Have you ever had this happen to you? You are sound asleep in the middle of the night and something wakes you up . . . and then the good ‘ol brain kicks into gear. At two or three in the morning it is rarely the rational, logical brain, but more often the fearful brain that takes normally mundane issues and turns them into insurmountable obstacles. When that happens, these problems rarely resolve by tossing and turning and agonizing over worst case scenarios. I simply lose sleep with no sensible solution to any of my perceived hurdles and what is worse, my tossing and turning affects my husband and things snowball creating not only a miserable night but a lousy day for two people due to lack of sleep.
For me, a better solution is to quietly get out of bed, sometimes make a pot of coffee and try to engage my coherent brain and tackle the issues. For me this process starts with identifying and naming the real problems. Next comes some brainstorming about potential solutions, both purely reasonable and totally off-the-wall. What usually follows is research. I need to understand the problem before moving forward with a decision. Sometimes this process is short. Often middle-of-the-night-issues become non-issues when my rational brain kicks in.
Attending last Thursday’s City Council meeting was a little like waking up in the middle of the night with a million thoughts and fears running rampant. Currently we seem to be a town paralyzed by fear. This is not a new occurrence. This is part of Glenwood’s history. We want to do it right . . . or perfectly . . . or not at all. Usually we end up with “not at all.”
Some concerns voiced at last Thursday’s meeting are absolutely prudent, some are irrational or over stated in my opinion and some have been addressed and resolved but just keep sneaking back in. Do not misunderstand. I am not advocating rushing headlong into decisions without proper consideration, understanding, thought and due diligence. But it is time to name and identify the fears and deal with them.
Some of the fears, concerns and questions broached at the City Council meeting – or since – include:
- Traffic will be doubled and tripled if a new bridge is built without a bypass
- Traffic speed will be increased throughout Grand Avenue turning it into another I-70 corridor
- The proposed bridge will be an L.A. style off-ramp
- The bridge does not fit with the history and surroundings of Glenwood
- The town cannot survive without a bridge for two months
- The NEPA process has been circumvented by CDOT
- Many local businesses will close and be replaced by marijuana shops and tattoo parlors
- Tourism will decline
- Oil and gas trucks will speed down Grand Avenue
- City Council is disregarding work by prior councils
- There is no comprehensive plan for transportation
- Grand Avenue is doomed to be a mass transit corridor
- Has CDOT segmented this project by separating the bridge project from the ACP and from a potential bypass?
- Is this something that can or should be decided by a vote of citizens?
- Exactly what powers does CDOT have and what triggers them
- Delays in the ACP could cause additional cost to the city to update traffic studies and restart the public process
- Could the “police powers” that CDOT states they have make the IGA null and void
- Who has control over the traffic light sequences throughout Grand Avenue?
- No one will use an “Underground tunnel” for pedestrians in the middle of Grand between 7th and 8th
- CDOT is going to do whatever it wants no matter what Glenwood does
Identify the problem
So what is at the heart of this alarm? It is time to name them.
- Pedestrian/bicycle safety
- Economic impact on merchants and businesses
- Environmental impact
- Financial ramifications to the entire city
- Safety concerns about the bridge
- Preservation of the history of Glenwood Springs
- Glenwood’s image and branding
- Volume of traffic
- Loss of local control
The subjects named above, and there may be more, are all absolutely legitimate issues and Glenwood’s citizens are right to be concerned and to ask questions and look for reasonable answers. However, in looking for these answers some fact cannot be pushed aside.
- The State of Colorado, through Colorado Department of Transportation controls SH 82 from I-70 through Glenwood Springs, over Independence Pass to the juncture with Highway 24 between Leadville and Buena Vista
- Access to SH 82 (including all of Grand Avenue) is currently governed by the Colorado Access Code http://www.coloradodot.info/business/permits/accesspermits/references/601_1_accesscode_march2002_.pdf/view
- The Grand Avenue Bridge project scope and need is limited to the south side of Colorado River (downtown Glenwood Springs) and the connection to I-70 on the north.
- Under the NEPA process, if the agency is uncertain whether significant impacts are expected, an EA (Environmental Assessment) is prepared to determine if there are significant environmental effects. The findings of the EA may lead to an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) . http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/Citizens_Guide_Dec07.pdf
- City Council has requested that intersections at 8th, 9th, 10th & 11th remain full movement and signalized under the draft ACP
- Neither the bridge or the ACP process is over
- The City of Glenwood Springs has a Comprehensive Plan that includes transportation. http://www.cogs.us/departments/community/Forms/GlenwoodSpringsCompPlan2011.pdf
I am frustrated on many different levels, which is why writing this week has been so difficult and I will cover in more depth in a later post. But perhaps what frustrates me most right now is that there is a pervasive perception that there is no community support for either a new bridge or the ACP. It is true that those opposed have been vocal, but in my conversations with people around town, there are many who feel that a new bridge would or could have a positive impact – depending on design. Many also feel that a Access Control Plan would give the city some say in access along Grand Avenue which is better than none. Why are they not writing letters to the editor or showing up to meetings? I wish I knew. Perhaps there is not the fervor that those against have. Perhaps they feel that their voice is represented by many on City Council. Perhaps they are intimidated by the process. Perhaps it is simply easier to be against something than for it. There have been some positive suggestions made by several citizens, including Sumner Schachter, Steve Smith and others. Those will also be explored in a later post . . . as this one has run on too long . . .
My thoughts and prayers go out to all who have suffered tragic losses this week. Remembering those in Boston, MA; West, TX and now at MIT.