Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20080819MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kim Peterson, Global Warming Project Manager THRU: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director DATE OF MEMO: August 15, 2008 MEETING DATE: August 19, 2008 RE: GHG Inventory Assumptions REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests clear direction from Council on methodology for conducting a community wide GHG inventory. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: • May 2007 -Council passes the Canary Action Plan • June 2008 -Council approves funding in the amount of $47,950 for completion of a 2007 Community Wide Greenhouse Gas Inventory BACKGROUND: In 2004, the City of Aspen hired Climate Mitigation Services to compile a baseline greenhouse gas inventory for our community. At that time there was no standard protocol for how to conduct such an inventory and what should be included. With advice from Aspen's Global Warming Alliance, staff consulted members of City Council and made certain decisions on what to include in the inventory. The general inventory features are as follows: Boundary definition -the inventory encompasses building stock and functions with the City limits as well as sources outside the city limits including: the water treatment plant, the wastewater treatment plant, emissions from power plants serving Aspen Electric and Holy Cross Energy, commuting, tourist travel, homes on Red Mountain, the AABC, the airport and schools. Direct and indirect emissions -all energy-related emissions within the emissions boundary (Exhibit A) are included such as fuels directly combusted to heat buildings or operate machinery, equipment or vehicles, as are indirect emissions from power plants serving the community. Transportation-related emissions such as commuting, freight delivery, public transportation and air travel are also included. Greenhouse gases -there are six greenhouse gases: 1) carbon dioxide, 2) methane, 3) nitrous oxide, 4) hydroflourocarbons, 5) perflourocarbons and 6) sulfur hexafluoride: Aspen's inventory counts the first three. The latter three are excluded because they result Page I of 6 from heavy industry which Aspen does not have. The 2004 baseline inventory ignored HFC refrigerant leakage but there may be a reason to look into AC and appliance leakage to see if the emissions are material and need to be included. Staff will investigate this further. • Credits and offsets -Aspen's generation and purchase ofzero-carbon electricity will be counted. All purchases of Colorado Carbon Credits through the Colorado Cazbon Fund as part of the Canary Tag program will also be counted. DISCUSSION: At the time of the 2004 baseline inventory, two decisions were made which are now up for discussion. 1. Emissions from air travel: staff decided to include all emissions from roundtrip air travel for passengers whose final destination was Aspen from the Aspen, Denver, Eagle- Vail, and Grand Junction airports. There is no accepted protocol for municipal accounting of air travel emissions. Corporations using World Resources Institute's GHG Protocol include air travel in corporate aircraft fleets and may elect to estimate emissions from staff air travel on commercial aircraft, counting roundtrips using actual miles traveled. Universities, using the Clean Air, Cool Planet accounting software, are asked to estimate total faculty and staff air travel, roundtrip, for all university-related travel. Municipalities often ignore air travel, and the ICLEI protocol for community-wide municipal inventories is in development. ICLEI's local government protocol makes it elective to include local government staff air travel. The trend in greenhouse gas protocols seems to be merging with Aspen's progressive position in its 2004 inventory: to count air travel emissions for local governments and residents, as the City of Denver did in its 2005 inventory. Some communities only count a fraction of jet fuel sold at its local airport, which is the appropriate protocol to account for airport emissions, but not appropriate for Aspen's broader objective of estimating emissions for the entire community: tourists flying to Aspen, residents flying elsewhere, and capture emissions from all resources and people flowing into and out of