HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationFile No. LEA-00001
APPLICATION FOR
LOGATION AND EXTENT
cRS 30-28-110
OWNER/APPLICANT: RoaringForkRailroadHoldingAuthority
MAILING ADDRESS: 530 East Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
PHONE: (970) 920-7493
1. Property Location: A continuous rail corridor in Pitkin, Eagle, and Garfield Counties.
2. Acreage: Approximately 461 acres
3. Tax Parcel Number: N/A
4. Location and Extent Proposal:
Eagle County has entered into an lntergovernmental Agreement with Pitkin and
Garfield Counties, the Cities of Aspen and Glenwood Springs, and the Towns of
Snowmass Village, Basalt, and Carbondale to acquire a 32.75 mile, 100 to 200 foot
wide rail corridor that meanders along the Roaring Fork River from Glenwood
Springs to Woody Creek near Aspen. This line is commonly known as the Aspen
Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad right-of-way. See
enclosure (1).
ln order to protect this corridor, the eight governments of the Roaring Fork Valley
created the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (RFRHA) tasked with acquiring
and managing the entire corridor while developing a plan for compatible
environmental, recreational, and transportation uses.
Funding for the $8.5 million acquisition is from the following sources:
Local Governments $2,900,000
City of Aspen $667,000 23o/o
Snowmass Village $337,000 13o/o
Pitkin County $580,000 20o/oBasalt $ 29,000 1o/o
Eagle County $174,000 6%Carbondale $116,000 4o/o
Glenwood Springs $464,000 160/o
Garfield County $493,000 17%
Colorado Department of Transportation
GO Colorado
Pitkin County Open Space & Trails
Eagle County Regional
Tra nsportation Authority
TOTAL
$3,000,000
$2,000,000$ 500,000
$ 100.000
$8,500,000
Project Goals
The goals of this project are:
Acquisition of a continuous corridor which will accommodate rail service in
the Roaring Fork Valley as well as a regionaltrail linking the entire valley and
its contiguous towns.
Preserving and protecting a 461 acre greenway from development.
Partnering with the Division of Wildlife and localenvironmental organizations
to work towards goals of identifying wildlife species, high priority habitats,
and endangered species; providing fishing accesses; and providing
educational and watchable wildlife opportunities for the public regarding the
unique natural heritage of the valley.
Providing and managing public recreationalaccesses and opportunities such
as fishing, hiking, biking, boating, and wildlife viewing to residents and
tourists.
' Further educating the public about the diverse cultural, historical, and natural
assets of the valley as their appropriate recreational uses.
ln May of 1995, RFRHA received a planning grant from GOCO to perform a
Recreational Access Feasibility Study for the corridor. This document is provided
as enclosure (2).
ln May of 1996 a Phase I Environmental Audit of the property was completed
rendering a finding of no significant impact on the property excluding surficial soil
staining in the "wye" section at the end of the corridor in Glenwood Springs.
The Colorado Passenger Rail Study undertaken by CDOT in 1996 identified the
Aspen Branch as one of Colorado's top priority rail corridors for passenger rail
implementation. lnformation on the Roaring Fork Valley Rail Project is provided as
enclosure (3).
Proposed water: N/A
6. Proposed sewer: N/A
7. Proposed Access: Rail access to the corridor is at the "vvye" in Glenwood Springs.
There is an ovenrhelming sense of urgency with this project as closing is scheduled for
February 28, 1997. Failure to conclude the acquisition would likely result in the corridor
being declared abandoned and falling prey to reversionary interests to be potentially
subdivided by possible residential and commercial development, and lost in perpetuity.
I do hereby certify that the foregoing information and attached documents are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
February 10. 1997
DateGeorge J. Roussos, Chairman
Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority
ao
g
-6=o6dd
FF
ItlrIt
ao
>z_ *rT
.sD8-l; ol
coBnh 5i er eE.v 3.E i;IU d;:o 2,;
6
qcl
E9u6
P-ioE.;U,!:
' c:1 6r,q*e
:'t?x
E c xB;=de
uo
FU
.rY,, - ''|.r
!--
;') '
{.
,t..
zvt-\
-?)t{ta\q
-\l
t{
)
--.)
z,o>
z
aal{
.e'?
:.
..'*'l
a.,.{.,.!
t ':f'\d\o
oo
(n
B
,o
o-
-'r.o''&
tU
a'*.1
trJl
c<
r\ ,
r\
c<
U
(,; arnsopuT
,l*iL
{ -il._r .-, aq
0
.l'.r(
\ ---'
a-:, r
l'
Il", "{.,it I(:(-
I
I
.E
u)
z
./trSG\.2/\r-
t
I
Ii
\*
q
n
Q
i..
,i
:
/
i
it
\
-{
AspBN BneNcH
DBNvER & Rro Gnq.NoB WESTERN RaIrnoAD
Recreation Access
Feasibility Study
THe ROaTNC Fonr Reu.noAD HoroINc AUTHoRITY
JUNE 1996
E nclo-rL(re (.r)
I
The Rooring Fork Volley
Roil Proiect
Februqry 3, 1997
Sponsored by the Governments of the Rooring Fork Volley:
The Cities of Glenwood Spriirgs ond Aspen,
the Towns of Bosolt, Corbondole'ond Snowmoss Villoge
& Eogle, Gorfield ond Pitkin Counties.
E,nclosure b>
EAGLE PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 20,1997
FILE NO.:
TITLE:
LOCATION:
LEA-00001, Location and Extent Review
Acquisition of Aspen Branch by the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding
Authority
A continuous rail corridor in Pitkin, Eagle, and Garfield Counties.
APPLICANT: Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority
STAFF CONTACT: George Roussos
J BACKGROUND: This request is for a "Location and Extent" review pursuant to
C.R.S. 30-28-110. The purpose of the review is to provide the opportunity for
residents and interested parties to present input, thereby allowing the Planning
Commission to inform and advise the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority
(RFRHA) of the effect of its actions on the County and residents. The Planning
Commission's scope of review is limited to "Location and Extent."
ll. PROPOSAL: ln order to implement the lntergovernmental Agreement which
established the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority, it is necessary for the
Authority to acquire the Aspen Branch. The land is currently owned by the Union
Pacific Railroad which acquired the corridor upon its merger with the Southern
Pacific Railroad. lt is a 461 acre continuous corridor 32.75 miles in length with width
ranging from 100 to 200 feet. The parcel will be owned and operated by the
Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority, an intergovernmental authority.
u, stTE DATA:
Surrounding Land Use/Zoning:East: ResourceWest: Resource
North:Resource
South: Resource
ExistingZoning: Resource
Total Area: 461 acres
CHRONQLOGY:
1. Eagle County is party to an lntergovernmental Agreement creating RFRHA
executed in December 1994 which tasks RFRHA with acquiring the Aspen
Branch.
2. RFRHA entered into an agreement with Southern Pacific Railroad in October
1996 to acquire the Aspen Branch for $8.5 million.
3. Closing is scheduled for February 28, 1997.
I}L
V. MAJOR CONCERNS AND ISSUES:
This Location and Extent review is one of a myriad of tasks which must be
completed before the closing which is scheduled for February 28, 1997.
vl.FINDINGS:
The proposed acquisition will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and
welfare of the inhabitants of Eagle County;
The proposed,acquisition will enhance the use or enjoyment of adjacent
lands;
The site has adequate access, and water and sewer are not at issue;
The use of the site is not inconsistent with the applicable policies of the
Master Plan.
UL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval is recommended.
1.
2.
3.
