) would require the relocation of the east curb line between Dean and Millon Galena Street to accommodate the installation of the stub end track. This option eliminates all track and poles on Dean, Mill, and Durant streets but requires a bridal overhead support system for the wires. It is recommended that a momentary interrupt signal be installed at the Durant/Galena intersection to permit trolley traffic to cross Durant safely. The sensors would be connected in such a way as to not give a false reading of the trolley direction. This method would assure that only an approaching trolley would turn the Durant signal to red when necessary. The momentary interrupt could be coordinated with other Durant Avenue signals in close proximity. - - - ... 3. THE NORTH END OPERATIONS option '1 would have the trolley loop the playing field via the bike/pedestrian paths along the east, north and west side of the field as shown on drawing f 1. Upon approaching Mill Street, the trolley tracks would be located east of the present Mill Street sidewalk and adjacent to Spring street, south of the present street lights and boulders. A set of Wye switches would be located at the bike trail end of Spring street for directional control of the trolley travel either to the barn or back to Galena Street. A crossing would allow the trolley to approach the barn only after making the entire loop. An additional option would be for one more set of switches to allow direct access to/from the barn and Galena Street. The disadvantage of this option is the length of track to be laid and the topography adjustments that will have to be made to accommodate the trolley track and the bike/pedestrian trails in the - - - - ... 7 ~ ~ .~ ,- - - same general area. Two big advantages would be the availability to serve all of the parking loti Spring Street area and the Mill street/theater area. - option 12 (drawing 13) would have a Wye configuration which would reduce the track distance, conflicts with the sidewalks and bike trails, and allow a shorter turn around time for better headways. The car barn tail track would be a part of this Wye. option 13 (drawing 15) would also have a Wye configuration and reduce conflicts the same as Option 12. The disadvantage is the reduced trolley service to the post office/Clark I s Market/Art Museum area. - .... - In addition to the track configuration, the overhead wire and poles must be considered. The location of the poles determines the amount of support required for the wire. Corners usually require more span wire construction than is desired. The local decision to eliminate all overhead wires will be violated; however, when the catenary is compared with the large signal support poles and attached arms, the visual pollution is very limited. Most people will not see the 4/0 wire strung between poles. It is the corner wire configurations that are most objectionable. Electric Trolley Coach overhead hardware may be used in certain locations to reduce the objectionable overhead in curves and turns. -- - - .... ... - .. .. - . 8 .-... .-.... .... - construction Costs - For the estimation of materials required for an operating system, the prices estimated for each option are a compilation of costs frOlll manufacturers, contractors, and operating systelllS. The following chart will define construction costs for each option. The - common base units will be the Galena street trackage common to all elements and the car barn trackage/overhead. - unit option f1 option 12 option '3 Galena st. - track 331,670 331,670 331,670 overhead 87,825 87,825 87,825 Subtotal 419,495 419,495 419,495 - Car Barn track 125,270 125,270 125,270 - overhead 23,440 23,440 23,440 Subtotal 148,710 148,710 148,710 - South End track 135,216 53,635 15,538 - overhead 44,280 23,600 11,840 Subtotal 179,496 77,235 27,378 . North End track 184,655 100,560 45,666 overhead 59,700 35,100 17,280 Subtotal 244,355 135,660 62,946 TOTAL 992,056 781,100 658,529 9 "..., "..., ""\ - CHAPTER 4. - VEHICLE REFURBISHMENT - The report of the trolley refurbishment was prepared by Gales Creek Enterprises of oregon, Ltd., after sending out a team, led by Paul Class, a principle of Gales Creek, to thoroughly inspectinq one car as a representative example of all presently owned cars. The vehicle was separated from the truck assembly, certain parts removed, examined in detail, and then tested to determine the repairs required. The body was also carefully inspected to determine all sources and locations of damage, or deterioration, and the necessary corrective measures to be taken. All of the other five trolleys were examined, in place and as accessible, for visual condition. - - - - The following report is in five sections: purpose and scope, physical evaluation, cost and time evaluation, recommended spare parts purchases, and a supplemental construction recommendation. As stated earlier in this study, the repairs, improvement and purchase of spare parts are highly recommended so that the trolley system may operate with a minimum of down time and the community can