the City and community of Aspen. In the Pitkin County Airport's 2006 inventory, they counted emissions from all fuel sold at the airport, which is emerging as the standard for airport related emissions. If we were to follow this methodology for commercial and general (private) aviation, we would be missing many of the emissions associated with air travel to Aspen since some pilots will just drop off passengers in Aspen then fly on to Rifle to fuel up and tie down. While there is still no single accepted protocol for community quantification of air travel emissions, one option is to count only one way of the trips either originating or ending in a city's airport. The "partner airport" (origin or destination) would count the other half of the emissions. For example, for a passenger flying to Aspen direct from Chicago, one half of the emissions would be counted by Aspen and the other half by Chicago. We have received guidance from the Aspen Global Warming Alliance that we should keep the same methodology for our 2007 inventory (which is to count both ways of all air travel). Staff too recommends that we follow the same methodology as for our 2004 inventory and count round trip air travel. Page 2 of 6 2. vehicle commuting on Highway 82: following the same methodology of air travel emissions, our 2004 baseline inventory counts vehicle traffic in both directions, coming into and leaving Aspen. Again, there is no single accepted protocol for quantification of vehicle emissions. In the 2004 baseline, roundtrip commuting was counted. This methodology was the recommendation of AGWA. An alternative option is to county only half of the trip with the other half accounted for by the origin or destination jurisdiction. For example, for a worker commuting from Carbondale to Aspen daily, one half his/her vehicle emissions would be counted by Aspen and the other half by Cazbondale. Staff recommends that we follow the same methodology as for our 2004 inventory and count round trip commuting. This table lists the pros and cons of staying with current methodology versus changing: AIR TRAVEL PROS CONS STAFF RECOMMENDS Count Keep same methodology As standazd protocols YES -open for roundtrip from as 2004 baseline -easier emerge, we are not in line discussion on Aspen and to compare "apples to with their methodologies. whether we should surrounding apples". "Double or over counting" include passengers Airports Trends are what matters, the responsibility for using surrounding not absolute numbers. Aspen's emissions. airports. Take full responsibility Will make it more expensive for Aspen driving and time consuming if we emissions as a resort want to change course in the destination. future. AGWA guidance. Hazder to meet emissions reductions goals since on the one hand we promote flying to Aspen to keep economic engine going but on other hand are trying to drastically curtail emissions. Why should we take responsibility for other munici alities' ai orts? Counting one More in line with Would have to redo 2004 NO way from emerging protocols. baseline to get comparison. As en onl VEHICLE PROS CONS STAFF TRAVEL RECOMMENDS Count Keep same methodology As standazd protocols YES roundtrip on all as 2004 baseline -easier emerge, we are not in line vehicle to compare "apples to with their methodologies. emissions apples". "Double or over counting" Trends are what matters, the res onsibilit for Page 3 of 6 not absolute numbers. Aspen's emissions. Take full responsibility Will make it more expensive .for Aspen driving and time consuming if we emissions as a resort want to change course in the destination. future. AGWA guidance. Why should we take Legitimate reason for all responsibility for other that commuting is that municipalities' vehicle Aspen is too expensive emissions? for all workers to live here. As more affordable housing and BRT comes online, we should see emissions reductions in this area -city can take credit for these policies in reducin emissions. Count one way More in line with Would have to redo 2004 NO onl emer in rotocols. baseline to et com arison. It should be noted that under future protocols, our inventory methodology may have to change drastically should we choose to adopt them depending on what they include or exclude. It's also important to note that Aspen's GHG inventory is much more comprehensive and inclusive than any other community wide inventory. Tn summary, staff recommends staying with the same methodology as we used for the 2004 baseline as we are really trying to measure trends in emissions. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: If we decide to change methodology from the way we did our 2004 baseline, the price of the contract with Climate Mitigation Services would increase. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Neither option is going to have significant environmental impacts although results may change policy focus on how to address sources of greenhouse gas emissions. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff requests that Council approve use of similar methodologies to conduct 2007 greenhouse gas inventory as were used in 2004 baseline inventory. ALTERNATIVES: See alternative methodologies in Discussion Section above. Page 4 of 6 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Emissions Inventory Boundary Aspen Emissions lnveniory 2004 Report commissioned by City of Aspen Richaid Heede Climate iVlitieauon Services heedU~uelimatcinitigation.com Sno«~mas, C;O B7 G54 USA 470-92',-951 I Fig. 1. Map ojAspen's Emissions Boundary & Main Sources Page 5 of 6 Ptikin County ~ •~..-~~~. t.anden N ws ~ s 4Ntite Horse Springs; ~'+~ ~ 8 Starwopd. o 1,~ ~ ~ } \ Nortnao `' Pifkin COUnry:Alryort L1 8 Air Travel EMISSIQNS INVENTORY BOUNDARY - Roads - HVVt' 82 -Airport Runway ~ . ~ Water ~ , ,1 City of Aspen ....., ~,,,; Ski Area Boundary Emissions -='" t AAg~ Also included: m' Natural"Gas uee •: • ~ ~~ Propane use ~ • RFTA EJeotriciryuse ~ ~ Intown vehicle trafRc : ~r ~: po..: . Asperxeleted RFTA tiustrips. , r ` " x a, r ~~ ' HWY 82 Traffic a: •. ~ ! ~ ~ ` 'c .. . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .a. ,a ,~ !~ ~ ,x. . WRpp3 RO;~` .,~ CiC: ~ ~~e ~ • `"mil c '~ • 4i~ Mtry.itU. ye°' •a. •~ ( ~ ButtnnNlkMouMain m ) \ ~ ~ ~' - •• ~. ` As en V lle Hos it l ~~ ~ ~ n r ';td x« tae GrN .A\ \. p a y p a ` •_•~ . ~ r% .+:, ,F © ~ e` x ~r~"s t T .: : Aspen.School District r. ', '~ ~. • r ~""', y * •, •.~.. , ..•'•'~• .'; '..~ Aspen Mountain , `}v~,. .~ '#+~ ` .iii r ~. ~ .p ` .+ t • ~, c. Motrden Vall6y ~, /='-ez Aspen HigNands ~• k' .... ..~ Map of the Aspen Emissions Inventory Boundary (solid red) surrounding City Limits (dotted black). Courtesy ofCity of Aspen/Pitkin County GIS Mapping Dept. Page 6 of 6 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Tom Rubel Jeff Woods August 14, 2008 August 19, 2008 EVENT FLOORING REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Authorization to proceed with the bid process to purchase event flooring. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On January 7, 2008 we met with Council to discuss options to alleviate turf damage due to over use of parks, most notably, Wagner and Rio Grande. BACKGROUND: Council approved funds to lease event flooring for a test to determine if results warranted large capital purchase. DISCUSSION: After extensive evaluation of the impact of special events on the turf surfaces in Rio Grande Park and Wagner Park, it is evident that improvement in protecting these surfaces is needed. With a number of important events occurring on an annual basis, most notably Jazz Fest and Food & Wine, and with the demands for use of these surfaces by active and passive recreation users, it is important to provide greater protection to the turf. The Parks Department has done extensive research into protocols for managing turf grass with these events in both the summer and winter. Current management practices require that the parks be closed while they recover from the impact of these events, which precludes casual use by the public. An alternative would be the use of protective flooring installed prior to these events to reduce recovery times. The flooring that we tested allows air, water and sunlight circulation to reduce turf damage. It is the only product that allows sunlight to penetrate. This system has worked well when used in major stadiums around the world during large events. Page I of 3 The areas in Wagner that were covered with Terraflor showed significant less wear than the uncovered areas except in the load- in area and areas where the turf was not well established. One week after the event, the