4.
h
Roaring Fork Ratfuoad Corridot
I,EGACY FROJECT
Roarinc tork Railroad Holding Authority
530 Eait Main St., Aspen CO 8161I
February 17,1997
Carfield County Plann ing Commission
c/o Don Duford, CountY AttorneY
Carfield County Courthouse
109 8th Street, Suite 300
Clenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Don and Planning Commissioners;
Thank you for accepting this request to consider our proposal to purchase the
Denver & Rio Crande Railroad Righrof-way for use as a community facility. Sub-
section 30-28-1 10 of the Colorado Revised Statutes addresses when this approval is
required:
30-28-110(1)(a): "Whenever anY county planning commission or, if
there is none, any regional planning commission has adopted a
master plan of the county or any part thereof, no road, park, or other
public way, ground or space, no public building or structure, or no
public utility, whether publicly or privately owned, shall be
constructed or authorized in the unincorporated territorY of the
county until and unless the proposed location and extent thereof has
been submitted to and approved by such county or regional planning
commission."
ln 1994, the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (RFRHA) was formed by the
eight local governments in the Roaring Fork Valley to purchase the railroad right-of-
wiy for transportation and recreational purposes. The property consists of
approximately 460 acres of land stretching 32-miles between Woody Creek Road
and Clenwood Springs. The property ranges from 5O-feet to 200-feet in width and
follows an alignment down the valley floor and in areas adjacent to the Roaring
Fork River. Ritached for your review as "Attachment 1" please find a packet of
i nformation regarding the property.
RFRHA has negotiated a contract for purchase of the property from Union Pacific
Railroad Company for $8.5 Million. RFRHA has also gained commitments for
funding the purchase prices as follows:
Ph:97O-92O-7493
Ex:97O-92O-5198
{
TOTAL
$ 2,900,000
$ 3,000,000
$ 2,000,000$ 5oo,ooos 100,000
$ 8,500,000
As mentioned above, the right-of-way is to be purchased as a community asset for
transportation and recreational purposes. Although negotiations between the local
governments and the railroad have gone on for several years, the purchase
represents only the beginning of a regional process to plan for and implement the
facilities and improvements needed to provide for the desired uses. RFRHA and
CDoT have invested in the development of feasibility studies for the property which
tend to prefer commuter rail and a contiguous trail/open space corridor with
opportunities for access to the river and public lands. Once the property is
purchased, the local governments will begin a comprehensive planning process for
the righrof-way, currently being called the Corridor lnvestment
Study/Environmental lmpact Statement (CIS/ElS). The CIS portion of the report will
fully examine all possible improvements and strategies able to provide for a public
transportation system, trail and recreational access for the property, select the
appropriate improvements and recommend a management and funding strategy for
the improvements to be placed. The EIS portion of the report will provide all of the
necessary federal environmental clearances for the project. This process will be
initiated immediately and will include full involvement from federal, state and local
governments and the public at large. The CIS/EIS process needs to be completed
within 2 years.
The intent of Sub-Section 30-28-1 10 of the Colorado Revised Statutes is to give the
planning commission of the area where the property is to be purchased a chance to
consider whether or not the purchase conforms with existing master plans. I have
investigated existing adopted master plans in the valley to see if the project is in
conformance with these documents. Please See "Attachment 2" for copies of the
sections of these plans that discuss the railroad righrof-way:
. GartieH County Comprehensive Plan: Although not mentioning the railroad
right-of-way specifically, this plan does acknowledge the need to develop a
regional public transit system that will help encourage the use of modes other
than the automobile. lt goes on to promote the development of a county-wide
transit program that includes potential rail service as one of it's components.
The plan also enu-ourages the development of trail systems that reflect regional
goals and provide access to the river and public lands.
. Mid Valley Community Master Plan, Eagle County: This plan recognizes the
railroad right-of-way as a potential transit corridor and an important trail
8 Local Governments:
Colo. Dept. of Transportation (CDoT)
Co Colorado Trust Fund:
Pitkin County Open Space & Trails:
Eagle County Transportation Commission:
alignment in the mid valley. lt also states that development should
accommodate mass transportation based on a valley wide plan.
. Pitkin County Down Valley Comprehensive Plan: Although at the time of
adoption of this plan not enough technical information existed to make a
definitive statement, the plan does state that the railroad "...right-of-way should
be preserved so as to not preclude the potential use of the righrof-way for
railroad purposes." lt goes on to say that in the event that a railroad is a feasible
mass transit solution, stations should be developed down valley in areas such as
Woody Creek, Cerbazdale, Snowmass and Wingo Junction.
. Aspen Area Comprehensive Ptan (Pitkin County): This plan designates the
Denver & Rio Crande right-of-way as a "multi-use transportation corridor". lt
also endorses the Roaring Fork Forum's efforts to develop an integrated valley-
wide transportation system. RFRHA was initiated by the Roaring Fork Forum to
conduct the purchase of the righrof-way'
Based on this survey of the above listed documents, we feel that our efforts to
purchase the railroad right-of-way for the public purposes of transportation and
recreation are compatible with the goals and objectives of the county master plans
adopted to date. We ask you to consider and approve of the purchase of this
property because of this compatibility. Representatives of RFRHA will be present at
your meeting to discuss this project with you and answer any questions you may
have.
Once again, thank you for your willingness to review this purchase on such short
time notice. Please contact Chris Lane at 920-7493 if you have any questions.
Chris Lane
John Worcester
Debbie Quinn
RFRHA Board Members
Sincerely,
PITKIN COUNTY ADMI
Newland, Assistant
3
ATTACHMENT 1
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
da6a ' d'*rt dst'i
LEGEND:
FF{.l DEWER & Rro cRAND wESTEBN (sourHERN PAclFlc) RAILRoAD
-t.l- {F ABANDONED RAILROAD R.O.W.
ROARING FORK VALLEY
EXISTING RAILROAD SCHEMATIC
I
N
o
After intensive study ond public input, CDOT ond fhe five municipolities of the volley:
Glenwood Springs, Aspen, Snowmoss Villoge, Bosolt ond Corbondole supporf roil os the best
-tronsporfotion solution.
Locol iurisdictions ore prepored to portner with stote ond federol ogencies to construct o roil
line ond o porollel recreotionol trc from Aspen io Glenwood Springs, o distonce of
opproximotely 40 miles mosily olon,.' the existing Denver ond Rio Gronde Roilrood olignment.
The corridor plon includes roil ond multi-modol stotions, pork ond ride lots, HOV lqnes, ond
recreotionol ond blke troils throughoui.
Why roil?
. The most congested four-mile segment from ihe Pitkin Counfy Airport to downtown Aspen,
known os the Entronce to Aspen, hos become o moior troffic bottleneck thot threotens the
economic vitolity, environmentol heoth ond chorocter of the region.
. fhe Entronce to Aspen is soon io be the site of o combined new two-lone porkwoy ond light roil
tronsit (LRD system to be funded totolly with stote ond locol funds. This solution emerged os the
preferred olternotive ofter exhoustive study of olternotives ond considerotion of public
comment.
. There is sirong public support for exponding the roil system to Glenwood Springs os quickly os
possible.
. CDOf hos listed the Rooring Fork Volley os one of the top fhree priority corridors {or possenger
roil service in the Stote. The plon hos olso been endorsed os port of the region's Tronsif
Development Plon ond will be included in the Stote's Tronsportotion lmprovement Pton.
. lt will creote o bolonced tronsportotion system integroting highwoy, tronsit, ond fr-onsportotion
demond monogement solutions such qs poid porking ond HOV incentives in o woy thot will
mitigote serious congestion ond pollution problems ond yet preserve the essentiql chorqcter ond
livobility of the Volley communities.
Cost:
. fhe Entronce-to-Aspen roil link will be constructed entirely with locol funds.