receive the assurance that all aspects of operational safety have been addressed. - . The are two items left out of the vehicle refurbishment report. The requirement of the line truck will be noted in Chapter 5. A line truck is necessary for servicing the wire overhead for adjustments and repairs as well as use as a tow truck for disabled trolley cars. The cost for a used line truck with winch and rotary lift is approximately $20,000 to $25,000 used and restored. The need for stop, turn, brake signals on the trolleys has also been noted. The cost addition to the refurbishment report will increase approximately $2,000 per vehicle for the low voltage light system. It is sugqested that a two-way radio system be installed if the trolley is not a part of the present transit system in Aspen. Such a radio system would allow the trolleys to communicate between the cars and the barn, or line truck, in times of need and for scheduling information. The radios may be supplied with a touch key pad which would allow the operator on the car to summon police, fire, or ambulance assistance when required. An additional feature would be the availability to shut off the power in case of an accident where the wire structure was in danger of touching the ground and in cases where the fire department requested the shutting off of power. The estimated cost of six portable radios, a base station, and telephone interconnect is less than $13,000.00. - - ""\ - - 10 ,-.., .~ - ..." - UPD 'ntOLLBY SYSTU J'BUIBILIft STUDY for The city of Aspen, Colorado - ROLLIHG STOCIt J'ebruary I 19'0 ...... SOURCE: Gales Creek Enterprises of Oregon, Limited - - PURPOSE: The purpose of this section of the study will be to define the process for bringing six 36 inch gauge Brill style Trolley cars, presently owned by the city of Aspen, from their current condition to a state of repair that meets with the safety, operational efficiency and aesthetic presentation necessary for regularly scheduled public service in Aspen, Colorado. ...... .... Additional considerations will include certain alterations to the cars in an attempt to adapt them to the severity of the Aspen winter climate and the addition of duplicate controls, in five of the cars, allowing flexibility in the design of the system route layout. Specific information provided here will be; (1) the estimated cost of the process; (2) estimated time to complete the process; and (3) Recommendations for an initial Spare Parts Inventory. Information relative to labor costs will be derived from national averages in the industry. Procedures, historical treatment and some parts information will be derived from inter-national averages. All information will be based on fUll-time, scheduled service. - - ,- .... - .... - - - 11 ~ r- .,-., - '.\ ! :...0 PIlOCBDOD. - por purposes of evaluation, reference to the cars will be lIllda in the following categories: Body ... - structural Interior Exterior - Truck(s) Wheels and Axles Frame and Brake Rigging Gears and Bearings Springs Electrical - - ... Motors Controllers Heating Lights Trolley Poles & spring Bases Track Brakes Resistors, Lightning Arrestor and Circuitry - Air & Mechanical - - Air System Sanders People Catchers Windshield Wipers Destination Boxes Retrievers Hand Brakes Tow Bar ... ... Hardware & Miscellaneous - All references to "front" and "rear" are made relative to the "A" end of the car being the "front" end. The "A" end is the end containing the Primary circuit Controls. The "B" end will, therefore, be referred to as the "rear" end of the car. All references to "left " and "right" are made as if one stood in the center of the saloon facing the "front" of the car. - - - 12 - I~ .~ - - SUPPLBHBNTAL CONSTRUCTION ,- - As mentioned in the Purpose and Scope of the work, there will be supplemental work required, recommended or desired to enhance the operation of the cars, and, indeed, the line, that exceed the necessity for basic repair and restoration. These areas of supplemental work are: Foldina Doors. The cars are presently equipped with expandable gates. These gates are included in the repair and restoration of the car. - - - There are many arguments in favor of replacing the gates with folding doors with mechanisms that could be operated by the motorman. Those arguments would include everything from the motorman's comfort in times of dire cold, to saving wear and tear on the Bulkhead doors. - - Heaters. There is presently no heat source for passengers in these cars. Their operation in Portugal did not require heat. This study considers, as supplemental to the basic repair, the installation of heaters. One would be placed under each latitudinally place chair and one in each vestibule. Double-Endina. Car #418 is presently "double-ended". This means the car has controls at both ends and can operate in either direction under power. The remaining cars are "single-ended" and are capable of operating only in the direction of the controlled end. Double-Ending the remaining five cars would allow all cars to be operated on the line without