My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07593
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07593
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:28:01 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:28:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.765
Description
White River General
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
9/1/1996
Author
USFS
Title
Aspen Highlands Ski Area - Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Summary
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Aspen Highlandr S/cj Aua - Draft En'lirolllMnlaJ impacl SlaletNnJ. <br /> <br />employee audit if the implementation of Alternative C is approved and after the design and operation structure <br />of the Merry-Go-Round and Loge Peak restaurants have been fmalized. <br /> <br />POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES <br />If the nlJIIllJc7 of skiers begins to approach the upper management limit of 3,480 SAOT set by the ASC for Aspen <br />Highlands, a mutually acceptable strategy for limiting the number of visitors to the area will be devised by the <br />Forest Service, Pitkin County, the City of Aspen, and the ASC. To offset the shonage of affordable employee <br />housing in Pitkin County, the ASC could provide some fonn of housing or transponation subsidy for new <br />employres who are frn=l to live downvalley from Aspen. To aven increased pressure on visitor accommodation <br />during peak periods as a result of increased skier numbers, incentive packages that encourage skiers to visit <br />during off-peak periods should be developed and promoted. <br /> <br />TRANSPORTATION <br /> <br />AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT <br />Access to Aspen Highlands is provided exclusively by Maroon Creek Road, a two-lane facility. Land use along <br />this road includes residential development, the Aspen School District's Maroon Creek Campus, Aspen Highlands <br />Ski Area, and the T -Lazy-7 Guest Ranch. During the summer, Maroon Creek Road also provides access to the <br />WRNF including the Maroon Bells Wilderness. Major intersections along Maroon Creek Road include Castle <br />Creek Road and SH 82. The Maroon Creek Road/Castle Creek Road intersection is aT-intersection with Maroon <br />Creek Road as the major street, while the Maroon Creek Road/SH 82 intersection is aT-intersection with SH 82 <br />as the major street. These intersections are only 220 feet apan, resulting in traffic from the Maroon Creek/SH82 <br />intersection occasionally backing up into the other intersection. There are a total of 742 parking spaces at Aspen <br />Highlands, Mrlch are provided mainly by the Highlands and Thunderbowllots and by two smaller areas. During <br />the 1994/1995 ski season, an average of 354 vehicles parked in these lots on a weekday and 467 vehicles on a <br />weekend. The RFf A provides free bus service year-round between the city of Aspen and Aspen Highlands. <br />During 49 monitoring days (including both weekdays and weekends) during the 1994/1995 ski season, the <br />average daily number of skier transit trips on the Aspen Highlands ski shuttle was 1,365. <br /> <br />ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES <br />For the No Action Alternative. existing traffic volumes, and parking and transit demand were adjusted to year <br />2000 using a growth rate of two percent for traffic and one percent for skiers. Both the SH 82/Maroon Creek <br />Road and the Maroon/Castle Creek Road intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable level of service. <br />While traffic volumes on Maroon Creek Road from SH 82 to the schools are projected to operate pooly ("E" level <br />of service), they are considerahly below this roadway's calculated capacity. Without developing the base area, <br />traffic would back up from SH 82 to Castle Creek Road 5 percent and 35 percent of the time, during a.m. and <br />p.m. peak traffic periods, respectively, while with the base area development, backup would occur 11 percent and <br />44 percent of the time during the same peak traffic periods, respectively. Maximum parking demand would be <br />495 in the year 2000, which is within the current parking capacity at Aspen Highlands but, due to reduced parking <br />capacity, parking demand would exceed parking capacity by 10 percent if the base area is developed. Daily total <br />peak transit demand would be 2,840 riders without base area development and 4,090 riders with base area <br />development, including 1,435 skiers in both cases. <br /> <br />Under Alternative B, the only element that would increase traffic at Aspen Highlands is the improved access <br />capacity of the Thunderbowl Lift. It was estimated that this and the other improvements would result in an <br />increase in 176 skier trips per day, 84 of which would be new peak-hour skier trips including 38 that are likely <br />to use transit transpon, and 46 that would arrive in an average of 18 extra cars per day. The added traffic volume <br />resulting from the ski area expansion would result in very little change in intersection and roadway operations. <br />Overall intersection and roadway levels of service would also not be greatly impacted by the traffic generated by <br /> <br />30 <br /> <br />S~clion III <br />TranspoTlaJion <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.