. fhe link between Pitkin Couniy oirpor:i lnd Gt.n*ood Springs would require on odditio nol $77
million. t
. The locol governments will soon purchose the Union Pocific-owned roilrood right-of-woy for on
odditionol $8.5 million.
Whst is the proiCtii* -
I
.q;,,'. -..:;!tx:ffi 5,,; Tr{["ffj1:.;:,i-. tdtt-.,.,:
, ,' 't,i','*s',#i' l':'r'.a".!Lii;11:r1- i$i "-
i .,r,;j_,..": '''.1:' - ""- '':' " i'1":. Ihe Rooring Fork Volley as o norrow,'4o'mile long volley locoied in western Colorodril''tt
includes five estoblished municipolities ond numerous unincorporoted v!!!oges {inclurde
Ciiin p I io ncc qffie-{gglti* -
*equ i re np!.$
Study (FEIS) of thio *i'I fdderol Eitird;fi;iiiol lfrpoct Studv (FEls) of the Enl
this spring. A*ederollf:confoiming Moior lnvestmint
l ------- fi- eL- ^-ai;a -^--iA^. :ia-underwoy fdr the enti13 corridor. ".i
-.*i,
A;pen sellnent
Study mls) ond ii
Why is ihis Proiect imPortont?
. World closs skiing ond o voriety of other outdoor octivities, plus culturol events "n! pt-o{I. '
focitities ore the economic bocktone of the Votley. Yet without on efficient. occessible, onJioclllr3gs org fne eg(rllgal.lL uqL^ev'rs vr rtrs ------- --' . .
uncongested tronsportotion system. the livobility of the Volley comm"riiies is being threoteted. '
. Service industries, which comprise 40 percent of totol emplo'.'ment, depend on the oroilobiiity oi
offordoble housing, tronsportotion services, ond public sofetv io oltroct ond retoin thot
workforce. The |oigest proportion of these workers must commute from long distonces
downvolley, despitl oggreiriv. locol efforis to creote offordoble housrng opportunities. During
the winter seoson, the iJt"l populotion of the uPPer volley con triple' ond in recent yeors the
o.reo hos experienced significoni growth in boih permonent residents ond visits by tourists'
. Ihi, proiect will serve os o moior cotolyst for progressive lond use plonning ond ensure
bolonced development throughout the Volley. lt will ottroct trrnsit-oriented development,
,vhich brings residentiol ond .o.r"rciol development to the c :o immediotely surrounding
tronsit stotions, while preserving vitol recreotion oreos ond op''n sPoce' By engoging in more
thoughtful ond bolonced dev.lopment, tronsii will ensure more livoble communiiies ond o better
qrolity of life for ihe residents ond visiiors of the volley.
. fhe Rooring Fork Volley Roil Proiect con be o model for notionol porks ond other rurol oreos in
frogile environments thot suffer from troffic congestion'
RidershiP
. Current onolysis suggests thot ridership olong the proposed olignment could exceed 5 million
possengers onnuollY bY 2015'
. Forebox revenues ond locol subsidies will fully meet operotionol ond mointenonce costs'
Additionol sources of dedicoied locol ,.r.nu. for both copitol construction ond operotionol
costs ore now being considered'
. The exisiing tronsit operotor. the Rooring Fork Tronsii Agency (RFTA). ooerotes o highly
successful bus system which corries 3.9 million Possengers onnuolly, wiihout o federol operoting
subsidy.
ln summory, the cosf-effecfiveness of the proposed proiecf, its infe :rofion of progressive /ond use
pionnrng ond fronsrr-orienfeddeve/opmeni, ifssfofus os o locol "o,er-mofch" prolect. ifs broodsupporf ot
bofh rhe /ocol ond sfote levels, ond ifs ablity to readily serve os o mulfi-modol mode/ for nofionol pori<s
ond rurol valleysthroughout fhe Un,fed Stotes, moke it highty compefifive for sfofe ond federol funding
ovoi/oble fhrough fhe lnfermodol Surfoce lronsporfoi ion Efficiency Act (lsIEA, due fo be reoufhorizd by
fhe Congress in J 997't
--FUNDING
PROEII.E
Locol/Stote Funding $t 3l'I million
il6.ioiFr^ai"g v
.,7J.o million
T;hl F."i".iCJ't
^1e:
t million
Nii-r"al.ol Mot.h 6l Percent
DSTWER & RfO GRAI.IDr WgSTERN R^q.U-nOAD
Recreation Access
Feasibility StudY
Tne Roenntc Fonr Rennoeo HoLDING AUIHoRITY
JUNE 1996
D&IRGW MIIf,IOAD: Re$eaionAccess Fdasihility Stttd " '' ": 'tt.'=:,:rr-
fI. Enrvmonnmnr
TEE ROARING FORK VALLEY
One of the main attractions of the valley is the outstanding mountain scenery and
natural settings. The location of the Valley in the central Rocky Mountains (frgure 1),
the presence- of internationally recognized resorts, an active river resource, and
wilderness surroundings encourage a high volume of visitors and residents alike. The
character of the noaring fork Valley is a complex mosaic of natural plant
communities, irrigated crop and pastureland residential subdivision development and
commerciaUindustrial c"nteir. Visually the midground and background is dominated
by. farms, ranches, meadows, and views of mountain peaks, including the dramatic
snow-capped twin peaks of Mt. Sopris. Views of distant landmark peaks, many within
wilderness, enhance the visual character of the valley by providing a scenic backdrop to
valley views and visas. This wide variety of land uses, landscapes and landforms
.r*"a by erosion and glacial activity present a complex visual pattern pleasing to the
The Vatley is relatively nrulow, averaging less than one mile in width, with a range
from 1.5 miles at the Crystal River confluence at Carbondale to a mere 700' width in
Snowmass Canyon. The floodplain terraces of the vdley floor are shared by the
Roaring Fork river, busy sH82 and the D&RGW ROW. Major drainage connections
in39 th; Valey study area include the Crysal River at Carbondale, the Frying Pan
River at Basali and inowmass Creek at Old Snowmass and Woody Creek at the study
terminus at Woody Creek. Numerous smaller drainage's occur along the corridor,
many providing access from to the ROW to public lands. Valley slopes,_for the most
part-still uncluttered by development, provide scenic backdrops varying from forested
irills and red rock formations tothe twin peals of Mt. Sopris which dominate the visual
background from the lower half of the Valley. A large percentage of the Valley walls
." ii the public domain as state, Bureau of Land Management(BlM) or White River
National Forest (USFS) holdings.
eye.
*O**O*-r}r*on^rrorru*rOrr*r*, O .'''' ",
Within the tast nro decades, population increarc, resort development and escalation of
land values have prompted unprecedented growth, dwelopment and vehicular traffic in
the valley. Although still predominant, the scenic, irrigated ranchlands composing the
valley floor are rapidly being developed, mainly through residential subdivision. Golf
course and commercial service center development is also occurring adjacent to the
improved SH82 corridor.
Recreation and its associated activities are the mainstay of the Roaring Fork valley's
eoonomy and lifestyle. Opportunities include but are not limited to fishing, hunting,
rafting, kayaking, bicycling, hiking, downhill skiing, ski touring and golf.
The relatively young and active population of the Valley (1995 approx. 35,000) and
1.5 million visitors annually provide the basis for a growing demand for outdoor
recreation facilities. Increasing traffic congestion on SH82 promotes the development
and use of alternative transportation modes and corridors.