installing a turn-around at each end of the line. The cost of Double-Ending is shown in this report and is based on a particular method devised to save money and equipment. - - - - ,I' - I 1 I - ... - ~ 13 1"""\ ,-..., - - PHYSICAL .VALUATION REPORTS - - The following pages contain individual reports on each of the Aspen Cars. These reports are self-explanatory and include information specific to the car. Gales Creek Enterprises of Oregon, Ltd., removed the Truck from Car #524 and determined its repair requirements. It was agreed in determining the scope of this study that the Truck from Car #524 would be used as a model for the assumed condition of the remaining cars. ... ... ... The cars were grouped together at the time of the study and 1524 was chosen for its accessibility rather than its quality for typifying an average condition. Therefore, it is recommended that prudence be exercised in determining the condition of the trucks under the remaining cars. There will be some repetition observable throughout the reports. This is due to the necessity of meeting safety standards for operation. Running lighting, brake system and electrical appliances effecting the operation of the car must be inspected and up-graded on all cars regardless of condition. Specifications for parts and systems used in the evaluation of the work are taken from the 1911 Electric Railway Dictionary, the experience of Gales Creek Enterprises of Oregon, Ltd. and the wise counsel of other members of street Railway Associates. ... ... ... ... ... ,- ... ... ... ... .. 14 - 1""'. 1""'--." - - AIpon Fnsfbll fty Study. F.......ry, 1990 C..t (""IUlt!an: - CAll. CAll. CAll. CAll. CAR. CAR. - MEA: ill411 *519 1/520 *521 *524 *526 TOTAl.S: Body 514,974.00 511,070.00 513.720.00 510,935.00 5 9,180.00 510,980.00 570,859.00 Truck. 5 4,125.00 5 4,125.00 5 4,125.00 5 4.125.00 5 4,125.00 5 4,125.00 524,750.00 - Electricel $ 9.7Z3.45 5 2.410.115 5 2,222.25 $ 2,335.115 $ 3,814.10 51,905.10 522,411.60 Air' Mechanicel 54.057,60 5 2,171.60 $ 3.066.35 5 2.397.10 5 2,801.60 53.424.115 $17.919.10 - Herdwere , MiacellenoKlo2,242.50 $ 1,951.00 $ 1,778.50 5 1,831.00 5 1,260.00 $1.861.00 510.924.00 - Finishes: Exterior Paint 5 7,200.00 5 7,200.00 5 7,200.00 5 7.200.00 5 7,200.00 $ 7,200.00 $43,200.00 Interior Paint 5 1.440.00 5 1,440.00 5 1,440.00 5 1.440.00 $ 1,440.00 5 1.440.00 5 1.640.00 Interior Natural $ 4.320.00 5 4,320.00 5 4.320.00 5 4.320.00 $ 4.320.00 5 4,320.00 $25.920.00 Truck $ 450.00 5 450.00 5 450.00 $ 450.00 $ 450.00 5 450.00 5 2.700.00 Cle." and Prep 5 270.00 5 270.00 5 270.00 $ 270.00 5 270.00 5 270.00 $ 1.620.00 Contingency (11)>1l 5 4.880,26 $ 3.540.85 5 3.859.21 5 3.530.40 5 3.486.07 5 3.597.60 $22.894.37 - Sub'Totel per _.682,81 $38.949.30 $42.451.31 $38,834.35 $38.346.77 539.573.55 Sub-Totel ell cers $251.838.07 - Spare Parts Inventory Add 52.996.25 if OlllJble Ending Option Exercised 5 35.847.85 Sub-Total all cars $287. 68S. 92 Heat units (10/cerl 5 1.190.00 5 1.190.00 $ 1.190.00 5 1.190.00 $ 1.190.00 5 1. 190.00 57.140.00 Sub-Total per cer 554.872.81 $40.139.30 $43,641.31 $40.024.35 539.536.77 540.763.55 Folding Door $ 7.680.00 5 7.680.00 5 7.680.00 5 7.680.00 S 7.680.00 5 7.680.00 S294, 82S. 92 $46.080.00 SUb~Total all ears Sub-Total per car 562.552.81 $47.819.30 551,321,31 547.704.35 547,216.77 $48,443.55 z==za~== ssaa:aaa.s =ZZ$..-==- ========== ........=: sa_zs===.. Sub- Total all cars 5340. 90S, 92 ======-=== OlllJble-Ending* ..!!!..2!! 510.256.00 510,256.00 510.256.00 54.533.00 5 4.533.00 $ 39.834.00 Totals per car 562,552.81 ssa.075.3O 161.577.31 $57.960.35 $51.749.77 $52.976.55 ========== =_==:====: ===z:=:=:: ========== ======--=== z=::==:=:: Totel Sese + All Options S380.739.92 =========== * All Truck costs were derived frOfll analysis of the Car 1524 truck; the only truck separated trOll its car body for this study. .. These costs were derived frOM a process kIIerel;:Jy the 8K controllers and SOMe other parts specific to the 8K systelll, ere r8lllO'led frOll cars *519. 520 , 521. two of these controllers and specific perts placed In cars *524 & 526, thereby double-endi"" th.... then Cars *519, 520 , 521 receivl"" two (2) JCJ5JJ controllers. and specific perts. eac:h. thereby cbble.endinQI theM. This standardizes perts per car and leaves one 8K10 Controller, end SCMe parts, for Spare Parts Inventory. 71 "....., /""'.. ... - Aspen F...lbll lty study. F_ry, 1990 ... 1i_ Ev.luatfon: Dllea: otbenIi_ .tated~ tf_ .... in ShaD DIMd - Totall lilted he... or. for the -..t of totel oIIop tl.. to perf..... the wort. They do not IIlJI\lfy the 8IIlOUnt of tI.. a perticular car or troupe of co... ..,. be be ti4ld up for c_truction. Th. ar... _t likely will OYerlop, rocIucil'll/ oct...l lI_r c_truction ti.. per cor to about 60S of the total oIIop ti.. (in calender dayIl) requir4ld for the _k. Theoe fi,...... do not include portl Ihi_t or t..til'll/, CAll CAll CAll CAll CAll CAll Ar..: "'B: 1519: 1520: 1521: 1524: 1526: Area: . -----------------------.-.---------.---------.-.----------------------------.--_._.._------.