The final 2,200 feet are the hardest, but specifics of the options for finishing Aspen’s entrance are starting to come into focus.

In preparation for an all-important vote in November 2009, consultants hired by Aspen City Council to evaluate pros and cons of the modified direct, the split short and the reversible lane presented their most up-to-date findings at a public meeting this week. City Council plans to put the options on the ballot in a year in it what hopes to be a decisive vote.

Ralph Trapani, former Colorado Department of Transportation highway engineer now with Parsons Transportation, a consulting firm, laid out cost and travel time estimates, open space impacts and bureaucratic hurdles to the council. The options on the table are:
— The modified direct alignment, which would cut a new four-lane road across the Marolt Open Space with two of the lanes dedicated exclusively to mass transit. This option includes a cut-and-cover tunnel of about 400 feet over the road as it crosses the open space, allowing for continuous trail connections, and a new bridge across Castle Creek, bringing the road back to Main Street with a stoplight at 7th and Main. Under this option, the existing highway between the roundabout and Cemetery Lane would be torn up, “revegitated” and returned to open space. This option is also known as the “preferred alternative” because it emerged as the winner after a federal public process in the 1990s.
— The split shot would see a new two-lane road built across the open space, which would be used by incoming traffic, while out-bound traffic, would use the existing alignment. There are two separate split shot proposals, one with a roundabout at Cemetery Lane and another with a grade separated interchange at Cemetery Lane.
— The reversible lane concept would see a third lane built on to the existing Castle Creek Bridge. The extra capacity would be used by incoming traffic in the mornings and outbound traffic in the evenings. Engineers cautioned that this option has not been evaluated as thoroughly as the split shot and the modified direct.

Although there was no council consensus on whether or not it should go to voters, another option that has been floated is a gondola from Aspen to Buttermilk. Council members acknowledged there would be significant costs and time associated with evaluating the aerial connection option at the level the split shot and modified direct have seen.

Council members also acknowledged that an unrestricted four-lane highway might also have to be put on the ballot.

Voters’ choices are also likely to include a “do nothing” option.

Cost

When the cost of the modified direct was first estimated in 1996, engineers figured it would cost about $25.5 million. This number has now increased to $62.3 million due to inflation.

“Of course these are difficult numbers,” Trapani said. He noted, however, that the 6.6 percent annual escalation from 1996 is not as bad as some construction experts might expect.

The price tag for the modified direct could also come down by altering the grading on the project, as well as by changing the length of the tunnel.

The split-shot options cost less, because a two-lane road is cheaper to build than a four-lane road. This option also saves money because there is no tunnel associated with the split shot. The tunnel alone will likely cost $14 million, Trapani said.

The split shot with a roundabout (option A) is estimated to cost $35.3 million. Option B, which would see the grade-separated interchange, comes to $51.6 million.

The total cost of the reversible lane is $7.87 million, although this estimate is not as refined as the previous three. Engineers note that the reversible lane option is really just a retrofit of existing infrastructure.

The above options include 20 to 30 percent “contingency” cushions for any cost overruns, unforeseen obstacles and delays that may occur, plus design and engineering fees.

Open Space

The cost differences between the modified direct and the split shot must also be viewed through the prism of open space.

The modified direct, while the most expensive, also results in the smallest net loss of open space. While the new roadway would eat up 5.4 acres of existing open space, it gives back 3.5 acres with revegitation of the old segment of highway and the cut-and-cover tunnel, resulting in a total open space take of 1.9 acres.

The split shot with a roundabout takes 4.2 acres, giving nothing back.

The split shot with an interchange takes 7.4 acres, earning Trapani’s “most intrusive” distinction.

There are minimal open space impacts with the reversible lane, although there could be impacts to the city facilities below the Castle Creek Bridge.

Travel Time

Computer models show an inbound morning travel time on a bus of about two minutes between the Maroon Creek Bridge and First and Main streets with the modified direct, jumping to two and a half minutes for general traffic. The time increases to three and a half minutes for outbound afternoon traffic, but only two minutes for bus riders.

The split shot takes slightly longer with the longest travel time reaching 4 minutes and 45 seconds for outbound general traffic using the grade separated interchange option.

The reversible lane travel times are all in the three-minute range.

Overall, the computer models show the modified direct offers the quickest travel times, particularly for bus riders.

New impact studies

While Aspen needs only a vote in favor of converting open space to build the modified direct, the split shot options could require a new federal environmental impact statement and record of decision, a process that could take two to four years and cost anywhere between $1 and $3 million.

Not solving it tonight

Councilman Dwayne Romero observed what he called the questionable marginal benefits between the more expensive modified direct and the split shot. An extra $27 million for a minute or two of travel time and two acres of open space may not be compelling enough, he said.

Trapani, who is a supporter of the modified direct, cautioned that the split shot has significant neighborhood impacts that aren’t figured in cost calculations. With its couplet roadway system, the split shot would essentially make an island of the Villas neighborhood, bordered on each side by highway carrying 12,000 cars per day. It’s this type of thing that may doom the split shot should it go through the federal environmental impact statement process, he said.

Councilman Steve Skadron compared Aspen’s entrance to urinals in the bathroom of a hotel conference center. Enough are built to accommodate the few minutes during breaks when demand is at its highest. The rest of the time, the urinals are more or less unused.

“Our entrance to Aspen is not unlike that,” Skadron said. “The majority of the time it’s not congested. Right now it is not congested. During the off-season it is not congested. Are we not building our entrance to ease congestion for a relatively small percentage of the drive time? Is that how traffic management works?”

Well, yes, Trapani said. Roads need to be designed to be safe enough for cars and pedestrians when volume is high.

Councilwoman Jackie Kasabach said the entrance vote will ultimately come down to an open space vote, and the town will once again be confronted with the question of whether it wants to give up a portion of its open space.

“If we go to the voters, and they vote no, that’s their open space,” Kasabach said. “Then the community ends up with a no-build solution.”

Mayor Mick Ireland agreed that the community would be within its rights to vote against any change to the status quo at all.

“Voters will consider whether they want to pay for any of this stuff,” Ireland said. “Maybe the real sentiment that we haven’ t tapped into is just leaving it the way it is.”

Councilman Jack Johnson reminded the council that coming up with the ultimate solution for the entrance was not its job that night. The task at hand is to make sure voters will get enough information to make the decision themselves.

Assistant City Manager Randy Ready, who oversees transportation issues for the city, said a series of “transportation lollapalooza” open houses are planned for the spring, where the city will present all the information is has on the various options.

curtis@aspendailynews.com