IEE ROARING FORK RIVER,
The Roaring Fork was known as, 'River of Thunder," by the indigenous Ute Indians
due to its raucous tumbling downvdley from its source high on Independence Pass in
the Elk Mountains. In the relatively short distance of 70 miles the river falls in
elevation more than the Mississippi River does in its entire length. The main unifying
element of tr-'' Valley, both physically and visually, is the Roaring Fork and its scenic
and recrea&t-,ial oplnrtunities. Presently the river is the continuous natural linkage
within the variey. Along with its winding ribbon of bottomland forest, the river forms
the visual and recreational backbone of the valley. It is utilized by residents and
visitors for a number of active and passive recreational activities including fishing,
rafting, and wildlife viewing.
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
l
I
I
I
r
I
l
I
I
I
DSd(GW R/^ILRON) - Rccreation Access Feasibiliry study
The Roaring Fork is classifrd by the Dow as a cold water fishery and has been called
the .Best winter fistrery in the state for large trout and mountain whitefish"' 2 ln 1982,
the river produced thi record Colorado *t it"Rtt, at 5 lbs' 2 oz' Btown' Brook'
Colorado River Cutthroat trout and rainbow fiout are found in the Roaring Fork' From
its confluence with the colorado River upstream to carbondale, the river is designated
"Gold Medal" water which is characterized as the highest quality aquatic habitat in the
state. This designation is given to only 158 of over 8,000 miles of trout stream in
Colorado. From Basalt ultiu.r to Aqpen, the river is classified as "Wild Trout
Water". This valuable resource is enjoyed by 15,000 anglers annually'
Whitewater rafting is an important recreational opportunity provided by the river from
f"f"y tt-ugh fdiin an avenge year. Many opias occur between Woody Creek and
Glenwood includini zrmong tfrl favorites is "Toothache" in Snowmass Canyon' Put-in
and more imporanUy taki-out points with positive water current characteristics are
important to tt, safe use of the resource. Cunent literature tists six 'designated' boat
""rnp,
within the study area providing access for larger watercraft's The D&RGW
property may provide-additionat riveiaocess' parking, and staging spaces on public
i.na as.uting icontinuation and potentially expansion of this valuable resource use'
AsPENt BRANCH. DEIYVER, & RIO GNN,XNN WESTERN RIGHT Of WAY
The ROW follows the river and SH82 traversing through diverse land uses from low
J"*rty residential, agriculture and ranchland, riparian and wetlands, to high density
residentiat and commirciat within the urban communities. The alignment of the ROW
property mverses three counties (Garfield, Eagte, ild Pitkin), and connects several
.itiir -d tot"nr including Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, El Jebel, Basalt, Snowmass
a
Ir&J|GW RAILROAL - Dr*r*, Aeess Fcasibitity Study
and Woody Creek, witfiin the study area. The property extends a distance of 32.75
miles from the 'wye' at Glenwmd Springs to the removed bridge at Woody Creek
(Figure 5). The width of the ROW varies from 50' to 200' with a predominid width of
100' and contains 460.5 acres. Track is still in place the length of the study area.
Unsurpassed outdoor active and par,"'re recreation opportunities exist for access from
the ROW to open spaoe, wildlife i ,oitat and natural areas for wildlife viewing and
study. fvlany of these oppofirnities are available exclusively from the ROW. The
linear ROW parcel affords access to numerous local, state, and federally owned open
space properties on the Valley walls and floor and often provides spectacular vistas of
the dramatic mountain setting.
GnNnn^q,L HTSTORY
Transportation has played a major role in the history and development of the Roaring
Fork Valley and no elemeur had a larger impact on it than the arrival of the railroad.
The D&RGW and Colorado Midland, competing railroad companies, both reached the
valley in 1887. The D&RGW won the race as the first to reach the Silver mines at
Aspen. SH82 presently approximates the route of the Colorado Midland. The D&RG
road has been recently acquired by the Southern Pacific. The ROW has been out of
service and embargoed east of the Mid Continent Resources facility since 1980. Coal
shipments from this coal producing plant, 1.5 miles east of Carbondale, ended in 1990.
Currently the line occasionally services one customer, the beverage distributor 2.5
miles south of Glenwood Springs.
.-{
..,
J
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
r
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
r
I
I
t
il
T
il
T
il
il
D&RGW RIIILRO/J) ' Recreuion Access Feasibility Stttdy '" ' " '
:,,.
The Roaring Fork valley enjoys an exciting history of exploration, settlement and
g;*th ,pr;.d by the silre, Uoom of the tate tgttr century. The Aspe.n branch of the
D&RGW contributed significantly to this rich history of valley heritaget For this
reason the Row is eligib-te for entry into the National Register of Historic Places for its
association with early esp"n mining and railroad transportation history'2
Several more traditionat historic properties occur within the study area adjacent to or
within easy reach of the ROW. The A. B. Foster Ranch near Carbondale at the
upstream end of Snowmass Canyon was settled in 1887 and sold to its present owner in
Lguz. It is eligible for the National Register as an intact example of a typical late 19th
century ranch complex.2 Deeper into-Snowmass Canyon the railroad piuses by the
WtreaUey Schoolhouse UlUAing (1911) and the Weatley Cemetery,.a Pio^neer family
cemetery established in 1900. In the town of gasalt tie the remains of the Aspen
Smelter Company kilns used for frring charcoal until 1882. Another site eligible for
the National negister is the Mathers Building at the old townsite of Emma' This
resource consists of four brick buildings conJtructed in 1898 and served as an early
railroad stop for the D&RGW. The tit" it significant in history and architecture and
embodies a distinctive characteristic of turn of the century "urban" design in a rura1
setting.o The District has been somewhat degraded by highway imprwements but is
immiiately adjacent to the ROW via a pedestrian underpass crossing of the highway'
The Cardiff coke ovens provide another excellent historical interpretation opportunity a
short distance from the ROw at the south end of Glenwood Springs- This complex at
one time contained 240 such ovens and contributed greatly to the growth of the valley
by providing cheap etecricity and coal and supported coal extraction from nearby
nbas. Much of the product was used in steel mills at Pueblo.
.\l, v-e
o
D&J<GW RAILROAD - Rcrjreation Access FeasibilW Sru
Numerous other historic, culturat and ethnographic resources exist in the Valley witttin
clorc proximity to the D&RGW property, providing good opporttrnity for interpretation
and education. A comptete anatysis of these resources is outside the scorpe of this
study. Additional tristoricat opporioniti"s in the Valley are noted in the ROW narrative
and in Appendix B.
VPCTIITTON & WILDLIFE
A diverse and viable ecosystem exists in the Roaring Fork Valley. The riparian-aquatic
plant community adjacenito tt" river offers the most diversity for both wildlife habitat
and recreational enjoyment. Fortunately the ROW is characterized by a close
relationship with the Roaring Fork River along much of its length.
The character of the landscape in the Valley from Glenwood to Woody Creek, outside
the towns and commercial .oro, is a complex mosaic of natural plant communities,
irrigated crqp and pastureland and low residential subdivisions. Natural plant
communities are broadly characterized as those occurring on upland slopes, comprised
of mountain shnrb, pinilrV3uniper, and sagebnrsh or those contiguous to the valley and
aquatic and riparian communities adjacent to the comprised of cottonwood,
rp*.Vfo, bfu;h, alder, and willow riparian communities. Figure 2 summarizes the
*r*on vegetation communities and species encountered in the Valley'
plant composition and stnrcture are highly variable in upland slope plant communities
due in p"ti to human disturbance. Luring the mining era large expanses of coniferous
forests iv"* cut for wood or charcoal. The cooler and morc moist sites were generally
reestablished by spruce and fir. Warmer and drier sites are now dominated by
mountain shnrb communities, with plant composition dependent on steepness of slope.