------ Body 45.15 34.00 39.50 33.50 28.25 33.15 214.15 Truck* 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 n.oo Electrical 17.00 5.25 5.25 4.15 B.OO 4.50 44.15 Air & Mechanical 9.00 6.00 B.25 6.15 7.50 B.25 45.15 Hardware & Miocelloneouo 3.50 2.50 2.25 2.50 1.25 2.25 14.25 Finislleo 33.13 33.13 33.13 33.13 33.13 33.13 198,711 CIa." & Prep ~ ~ ~ --L.22 --L.22 ~ ~ Totals per car 126.38 98.811 106.38 98.63 96.13 99.811 _.;1:". ...z.. ..=..- -- .-- ...... Total all car. 626.28 .:z:.._ Heat Unitl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --.!& Totals per car 127.711 100.28 107.711 100.03 97.53 101.28 ====== ====== =a:===:= ====== ====== ====== Total all cars 634.68 ====- Fold;1'll/ Doors 19.80 ~ 19.80 ~ 19.80 ~ 11!J!!! Totals per car 147.58 120.08 127.58 119.83 117.33 121.08 ==-:&=- ===;1= ===.::=* =====- =:-=::=:::1: ===== Total .llcars 153.48 ====== Double Erdil'll/ ~ ...1hl!! 11.70 11.70 ...1hl!! 11.70 58.50 Totals per ear 147.5B 131,711 139.28 131.53 129.03 132.711 _s_. _==:lIllZ -==..= -===- s#zz_ ;I:=lIIl.:;:. Total .ll cars 811.98 _==::::1:. The fOllowil'll/ bre.kdowns """ty only to the besic work above. i..e. "Bcdy" throuth 'Clean & Prep". - - - - - ~ calender Weeks: 25.28 19.711 21.28 19.711 19.23 19.98 Calcutat4ld at 5 shop days per week calerdar IIontlla: 5.85 4.511 4.93 4.57 4.45 4.62 calculated at 21.6 shop days per 1IlOI'lth * All Truck: tiMeS were derived from anelysis of the Car 1524 truck; the only truck separated frOll its car body for this study. ** These tiMeS were derived frOll a process whereby the BK controllers and some other parts specific to the BK system, are reRlOved frCII c.... 1519, 520 & 521, two of these controllers and specific parts plac4ld in car. 1524 & 526, thereby double-endil'll/ tIIeM, then Cars 1519. 520 & 521 receivil'll/ two (2) K35JJ controllers, and specific parts, each, thereby double-endil'll/ theM. This standardi... perts per car and lelVes one 81(10 Controller, and .- perts, for spare P.rts Inventory. n r-, ,-. - - CHAPTER 5. CAR BARN MAINTENANCE FACILITY - .. The construction of a maintenance facility for storage and servicing of the trolleys requires space for an office, storage of parts, a room for the power rectifier, tracks for storage and hght maintenance of the cars, and a repair pit area for working under the cars as required. Additional space must be provided for a limited number of tools and working space for repair/refurbishment of components that may be removed from the vehicle, The building proposed is a steel frame. concrete block structure which contains an office and storerooms in an add-on unit. The main structure has two components: a work/storage area containing about 4450 square feet of floor surface and a clear span twenty feet high c~i1ing; and apartment units located over the maintenance area for employee housing (see Figure 3). The distance from floor to ceiling is required for the installation of the trolley wire at a height which will allow a man to stand on the top of the car to work and yet not come into contact with the wire. There arc three tracks enterinll the barn, Two traclCs are for storage and light housekeeping while the third track has a pit for servicing the undercarriages of the vehicles. The entire structure including the office/storage space, is recommended for fire sprinkler protection. While trolleys do not have the need for as many lubricants, oils, and solvents as a comparable bus maintenance facility; there is a need for some storage of these items on-site, The living quarters located directly above a maintenance area will require fire protection for the safety of the occupants. It IS anticipated that a 4" water line would suffIce for the requirements of the shop, the apartments, and the fire system. Electric service to the site will be 480 volt A.C. with transformers on site to convert the 480 volt to 600 volt D,C. and also to 110/220 volt house pj)wer for the offices tools, and living quarters. There will be a master disconnect for the 480 volt A.C. mounted withm easy access to the office or shop. Other disconnects would include a master control for the rectifier, a separate DC J>ower disconnect for the shop and for the exterior track system. and separate disconnects for the office, shop, and apartments. Other utilities serving the site will be gas for the infrared shop heaters and for heating and cooking in the apartments and installation of a sanitary sewer line. The sewer line may require a lift station to allow discharge into the sewer system. If so, a septic tank is recommended for deterioration of soUd particles and the pump would handle the effluent without a grinder, Except for water used in the washing of trolleys. very little waste water is geDerateo from the sliop. Surface water would be collected into a separator tank prior to beIng discharged into the sewer system. Employee housing must be supplied by any new business in accordance with the laws and ordmances of Aspen. Such housing may be on site, off-site, or subsidized through the local housing authority, For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed that such nousing will be on SIte and located above tlie shop area - the only area on site large enough for the number of full time employees suggested for operation. The apartments may be configured to have one unit of approximately 700 square feet, and six units of approXimately 62) square feet. If only five employees are required to have housing prOVIded, the six units could be reduced to four units of approximately 937 sCUlare feet. Tile present estimation of construction and finish out costs for the apartments is ~60.00 per square foot. Construction costs for the car barn site and improvements arc: Item Total cost. Barn 4450 SF Steel &. BIOCki $80 SF, 5356,000. Office 375 SF1-Steel &. Block 580 Sr;:. 