Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants present West of Aspen traffic study; council debates if new EIS or reevaluation should follow
Summary
Jacobs Engineering told council traffic data and origin'destination analysis support updated purpose-and-need work; CDOT/FHWA told staff a new EIS is required for some alternatives, and councilors debated the merits, timeline and scope of a new EIS versus a reevaluation.
Consultants from Jacobs Engineering presented findings from the West of Aspen Transportation Needs Study and told the Aspen City Council that updated data, origin'destination analysis and safety results are being used to refine a purpose-and-need statement that would determine whether the city should pursue a reevaluation of the preferred alternative or initiate a new environmental impact statement (EIS). Jim Clark of Jacobs summarized the NEPA guidance staff received from federal partners: "CDOT and FHWA indicated that a new EIS would require strong data driven purpose and need, and ultimately that they are the decision makers when it comes to what to do with the road and the corridor."
The presentation showed traffic-volume trends (1999'2023), analysis of bypass behavior onto Power Plant Road and McLean Flats Road, and crash data from 2015'2024 demonstrating elevated crash rates as drivers enter Aspen. Consultants said origin'destination data and connected-vehicle (streetlight) analysis show notable downvalley travel into Aspen and that queue'jumping is a congestion symptom. Analysts also reported transit usage patterns and emergency-response concerns tied to corridor redundancy.
Councilors pressed staff on the consequences of choosing a reevaluation versus a new EIS, the geographic scope (whether to include Brush Creek and the airport), and the timeline and risk of delaying major work. Several councilors expressed differing views: one said a new EIS would take years and asked whether reevaluation could produce useful refinements in months; another argued "I think I'm in favor of a new EIS" to ensure the city reexamines the full range of alternatives in light of changed conditions. Consultants said a new EIS is required if alternatives not previously analyzed in detail (for example the split'shot or three'lane shifted bridge alternatives) are advanced; otherwise a reevaluation or supplemental EIS may be appropriate.
Staff and consultants said they will brief EOTC and the Transportation Coalition, have a touchpoint with CDOT and FHWA, and return to council on June 24 with a draft purpose-and-need statement and a recommendation on next steps.