Moderately st€ep slopes contain serviceberry' oalbrush, snowberry, chokecherry, ild
wild rose as the most common occupants. Stee,per slopes contain serviceberry, antilope
bitterbnrsh, and sagebnrsh interspersed with grass species.
The cottonwood/spnrce community is dominant along the river with cottonwoods
prevalent in wetteisites. This diverse community provieir:s habitat for most of the bird
-d .".-al species living along the river including eagles. The understory in
aleas is preaominanUy "riUo"r, birch and alder transitioning to serviceberry and
oalibrush in drier soils. Dry floodplain terraces are often dominated by sagebntsh'
Understory species on moiiter sites can include a variety of sedges, rushes and
horsetails.
The valley is almost a continuous belt of inigated land where flatter terrain affords
op,portuniiy for cultivation. Meadows occur throughout the study corridor on the gentle
floodplar,; rerrirces of the valley floor due to result of grazing, farming and other man-
made influences. Dominant grasses include bluegrass, timothy, and bromes' These
open areas provide good deer and elk watching during spring "green-up"' Fence rows
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
FIGURE 2
Flora of the Aquatic and Riparian, trrlgated Meadow, Sagebrush'
Plnon Plne - Juniper, and Mountaln shrub communltles
]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
r
)
)
TREES
Ald€r o
BalsamootonuPod o
Birch o
BlueSpruce o
Dogwood(HsdStemmed) o
Juniper
l.larrorvLeafCouonvuood o
PlnonPineAuakingAspen o
SHRUBS
JurpGrass
l,rksgJr
Lutrn€
tGni.lcky Bluegrass
Mint o
I\iormonTeaitullein o
ilfustard o
tleedegrass
i.leedle and Thread Grass
|.loddrB&ome oOrchardGrass o
otrtClowr
PasqueFlotwr
Peavine
PricklyPearGactus o
Pusqrtoes
nasptery
Red Top
Rustr
RussianThistlo
Saltify
ScarletGlobemallow
SleepyGrass
Snakerwek
Stlckleaf Meneelia
Clover
Tknofi
TwietedStalk
VlqjntEotrer
Watarcress
Westam Wheatgrass
WintsrFat
Yarrcw
OtprGrasses& Herbs
:iiif,iii
!:i:::::::::;::
*xxi "
i:l:::i:i::;l:l o
liilri]: ^
:ll'.:':,'.',n
i:i:i.1!:
:i::rl:r:::I
!:!:::::::!:i::
:iiirti o
ti;iii
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Batbeny
BQSagebrush
Elitlerbrustt
Buflalobery
ChokaChetry
Compodb6
CowParsnips
Cuirana
Oogrood
Four-WirgedSaltbrustt
FingBdsage
GamHe/sOak
Goosebory
l-lcneysuckle
Mountain Mahogany
OrcgpnGrape
Plantaln
Rabt brustr
S€rr/icabeny
Snomery
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
aogto
Squautbush
Wild Rose
Willow
HERBS
Alalfa
Asbr
Ass'tFencerowShrubs
Grassos & Forbes
BeardsTorgue
B€dstratfl
Eeggafsnck
Blue BuncfiWheatgrass
gb€grass
Bodo BrushSquinelTail
B.ffte
&ilrustt
CanadanThisde
Cattats
CtpaEr6ss
Oernatis
Oover
CompassPlant
@mpoios
CresbdWheatgrass
ElkSedge
Gold€rrod
Grilfith'sWheaqrass
G.ourdsol
G.irnuJo€d
HerbaceousClnquebil
l-lops
l-lorssnit
ldaho Feecue
lndian Ricegrass
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
ip-.Lt
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
!:!::U:i
',i;;fi:::
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,:::S&
i:::#:i:
ii:tl::J
:::::gf
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
io
oo
In&RilW RAILROAI) - *}r*ron Access Feasibility Study
are lush in many irrigated meadows providing hiding, nesting and feeding habiat for
small mammals and birds and additional wildlife viewing opportunities.
Wetlands occur throughout the length of the study corridor with the dominant tlpe
occurring as a riparian shnrb/willow community. These areas occupy lower elevations
of the floodplain and are hydrologically supported by high groundwater. Other pockets
of wetlands occur away from the river or tributaries as a result of natural @eaver,
landslide) or man-induced (irrigation) causes. Wetlands have important beneficial
ecological functions including wildlife habitat active and passive recreation, and
aesthetic enhancement. The Valley's overall diversiry of plant species and community
tlpes provides ideal habitat for raptors, passerine birds, insects, beaver, muslcrat,
rodents, waterfowl, reptiles, and amphibians.
Wildlife species occur in abundance in the Valley due mainly to the highly diverse
habitat tlpes noted above. Wildlife Resource Information Systems (WRIS) data
indicates approximately 160 species that occur in the Valley and indicates their habiat
association. The more "watchable" wildlife include deer, elk, bighorn sheep, coyote,
raccoon, lrcrcupine, slunls, rabbits, squirrels, eagles, hawks, owls, and waterfowl
including great blue herons, geese, mallards, teal and merganser. All species of
wildlife are imporant for viewing, photography and education, as well as for balancing
the valley ecosystem. Figure 3 identifies the fauna which habitate the Valley and the
plant communitiy with which these species are associated.
10
.lI
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
{
t
FIGURE 4
wItDUrE MAP LrsT
Tho list of wildtife mrp,ping layors which occur withi" tho study arca hsve bcen evduated and somc
incorporsted into tho J;;[oo'-rpu. Hk J de"" hsbitst information hss be€o sirnplified into arec of
geosrel occur€oco r"Itl" p*Ggr9rr"rrr. -zu1" and repor sites ere locst€d with buffer zoncs
extcnding o't *om "*, ,lt"i. i"U g"gb -A Ot""t-gt* Heron nests er€ locst€d in large riparian trecs
and Goldea Eeglo ana ;th; rePior nesttusudly occurring on cliffs'
wildlife activity is preecoted grsPhicsuy and reprcseats ph:"o.T*" thet are ever cbenging' AniEsl
distribution end populations erc dynamic -d;fi; **iau,,Uy from thet shown on the Eappitrg'
Pltkin Countv Garfield Countv
Bald Eagle: whter Range
Golden Eagle: Nest Site
Elk: Production Areas
Winter Range
Winter Concentration Areas
SwerP Winter Renge
HighwaY Crossings
Migration Corridors
Migration Patterns
Mule Deer: Winter Range
Winter Concentration Areas
Severe Winter Range
Migration Corridors
Migration Pattems
Red-Tailed
Hawk: Nest Site
Bald Eagle:Nest Sites
Winter Range
Golden Eagle: Nest Sites
Elk: Severe Winter Range
Production Areas
Criticst Habitat
Migration Corridors
Great Blue Heron: Nest Sit€s
Sage Grouse: Habitat
CanadianGoose: Habitat
Wild TurkeY: Habitat
*Raptors:Nest sites
Mule Deer: Winter Range
Sovere Winter Renge
Winter Concentration Areas
Elk: Production Areas
Winter Range
Sever Winter Range
Winter Concentretion Areas
Wint€r Concentretion Areas
Production Areas
*Raptor species included on Garfield County "p-t-Ptl.'d:t ,
Long Eared o*ri, i"*s-o* Hawk, nalroea Hawk, Great-Horned orrl, Prairie Falcon'
g;;*i"g od;'At-i; Kestrel' Occipiter Species' Buleo Species'
I
t
I
il:
t
I
t
il
t
J
rl
fV. Coxcr,usrox AND Rrconmmma.rroxs
fip Aspen Branch of. fire D,;nver and Rio Grande Western Railroad right-of-way
proeerty exhibits substantia: potential for a unique regional recreationai corridor
it-ugtout the Roaring Fork lra[ey. It is the sole remaining element with the ability
to link the five incorporated communities, ircross three counties, in a valley where
unprecedented growttr and dwelopment are rapidly fragmenting the remaining open
qp.*.. This growth in the valley amplifies the need for outdoor spaces and trails, not
*ty for r."reation but for non-motorized trarlsportation options as well. This
recreation access study, together with the previousty compteted rail tran$t feasibility
Sdy, will serve as the basis of planning for future public use of the corridor. Today
as the agricultural heritage and scenery of the valley slowly give way to development,
the OARGW ROW presents a unique opportunity to Preserve a scenic continuous
corridor, allowing future generations of residents and visitors to experience the rich
environment and heritage of this important valley from the outside of a windshield.