30,000, Apts. 4450 Sr Steel &. Block 590 Sr~ 400,500. Electric underground service, 3 0 LF @);)20 6,000. Gas Connect fee &. service... 100 LF@)$3 LF 600. Water service, 4" line, 300 Lr @530 LF 9,000. Sewer service &. fee, pump/tanK/separator 60.000. Fire Fire System, Water &. Alarm 2~'V8~ Total ~!8, . - ... - - .... - 73 -J ~- I ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ~. ~. According to figures provided by the architects and contractors in Aspen, the cost of a maintenance facility of a steel building shell (Butler style) without the housing units would cost approximately the same as the steel structure and concrete block: Barn 4450 SF Steel &: BlOCk~ $80 SF, $356,000. Office 375 SF. Steel &: Block $80 SF 30,000. Elcctric underground service, 0 LF l1U$20 6,000. Gas Connect fee &: service... 100 LF"l1U$3 LF 600. Water service, 4" line, 300 Lr l1U$30 LF 9,000. Sewer service &: fee~pump/tanl(:fseparator 60,000. Fire Fire System, Water &: Alarm i~ ~88 Total $4 : : Thus, the cost of on site housing is more than $400.500.00, or a minimum of $190,500 more than the $210).000 estimated if the company particIpated 1D the local housing program at a cost S30.000.0v per unit (times 7 employees). - 74 1"""\ 1"""\, ... - ,... CHAPTER 6. SYSTEM OPERATIONS AND COSTS - Ooerations The daily operations of the trolley system will be demand driven to provide adequate transit servIce to Aspen according to the seasonal demands. Off peaI<: operationlt will require less frelluent trolley headway than the peak seasons, It is anticipated that the off season demand may be met with one trolley in operation from 7 A.M to 10 P.M on a frequency. of approximately 10-12 minutes headway. The peak season will require two trolleys operating on a six minute headway. Operations will be every day, all year round, The staffing requirements for such a system will require a manager/mechanic, a part time secretary/bookkeeper, three full time operators and one full time operator/mechanic, The peak season operations will require the addition of two full time operators, one part time operator for the off.season operations and one part time mechanic. The wage rate for such operators is prol'ected to be a base of 511.00 per hour plus a benefitfackage of 34%. The part time opera or l?ay scale will be the same rate for the number 0 hours worked. The secretary pay scale is calculated at 511.00 including a 34% benefit package while the manager pay scale is calculated at 540,000.00 base plus the 34% benefit package. The benefit package and labor rates are based on the present wage scale paid to employees of RFT A, Insurance premiums are the hardest to calculate as the workman's compensation rate changes dramatically. While the RFT A insurance costs for the addition of the streetcars is unknown at this time (RFT A insurance is supplied through the management contract). general liability. and comprehensive insurance for the vehicles, equipment, and barn are projected to be $29,540 per year. Electric costs are predicated upon a rate of ,05 per kilowatt hour. The trolley car will average a 6 kilowatt hour draw, The total hours of operation are l?rojected at 9000 hours per year, The total electric cost for one year includes the operations of the trolleys, shop and apartment use, and heating, The estImation for all electric costs is estimated at 512,000 per year. Maintenance costs are very difficult to projc;ct as the preventative maintenance schedule is derived from the thoroughness of vehicle refurbishment that is accomplished, The degree of preventative maintenance is always subject to discretion of the manager. For the purpose of this study, a yearly figure for all maintenance, includin& one major motor rep.air, trolley maintenance, line trUCK maintenance, and overhead repaus/adjustment. is estimated at 520,310. Other costs arc tax and audit costs, office supplies, water, gas, taxes, et cetera, and are estimated at $26,250 per year. Expense La bor administrative maintenance operations 5 68,.830 48/76 133,320$250,926 29,540 12 000 20.510 SU~:8~6 - - ... ..... - Insurance Electric Maintenance Other Total A comparison with known RFT A costs will be found in the Appendix. The operation of streetcars in the winter has been mentioned as being a problem. The one hundred years of experience all over the world