Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff outlines funding routes and timing constraints for Entrance to Aspen project
Summary
Jacobs and staff told council the project would seek prioritization through the regional TPR and STIP process or via discretionary grants, and warned that initiating a formal EIS starts a two-year NEPA clock that the city is trying to manage through pre-NEPA work.
Consultants and staff told the Aspen City Council the Entrance to Aspen project is not currently on the Intermountain TPR’s prioritized list, and that getting the project into CDOT’s STIP would require advocacy through regional prioritization.
A Jacobs presenter explained funding pathways and said the typical route is TPR prioritization followed by addition to the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). He noted the ETA project "was not on the current prioritized list" and that discretionary federal grants or earmarks are another possible funding source. Staff emphasized that initiating a formal EIS would trigger a two-year regulatory timeline: "There have been some NEPA regulation changes... that require EISs to be done in 2 years," a Jacobs presenter said, underscoring why the team recommends doing pre-NEPA work before issuing a Notice of Intent.
City staff said the pre-NEPA work is intended to produce the data needed for FHWA and CDOT to make an informed decision on whether a new EIS is warranted and to position the project for future funding cycles.