Pr,n rwngc Rncon nmr*PATroNs
1. The RFRHA shoutd pursue and exhaust all available means to acquire the ROtil
property for curent and future utilizatioll by the people of Colorado.
2. Dorelop a geographic information system based ecological habitat inventory
database to document the planS and animals of the corridor, ranking areas by
their wildlife value and fragility. Use database for integrated planning'
restoration monitoring and maintenance of the corridor.
3. Design and officially adopt an integrated, site-specific Master Plan, for the
ROW property, including a phased implementation schedule, to guide property
improvements, recreational access and development
Develop a 6pmmon regionat identity for the corridor through design guidelines
and specifications for signage and materials for trials, bridges, underpasses,
trailheads and related corridor improvements.
Develop a valley-wide interprctive plan emphasizing the history or the corridor,
the influence of human activity, natural systems, wildlife and recreation.
4.
5.
23
t,
I
,
I
t
t
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
t
t
t
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
,'
I
I
I
l.
I
I
t
a
.1 -,^f.;ff:*:':;.f
'--: '-'. j't '
&*$,,J,;
January, 1993
ATTACHMENT 2
l.
c++'l: E'EI.c
!r-4
*$gi EE.e 4,
| 8iE g ;Yef 44
5 E .EE
E E €E5E +E.9 I A2d; E<
@
l,
:_
t
'g
E
E
&
2
!
E
.Ir'::fr1
"E'.l'
c
i6
6I
5g
I
o
6
.!o
I
flo
Ert
'5
E
e
BDdT3o&
EE
:I
;s
c.9
:E
,F6<
@
I!
E
E.
.E. ,zHq<
E<E6
Ee
2z
cL
i=
@ W{tdt*1
=
G
6be
dL6E
}Ez
<z
\o
-._,J ,"N
i
i.)
I,-._..t
f91
r"''..<
*A
\./
.
-.
- r\.,/
o
E
rJ
>.
U
to
I
I
I
o
F
:..r
?{a-<s"str-E>qr .?
E5
zEzv=0
FU q("-Fod,.o<EiEuioz*
F
- - -
< t - -
a - - _ q t t' I e - II _ r ! _'t r lII I -
orTranspofiationAction Plnn r
ai.!
I
I
should be enforced from 7 am to 6 pm,- seven days perweek. The pay forparking
spaces should be limited to ninety (90)
minutes and the parking fee should initially
be one (l) dollarperhour.
Q tl. Establish a resident parking system which
restricts parking in the residential
neighborhoods adjacent to the commercial
core to residents through a signage and apermit system (administrative fee only).
This shall be established simultaneousty
with the ..pay for parking,, system in the
commercial core.
I C tS. Study and consider the establishment of an
alley easement for service/delivery vehicles
exclusively located at the nonh.nO of
. Wagner park.
tr fg. Develop intercept lots at Brush Creek Road/
State tlighway g2, Buttermilk and/or orher
appropriate locations, which wouid be free
to the users of the lot and secured. provide
frequent, effective and free transit service
between the lot and the City of Aspen.
tr 20. Create a long rcrm car sbrage facrlity/
impound faciliry at Brush Creek/Stare
Highway g2 or the Aiqpon Business Center.
Q Zt. Request that the U.S. postal Service provide
mail delivery ouBide of the metro area and
establish a postal sub_station at ttre Airport
Business Center.
O ZS. Implement a frequent, cross_town shunle
utilizing the Galena Street Corridor with
tennination points at the post Office and
the base of Aspen Mountain; consider' expanding the shuttle seryice to other areas
within the City. Encourage the continued
pursuit of the troiley option.
Q Zn.Implement the one-half cent sales tax
increase for mass kansportation funding
currently provided by State law.
tr ZS. Increase the frequency, service, and length
of hours of bus service throughout the
Aspen Area.
Q Ze. Establish a high occupancy vehicle (E5t
lane on State Highway g2 between Brush
Creek Road and the City of Aspen.
Aspen and Glenwood Springs.
Q Zl. Evaluate the utilization of a bus/transit
corridor along Owl Creek Road.
tr ZS. Endorse rhe conrinued work of rtre Roaring
Fork Forum Transponation Task Force in
theireffors o develop an integrated valley_
wide transportation system.
tr Zg. Recognize the Rio Grande right_of_way as a
multi-use transportation corridor.
tr fO. Designate the Rio Grande properry as a
terminus for transportation activities. This
does not preclude the use of other properties
for transponation activi ties.
fl 31. Create a separate fund which would enable
the use of the fees collected for parking
"cash-in-lieu', fees and ..pay for parking
fees" to be utilized for transit/pedestrian/
Continue and enhance bus service between
:
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
!
l
I
t
t
I
Ir
G
E
G
G
G
22 G
Actions b lmprove Trun;it Facilities
-,-<'.:.*-.--o
DOWN VALLEY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
'a:#+ir:,;.1*, 1.. I i.'-..
;.i
F -r"I -: r:-
,ftirH
i:.i t]_
PITKIN COUNTY
a
tI
rl
:i:
r:::
county which do not contain a large enough population to justify
regrular bus serrrice.
![ass fransit longr-Term Considerations
fn the long-tetm, there is a possibility that rail se:srice nay be
re-established on the Rio Grande right-of-way which parallels the
Roaring Fork River and links Aspen to Down valIey. A group of
private investors known as the Roaring Fork Railroad.are cur-
rently attenpting to install track on the Rio Grande right-of-way
from woody creek, the terainus of the existing track, to Aspen.
The Roaring Fork Railroad is proposing to run a d^aily train to
and from Denver and join with RFTA to run commuter serrrice to and
from Aspen for Down Va11ey residents.
The Roaringr Fork Railroad has not developed enough technial
information for Pltkin County to state within ttris plan that the
county owned Rio Grande right-of-way should re- usea again for
railroad puryoses. However, the railroad proposal is attractive
enough for it to be stated that the Rlo Grande right-of-way
should')be preserrred so as not to preclude the potential use of
the right-of-way for railroad purposes.
Since in the November, L986 vote, County rresidEnt! ovei-lt6:ttu-
ingly supported the Roaring Fork Railroad concept, in the event
that, the technj-cal studies show the railroad to be feasible and
the planningr process identifies ways for its impacts to be
;
t
)
130
a
recoumended
o
that several stations be developedrnitigated, it is
Down Valley and that RFfA-consider*ustnE-bueesl-asrEfeedersrtortheq,
railroad*stations from residential areas. Potential sites for
railroad stations which should be studied include:
o Woody Creek (Pitkin Iron Site)
o Gerbazdale
o Snowmass
_ lt"n"
Junction; and
131
-.
r
H
I
I
I
I
I
i
!
I
I
I
I
:
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
--!l
,----__,,tt-t:::
J.
4.
5.
Fifty percent of the existing agricultural land is preserved to retain rural character.