points out that such cars as will be operated in Al!))en did in fact operate in cities with a larger accumulation than Aspen and in wetter condItions of winter. Nclson\RC., Switzerland, cities in the northeast of the United States, and in Colorado have no proolem if the snow removal is correctly operated. The proposed 75 r"\ ,,-., ... ... .... Aspen system will allow the City Street maintenance to clear the line in the street right of way during their normal operatIons. The streetcar companies of old had a practice or operating a car whenever any icing conditions were forecast. This trolley operation knocked all of the ice off \he wire berore it had a chance to build up. The op'eratJon of the wheels along the track wdl tend to reduce the ice and snow buildup in the flange ways and along the open track. The line truck should be fitted with a hydraulic plow to assist the clearing of snow from the tracks when required, Revenue Additional revenue may be realized through the sale of copyrighted and trade mark items. The sale of Tee Shirts, coffee cups post cards, et cetera, is a major source of revenue in trolley museums and also at stores lIcensed by San Francisco and Seattle. New Orleans also sells.a good number of private charters, inCluding the decorations and food, for additional, profItable revenue. The sale of specialty advertising in the cars, or on the exterior may be sold to stores wanting to reach a select market or for instItutional purposes. Dallas presently has a contract which may maximize net income from the intenor advertisements plus two exterior, front advertisements on each car and projects up to $72,000 if all ad space is sold. Presently, after six months of operations, Dallas is realizlDg over $3,500 per month with additional ads in preparation. - - .... - - - .... - - .... .... - - ... ~ 76 ~ 1""". 1"'""\ .... .... .... CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .... Traffic The selection of Galena Street route was made primarily because of its directness between the parking garage and the ski slopes. While Galena Street carries from 4,000 to 5,000 vehicles per oay ouring the peak ski season, according to the Transportation Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, prepared In September of 1987, tlie trolley vehicles can flow with other vehicular traffic without capacity pr.oblems at comparable operating speeds appropriate for the central area. The options using Mill and Main streets will encounter volumes in the range of 7,000-10000 vehicles per day which could create congestion problems. The o~tion using the altey next to the parking garage would conflict with the one- way operation of the banI< traffic. Movement of the trOlley vehicles would be controlled by existing traffic signals except where special sianal interrupt phases are required to allow the trolley vehicles to make left turns through Intersections from the curb lane. It also appears that nearly all of the existing on street parking can remain. The above referenced report indicates that pedestrian volumes crossing the various trolley alignment o~tions at the south end of the route are not excessive and can be safely accommodated at signalized intersections and designated crosswalks. Trolley o~erations on existing bus routes are limited only to the options utilizing Main, Mill ana Durant. The option passing through Rubey Park will create some potential conflict with bus operations at tlie transit terminal. At the north end of the route, the trolley tracks should be located adjacent to (rather than on) sidewalks, jogging paths,- and bike trails, wherever possible, to avoid conflIcts with users of these facilItIes. It should De pointed out tnat Detroit, San Jose, Portland, Denver and several other cities, presently mix pedestrians and transit without serious problems. Option I provides the least amount of conflict with vehicular traffic that will be entering and exiting the parking garage..Trolley loading and unloading points should be located away from the garage access anves. Safety to passengers boarding and alighting the trolley vehicles at designated stops will be afforaed In a manner similar to busses. Where trolley vehicles are requIred to load from the center of the street, special .safety zones. will have to be created in the street to allow passengers access to and from the sidewalks. These have been successfully provided in many cities where this type of operation exists. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... - .... - - .... .... 