(Agricultural land is defined as land that has traditionally been farmed, ranched and
irrigated.) Wherever possible, the agricultural open space is in parcels of 35 acres or
larger to facilitate continued agriculturai production, acknowledging that it may not be
profitable, but will probably require maintenance and operation as an amenity. No
berming will be allowed for screening within this area.
A 200 foot building and parking set back is proposed adjacent to Higi. vay 82 wher
existing development dcos not preclude its applicalion. This set back would be
maintained as agriculture where it abuts agricultural land or as a recreation and trai
corridor where it abuts development. Wherever possible, ditches would flow in or
adjacent to the 200 foot set back, fostering the growth of trees to shade the pathwa;,s and
open space and to provide a development screen from the roadway. No berming will be
allowed for screening adjacent to agricultural lands.
Visual set backs are proposed along Emma Road and Hookspur Road, the intent being
that no new development be visible from these corridors. They are indicated as 200 foot
ser backs. Agriculture shali be retained within this 200'setback. However, the intent is
visual screening could be accomplished adjacent to developed areas by planting or the
use of existing topographic changes.
A minimum 50 foot building setback is prescribed along the Roaring Fork and Frying
Pan Rivers to facilitate river edge use, wildlife habitat, and public fishing &ccess.
The open space and trails system is recommended to foilow the Rio Grand right-of-way,
the edges of agricultural open space, the mountain slope edges, and along key roadway
segments. The system is designed to give access to the river corridors, to allow
pedestrian circulation from residential areas to the community centers, and to provide
iccess ro state and federal lands where recreation opportunities exist. A community park
of at least 15 acrcs shall be provided for the Basalt and El Jebel communities, located as
close tb the community centers as possible and connected to the open space and trails
system. New schools should occur adjacent to these parks. A grade separated pedestrian
way shall connect the north and south sides of El Jebel across Highway 82.
Potendal mass transit terminals are indicated at the junction of Highway 82 and Emma
Road and at Wingo Junction. These sites were designated because at these points, the
Rio Grande Railroad right-ot'-way and Highway 82 converge, providing the flexibility for
any mass transit mode (whether it follows Highway 82 or the Rio Grande alignment) to
loiate and develop in a manner consistent with the provisions of the master plan. High
densiry housing development (4-8 dwelling units per acre) would be allowed at these
points, within 500 feet of the terminal. Limited commuter service commercial would be
allowed up to 10,000 square feet. In the absence of a major transit terminal at these
points, these services and facilities would not be allowed.
These locations lie in Pitkin County and are obviously subject to the concurrence of that
jurisdiction. Inclusion here is for purposes of iilustrating the goals developed for th*
Mid-Valley plan.
6.
7.
8.
19
z
JA
&HFa
H&
m
)U)
rqJJ
RF{
a
o
8
F,.aJ
&t*
EIU
sa
zaoro
I
t|#
f;rii[
nEsE rli*r
Oot[i+#
aE!H,g,il:: i
oz
IJ.Io
3
,'iiiFD;':,\ u'\, lll .r .iI! A.' ), an'
'.'')\
N
t!,. ,,
i,r'R
,',|.,
))rli2
;1!
':.2
(D
dl
-..-s*13,-.;E
Gorfield CountY
Comprehensive Plon
Gorfield CountY
Plonning DePortment
, July, 1994
.::
3.0 TNANSPORTANON
IIIST'ES;
Tbc fo[oilrng issues werp idcotilied during the
Cmpreecosive Plan proeess:
. EYcn folowing tbg poposed
ioprovcmcots e:deoding &m Basalt
to Asp€o,-SH:Hg\ft[mF'
lfrar*i,tc trt unacceO@fc lErcls;l;
. Evco assrrning a significant gain itr
indstrial od comcrcial emplqmcot
rycunitles in Garfield Cotrnty, large
ntmbers of County resideirts will
cminuc to be crylopd rripvallcy,'
firrther affecting the mrridoq
. DevelopmEotinunincorrporatcd"areas
of the County will continue to place
dpor"ds on roadways initially
d€signed to carry tralEc related to
agriorlural rses;
. Land urc decisious have placod
iti.o"npitible trallic Effi on some
roadways, duc to thc approval of
prcjects ptacing rcsideutial and
cmmcrcial/industrial traflic on thc
smc transportation corridors without
apprcpriate mitigation
GOAL: Ensure that thc Counly
trotspoAa$on Eystqn is safe, funAional,
Wwidely daignd to hottdlc existing ond
fitrc tafrc lcvds, ond includq options forthc usc of ntda ortq than the single
@tPoil oaarrnobile
OBJECTIVES:
3.1 To iniirragc tbc devclopinifri:dlT
$gimsl public tr_lrsit=S}rffih that
rBpects thc intcraction bCrrcesr
cmcrging land use patrErDs and travel
bchavior in the Valley.
Tci cncouragp thc usc of.ryq@
Proposed dcrelopmcots will bc
wdnatd in terms of the ability of
Cqrnty roads to adcquately haodle the
traffic geocrated by tbs proposal
Proeosd dcvelopmcnts wil inchdc
succt designs that witl reduce advcrsc
iryacts on adjaccot land uscs, rcspcct
nanr8l tryography ad miaimize
driving hszards.
Proposed dcvelopmcots will providc a
minimrrm llumb€t'of acCcss pOintS on
thurgh strecs and highway corridors.
Proposed commcrcial ad industrial
dcvclopmcot will dirEct traffic to
roadwaYs caPablc of hrndling
projectcd fatrc Sections.
StrGst exteosims will bc required to
mnina logical -,n""t
FOLICIES:
3.1 Statr will fm a.*c6Ciffiia
idtitionshii with cities, cqmtics and
trasit pruviders in addrcssing regioml
trmsportation isnrcs.
3.2 Dcvelopmeots arc encouraged to
iilcgrate bikcways, podcstrian
circulation pdcms and trmsit
amities into project dcsigL
3.3 Tbprojcctrwicnproocsswilincludc
l4a-. a$@of tbcq*-;- . pmjddtratrc iryd assciatcd with--,' allco'nmcrcial ad indusbi8l projocts,
d niidciilial-p,tiidB gr"E Htm 5q
Oramg1nlu
3.4 Garlield Couoty will participate and
coop€ratc with rcgional and state$,ide
traospqtation plrnning to instlrc
ra&
3.2
3.5
3.6
3.7
'-'ii iSElEffiH- - i,'
- '--1:r''-----
'i-?.;l'e' . " i' '
+i__ .-:ta. .. -
...
3.4
.:l;.;.;..r' ,;,'-.'
}:..i.:i;,^l - . .
)
scocss to all available' modes for
Contyresidcos.
Thc County mllpursuer through the
rts9 9l S_lfte Highrvay andrFEEd
ltdttrE i6Ehrsins, thc dcvelopmcnt
of rigiofrriltirglrlc pdhs withcr* the
usc of the cmdemnation process.
Elevelopmcot propcals will be
rcquired to mitigarc taffic irnpacrc on
Couoty roads pro,portionsl to thc
dcvclopmcots cmtribution to thosc
iryacs. Mitigation may include, but
not be linitcd to thc following:
A Physical roadway
improvcmeoB;
B. Intcrsection improvements;
C. Transit amenities;
D. Signage requirEmeots;
E Altcmative tralEc florr
dcsigns;
F. Fhtting rchanism, 'tiE,
implcrntnt nccessary
mitigation
Cdnty road e:rtcosions will be
waluatcd based on the following
critcria:
A Existinglanduses adjacentto
thc project;
B. Fttre l"nd uses based on the
C,,mpr&ensive Plan ad tht-o :.9 Rcgulations;
C. Thc potential traffic to be
hsndld by the proposed
€xtcnsion
3.8 Strtrrcvicrwoflgg4deffi
!fffsiltt|illndgngHrwilli"cludc
a.dctcrminatio of tbc potcatilt
rryacts of thc prcjcct on thc local
trosportatim Enfto. Spcific issucs
to be ad.ekessod include r!-a following:
A Traffic geocrated basod on Instiurc of
1dffis Fngin€ing (ITE) ratcs;
B. E:risdng trstrc cqlnts on adjaccot
roodnrys;
C. Thc aptropriatcoBs of proposcd
aooqul poinS;
D. Thc cquibility with existing and
firtrc tratrc on thc afiected roadways.
PROGRAIIISI3 *.*
3.1 Existing traffc safcty problems and
,e, road systcm .leficicocies wiU bc/' ilatific4 andcoccpural policies witl
i bo acdoecd to addr€ss thcsc
\ weatocsscs. This imermation shorld' . --p updatcd on a rcguiar basis. _u .'
32 ,q,-.fi;;ffi"r#.-
rdsvclopd to allow for a sirc speific,
efficieot and effcctive procedure for
asscssing tbc rryact of commcrcial,
industrial and residcotial developmeot
(ovtr 50 dne[ing rrnits) 6 the regional
trosportation E/stcD-
3.3 Staf{, with thc copcration of tbcplenning eormmissisn, local ad
rcgional govcolmEotal agcacics and a
CitizEo Adyisory Commiuec shoild
dcrclry a Comy Wi& Bicple Mastcr
Plan to assist in long-range planning
etrorts.
A-,lcs ( l0l.ycar.Ifhnsputation P@
based m land usc pattcrns proposed in
thc Comprehcosive Ptan, shodd.ba
&tvelopcdlwhic,h irleotifi es roadways
3.5
3.6
)
3.7
3.4
)III.9
t --_-l
u,tich potcoddly coutd expcricocc
dgnificrnr tnffic incrcases in the
fitfira ]vfitigatim Esary to addressth6c iryacts shorld also b€
sunmlrircd
*i;ary;'-'"
o
3.5 {ffi:"of,
based on
aoticipatcd fimding at the local, state
ard FdEral lwel should be dcveloped
in coopcratim with thc Road ard
Bridge Departmcof
Planingstafr, with guidance ftomthe
Plming Commission, will invcstigarc
mhods of:-eqdtabty' assessrng
proposcd developmen'tq for neccssary
roadway improvemeots.
In mperation with local govenuneots,tbc Colorado Departmeot of
Transportatioq and private
tnnsportation prorriders, Garfield
ComyyiUpursuc thc dcvclopmcor of
arC.rxmty_-widc Tresit hgram to
irlu& thc following componcors:
A Fird-b8sd traruit scrrricc;
B. Park-and-Ridc Prograq
C. Potcotisl rail servicc.
3.7
G< -t*i<
\
u-t0
3.6
5.0 REffiEATTONAND OPEN SPACE
ISST ES
Priimriy
qm1idcotifiod during the Comprehensive Plan
process included the following:
. ,ffiFfiffif;ffiof Garfield County,
u,hich has Eaintaind important visual
corridors in an undeveloped state, are
rrrmsitioniiig' ffil6rL*ffifi ffia - krd
mffi
. visuai*'ffifr-dors of particular
importance need to be i&irtifid and
policies tailored to each corridor;
Cormty policy regarding qail qrstams
should reflect regional goaki, and be
consistent and complimentary with
other jurisdictional efforts ;
County policies need to be defined
regarding specilic direction addressing
rivcr and public land access;
Tonin|', SuMivision asd Pt D
regulations must be consistent with
gencral County op€lr space ad
rccrcational objectives.
. GOAL: Garfield County should providenty, )----. adequate ieqcotional opportunitia for
'-':^ -?-'i-\-County raiiEiub; ensute aosgyls to publicii 2 hnds consistent with BIiV/ASFS piti"io,
ond praserve aisting rsealional
opprtunilia and inportant visual conidots.
OBJECTIVES:
5.1 Encourage the location of active
recreational opportunities that are
accessible to County residents.
5.2 Thc Countywill $pport and enmurage
thc creatim of opeir space, through the
development and implementation of
zming; subdivision
regulatims dsigpcd
-!'
atd PLJD
to retsin and
e'rhancc oristing opcn space uscs.
5.3 Access to public lands will be
expanded and maintaincd-
5.4 Rafting 6a{ fish: .9 acoexts will be
strongly eocouraged during thc
dcvelopmcnt rwicw process.
5.5 Visual corridors arc considcrpd an
importsnt physical attribute of the
County, and policies will reflect to
nced to carefully plan these areas.
POLICIES:
5.1 Developme'nts thet prlpose densities
above one (l) dwelling trnit per acre
and exceed 50 dwelling units will be
required to ppvidd tiAquaLt
recrsatioul oppqtirnities to SEmc-thd
rcsidcnts of tbc projoct Alternatives
fc mecting this requircmeot will bc
defind in tbe Subdivision Regulations.
5.2 tnportant visuEl cqridors will be
idcotilie4 and appropriate policies
dflel@to addrcss theretainmcot of
Aco spaoc areas that link communities
inthe County.
5.3 Ifp\nicallypoiitbl{suMivisionsand
PLJDs will be eirmuraged to design
op€a spe arEas to bccomc contiguous
with existing and proPosed oPclt
sPac€s adjacent to thc Project
5.4 Consistent with thc mrtagern€nt
djectives of either the Bureau of Land
Managemecrt or tbc U.S. Fucst
Scnrice, dwelopmcat nort to Public
lands will bc €ffinEd4-:At$oF'
rc$iiraif6*jffi E.lf riiiblffi a&i$
Eaicmcots without the use of
condemnation proccsses.
-Ih*#EF-- :i:a i t&:5:.' '{
)
ru-|5)
55 Wih the oqeration &the Division of
WildlifE dcvctopmcots proposed in
arcas nEC to streams or rivers with
rafting or fishing potential shouldgf, Fb@il{Epgllisaccessrc
thescareas. - - --%
In ordcr to eocourage public aaseis to
rivcrs, sEea[$, and public tands, the
Conty will borcccptiveEinpcurives.. .
consistent wirb an tiffiTffi; - fuz
approved by the Board of Countv .>>,\'
Cgn-issimers, for developments rhat -4,
propose public acsess to thesc
arnerriti6g-
County Conrmissioners regarding
pot€otial alternatives.
&!v
-4. Y %..\-l+-,oo--$.L /-- \+<. \+aqio
a-r-a-<a- \-!,t.
ry^'*
5.1
jo-2.
Q -o"'^-eln-'e-2
PROGRAMS:
A nenr ZoningResolution, dralted and
adopted by December of 1995, will
irclude appropriate language !o ensure
the provision of recreational amenities
for dwelopments that exceed 50
dwelling units and a density of one
drrelling unit per acre.
Conty planning stalf will identi& and
mrp important visual corridors in the
C,rrrnty, and dcrrelop separatc policies
and programs that encourage the
ramtion of opeir space that tink
communities.
The Subdivision and PUD regulations
will be refined to include policies that
mragecmtiguous opcn space uses.
These policies will be formulatcd at the
timc the SuMivision Regulations are
rsvised
Plaming staff, in cooperation with the
Plming and TnningCommission, will
rfoedifrEffi iiEfritirie feIffibldand"
lctet a[loatives to acqirire o-fiqf$ilb
end recniticinat easetdiG. Based on
the options idenrifid by Staff, the
Planning Commission will makc 6
recommendation to the Board of
5.2
5.3
5.4
III-16
4_\<
o
r)a