77 .... r-. ,-., ... ... ... Environmental It is well recognized that electrically powered vehicles are non-polluting transit vehicles. Such vehicles also do not utilize the same amount of non-renewable resources as would a gas, or diesel, engine vehicle as the electrical power source may come from hydroelectric sources, The maintenance of the trolley also uses less solvents and produces very little toxic wastes, such as motor oils, as comparable carbon fueled vehicles. Smce a trolley has no exhaust emissions, almost no dust (PMIO) lleneration, and would have a tendency to reduce the reliance on the automobile for transit from either the north or south ends of Aspen' it will have a positive impact on local air quality and potential traffic congestion along the route. The installation of electric heaters to keep all switches from snow and ice freezing is a direct result of not utilizing an ethylene glycol based product which would require the pouring of the solution onto the sWitches and, ultimately, into the ground. The glycol "roduct would require one gallon per switch on an average of at least seven to ten times during the year, The analysis of noise impacts was conducted using information obtained from the City of Aspep., guidelines fro~ the American Public Transit Association (APT A), and data from an eXlstmg trolley operatIon. Readings of ambient noise levels are periodically made by the City of Aspen in response to citizen requests. Figure 4 shows the location, time, date and levels of ambient' noise along the proposed trolley route. Noise levels associated with bus operations in the vicinity of fhe route are also shown at two locations. The American Public Transit Association (APT A) has published guidelines normally used in the development of new rail rapid transit systems. The APT A &uldelines are expressed in terms of maximum acceptable noise levels from a pass-by of a smgle train in various community I and use areas. Table 2 shows the APTA Guidelines for maximum airborne noise from train operations for various community categories. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 78 ... ~. ~ - - - TABLE 2 GUIDELINES FOR MAXIMUM AIRBORNE NOISE FROM TRAIN OPERA nONS Lmax DESIGN GOAL Community Area Category Single Family Dwellings Multi Family Dwellings Commercial Buildings ~ - Low Density Residential 70 dBA 75 dBA 80 dBA Average Residential 75 dBA 75 dBA 80 dBA High Density Residential 75 dBA 80 dBA 80 dBA Commercial 80 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA Industrial/Highway 80 dBA 85 dBA 85 dBA SOURCE: American Public Transit Association, "1981 Guidelines for Rapid Transit Facilities" - - - The trolley system will run through community areas that could be characterized as both "High Density Residential" and "Commercial". Consequently, the noise criterion for noise levels (Lmax) will range from 75 dBA to 80 dBA for multifamily dwellings and 80 dBA to 85 dBA for commercial buildings. In order to estimate the "wi~h tr~ler condition, noise measurements were taken at three locations along the histonc t. C ar es Avenue streetcar route in New Orleans, including embedded track in Carondelet Street. Adjustments were made to these readings to reflect new continuously welded rail (CWR) for the Aspen system. In all instances, toe St. Charles line uses historic trOlley cars of a different ma!(e but, with similar operating noise characteristics, to those proposed for Aspen. The readings ranged from 70 to 75 dBA. A comparison of APT A maximum acceptable noise level criteria and the anticipated levels of trolley p'ass-by noise indicates that the expected levels are within the acceptable range. The Municipal Code of Aspen allows passing motor vehicle noise levels of up to 90 dBA. An additional noise consideration is the high frequency wheel squeal caused intermittently when steel wheels navigate sharp turns on steel rails. Wheel squeal is a variable noise ranging from a high-piJched screech to a low-pitched growl on dry track; on wet tracks it can be non-existent. Measurements on the New Orleans trolley system showed that the A- weighted maximum sound level was the same as a pass-by at 10 mph on tangent embedded track, Any possible noise can be mitigated by operating around curves at low speeds. The noise generated at the maintenance facility should be lower than the levels of other commercial operations in the area. Trolley maintenance is not the same as a vehicle bOdy shop repair sIte nor even the same as a bus garage. There is very little noise at any time as most maintenance consists of electrical inspections, mechanical adjustments to parts on the trolley, and the waShing of the vehicles. The loudest noise in the shop is a table saw for wood cutting or the air compressor: neither is operated all of the time, The car barn structure can be architecturaIly compatible with the area through the correct exterior design, or facade, esp.ecially if the employee housing is not added to the top of the structure. The rural nature of the creek and park area will be retained by providing minimal paved areas and abundant landscaping on the site. The impact of visual clutter of poles and wires is minimal as the Galena Street route will utilize single j)oles with double mast arms which do not require span wires from both sides of the street. The visual effect of the-poles at 100 foot intervals with a single wire attached to each mast arm is less than the traffic signal poles with mast arms at several intersections alonLMain Street, The poles and wires ado a historic element to the vintage, classic trolley cars. The aesthetic qualIty of the trolley system is consistent with the charm of a small town with historic structures and the smaller vlDtage trolley vehicles are in scale with pedestrians and the two to three story buildings in Aspen. ... - - - - ... - ... - - 79 ... ~, ... ... ... ... APPENDIX .... - ... - ... ... ... - ... ... - - I"'" - ... or-, - - - .... .... .... .... .... .... .... - - - .... - ~ ..... 1"""\ .-" OPERATING COST COMPARISON The following is a comparison of Roaring Forks Transit's known operating costs to the suggested costs if the street car operations are provided by a private firm. The RFTA costs were supplied to the consultants by Mr, Blankenship. The costs for the private costs are as derived from McKinney Avenue Transit, Dallas, Tx., and from resources outside the MATA financial figures. All MATA costs have been updated to reflect cost as may be prevalent in Aspen, such as the local labor rate as paid to RFTA employees, the associated benefit package, utilities, uniforms, etc. The costs of insurance has not been supplied by RFTA as such insurance is obtained through the management company and the impact on increased costs, if any, are not known at this time. If the costs of comparable priced busses does not increase the insurance, then the addition of streetcars instead of busses should likewise have no effect. It should be noted that the cost savings available under operation of the trolley system by a going concern will include capital and operating costs, Such items are, office furniture, the computer and software programs, some tools and equipment, marketing production costs (if combined with the present operations), office supplies by bulk purchase, dues and subscriptions, uniforms, labor, maintenance costs associated with the service vehicle, and other unspecified items which may be purchased at a lower costs through bulk purchases. ADMINISTRATION Labor General Manager $ 40,000 $ -0- Secty/Bookkeeper 11,400 -0- Fringe Benefi ts 17,490 -0- Subtotal $ 68,930 $ -0- Insurance General Liabil ity $ 17,500 Not Avail abl e Auto Liabil ity 1,000 Physical Damage 5,000 Bldg. & Contents 5,000 Crime (3D) 300 Radio Floater 240 Boiler/Mach. 500 Subtotal $ 29,540 i"""" ,-". - - Professional Services Audit/Tax $ 3,000 $ ? Legal 500 500 - Printing 2,000 2,000 Marketing Prod 2,000 (Policy Decision) Media Adv. 2,000 " .. Promotions 2,000 " " - Trash Removal 400 400 Other - Office Supplies $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Dues & Subscr. 750 100 Travel, Training 2,000 2,000 - Postage 400 400 Subtotal $ 16,050 $ 6,400 - uti 1 ities Electric $ 12,000 $ 12,000 Water/Sewer/Sewer 2,000 2,000 Gas 5,000 5,000 - Telephone 2,000 2,000 Subtotal $ 21,000 $ 21,000 - Subtotal Admin. $135,520 $ 28,640 OPERATIONS Labor - Full time Operators $ 66,253 $ 66,253 Seasonal Operator 32,344 32,344 Fringe, Full Time 22,526 22,526 - Fringe, Seasonal 10,997 10,997 End of Season Bonus 1,200 1,200 Subtotal $133,320 $133,320 - Uniforms $ 1,200 $ 1,200 Subtotal Operations $134,520 $134,520 - MAINTENANCE Labor - Mechanic $ 24,960 $ 24,960 Mech/Op hal fUme 11,440 11.440 Fringe 34% 12,376 12,376 - subtotal $ 48,776$ 48,776 - - - - .... :-. ~. .... Professional Services Contract Maintenance: Service Vehicle $ 1,200 $ 1,200 .... Building 1,000 1,000 Revenue Vehicle 7,000 7,000 Subtotal $ 9,200 $ 9,200 .... Other Repair Parts, st Cars $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Repair Parts, Svc Veh -0- $ 600 r Bldg Repairs 500 500 ! Uniforms 600 600 Solvent Service 300 300 I'" Fire Ext. Svc 240 240 ! Svc Veh Fuel, Lub 720 720 ! Lubricants, Trolleys 2,000 2,000 'I'" Janitor Suppl, Shop 2,000 2,000 ! Sma 11 Tools 750 750 i Subtotal $ ll,110 $ 11,710 , .... Subtotal Maintenance $ 69,086 $ 68,486 GRAND TOTAL $270,196 $231,646 .... !"i" ... .., ""! ... ...... .... .... .... - - - "OUI 'salepossy uew4osy-uol.ms ~ L NOI.ldO A311OW. N~y 19-\l)-tIlU 'GN )afO'4 :l.qp....oJdQV "-'TU1I1l :Aq~",I)",:) -~..:l.qll"'~Q ~ o _,~ :-"0 :,I,qptluD,'1tQ ,OI-.I'''r.>s ~ W ~~ . , d, IUO!Sf"al:l ___V--~ ..,eQ 'ON . ~.'-:',"" V 3M' H01VW , i '* '.,. ..... -- T ..... T " +. . ~'l . -i. . '-, '-1 I, .,: I " (I) .. : :4>.. ~ b." I ;: 1"'----- I "r 1'1 ',,1 i I +!' , I . I .. ~ ~ ~ 001 <0( <I( ~ z ,j I :I ~ ~:i'~i ~ j~!!! If lit- ! ! n .! ! .. j :5 ~ ~ i u. Wj.! ;....; is i'~l:..J C:!..J., l!l >1 ~~~il!~~~~ ~ -2 oz- ~~E1> ~lf~.:~:>.. :.S2,DU.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ",*'H1Ht!1 \; O:lUI 'S9}'e!:lOSSY u'ewlj:lSy-uo}J'88 , . SUOIS!1\3j:t -.- ~ ~ NOUdO _'_0 'ON I "3fty J.NVtI'1CI '3f\Y IGdOOO '3A,'l/ NVWAH ...."'""""" ...----..... J " // /~ ~ " / 10-10-"" ....IIM(O'4 :AqPNoo.Mtcly "'TllII":'CI"'~:> ti ~"':4.WIllUCJ ~N ;.t. '*'Ilt.aa . A3T1OH.L N3dSY . . f 'I ) / . " ---- , i . V 3N'1 HOim II --I :"-0 M..l;~~ '" , , I "" ,\<i "'", (0'\, '" *i , ( .... ! ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ! :>0 j 0 .... , 8~ Wi!~:=i in i.qw q~ ! ~i ~i&~r!~:~~ ... ~ . :r ... € .{ ... .!!: .. .,.~~%i:J!'~,~; i:~D.COIL::Jo~a:;;~~ """HHfHI I I ~ I ! I i i 1! % l.I . ~ 2 ! I J 1 1 \ ! . . l+I/)>- i . . , i :