covered areas behind the tables were barely discernable. The Terraflor met or exceeded our expectations in those areas. The uncovered areas are still marginal today and very noticeable. (See attached photos) Exhibit A. A critical factor in the whole process is starting with healthy, thick turf. Some of the failed areas could have been the result of a less than ideal crop of grass. This past year was the thinnest turf we have produced in many years due to the shortened growing season and the cold spring. Any flooring that is used for more than three or four days will cause some deterioration in quality. There will be labor costs involved with installation and removal of the flooring as well as the additional time spent. To defray the cost of the flooring, we are looking into purchasing a product that comes with a lease program. The vendor retains the right to lease [he product to other venues. They market the product and make all lease arrangements from picking it up at our storage site to returning it ready for the next venue. The City receives a percentage of the lease price. The flooring would be stored at a down valley location in Rifle, Grand Junction or possibly Denver. It would be stored on two flatbed trailers ready for easy access for rental. Used trailers would be purchased for eight to ten thousand dollars each. The benefits of flooring outweigh the challenges and even if we build additional fields, flooring is needed to reduce the recovery time of events on Wagner and Rio Grande. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: $380,000 remains in the budget after leasing Terraflor for Food and Wine. With that, we could purchase approximately 30,000 square feet of a combination of Terraflor, Terracover and needed accessories. That would cover nearly two thirds of the tented area in Wagner during Food and Wine. Based on previous owner rental programs, the recovery of the cost of the product could be in as little as 10 years. Each full rental of our product would net the City approximately $4000.00. The products have an expected lifetime of 15 years. We would also be able to supplement original purchase over time to cover the entire venue. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Any environmental impact caused by using an oil based product could be offset by reduced field maintenance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Proceed to bid process to purchase event flooring to alleviate effects of Special Events on turf in Wagner and Rio Grande parks. ALTERNATIVES: Reduce the number of events. Explore alternate venues for some events. Build additional fields. Page 2 of 3 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Page 3 of 3 Y. ~ ~ ~ y .1 ; .. F... h .,. .', t- Y a f s _ ~~ ~ ~ ^ ` ~r S ~• ~ J ~ _ ; '' „~'4' - ~r ~ it , f ~, uF f .~ { 7 l a ~~;. .°Y~ , ._ __ _ , .. ,.'~ y.~ _. .Y.. Ar;l.Zf z. _: -~ ~ ~~ ~ ~- is ! ~°`~ ~ -i~ ~ .~ ~!'. h~ ;~, ~~~~~-~ { ~ 7 - - - < ~•yq~ .y +l' ~: ~ ,''} ~' .y ! Y _;,, f' ~ ,~ ;•t = -~ ti°~ ti `~~~~ ~ R~. ~, ' ~'. :: •_ ~~ W . z ~~ _ d ~~ ~jyl~ iF .' ~'` - ~ , ` .y~ ~ r ~~ r._ h ~_'4 S' P ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~. ~:~~~~ _ ~ , ~ Fl ~ 1 ~ 4 d Vii'' ~~ .. y~et,, '.:-a < ~ ~ rte' ~ 3 7 °+ _ ~ -'~- , ~,~ i K ~'~ . ~~. Y, e~ ~ ref, ti,~ w . Y ~ t~ _; c s :4 ~ f Y' ~~- .'~_ ,, i ~~ i ~! $. ; ,,. t ~~ 1S'~ ~,:: :.., --, x~., ~.~ ~~ Y', ~ ;. I i, ` ~ - ~~ ~. ~, t < ~i~. '^~ 1 ~ ~ ?~~ ~ , P t ~4 ~ ~~ , P .; ~ :i:a ~ ~ y.r. a ~ y_ ~ ~ ~~~. ~ .~~,+ ; , ,~ ~~ tip, ` ~ ~ ~ 4:: ~ ~~ `,~ ~ PrYR ~~~~,~ . ~' { ~~ ~.' ~• ~ ~~~^ J ~~ ~^~x P l t~~ ttTMTMl ~1 ~ `~ ~ ~ ~4 'tit ~ Y Ir - ~° ;,~ ~~ - aeY$ i . ,~ ~ I ~ Q ;f _ J L 4"~ Y S A ! -+'Z ~~ r "r '~ ~ Y j a ~ j ~{ % '~ '~ ~f'.i~_... '~ _ ~~ Y L: _ 3,. _ Y y , ~ '- f - ~ a _ y . t 9, M~, .yT ~ ~ r f ~, _ - - ' ~.. , r 1. 1 . .. i; F r. ; I i f ~ r~ t~ ,._ o~ ~- ' Sri '~ ' I~ ~ + i r1 ~ ,"i«~; ~ t _ ~ t ~ -s ~ 4 N ~f .>C ~ ai ~ I 4 •~ ~ JF . '1 ~ - - - - r-s~yj , 5 ~.. - ~: ~ ~ ~F. /4 I a. _ .. p . J ~ .~ S K ~u'~-~ t I +S -[t pT 3~~`. u ._ A CcY F: ~ k Yy _. {{,~.. ~ ~~ ~ _, - i l ~' ~ Tl ~ x1 ~ ~ 1Ti' ~ y .fix-j ~ .~ _ ~ Y 17 Y ~- ' ~ a i~'Y~q. ~ ~. ~ t~ ~( ~ _ `~L' , r iy - ~ '~ ~ .^' ~, L _ yid ~G.~.' y } I ; i' . I I' [ ;;~~. ' r. ~ ' i `~, -_. - f H` • ~ _ ~ F , .~ ~ •, . ~ • ~ R i !,r *.~~~ ~•~ t 1.~ ~ ..7711 ~~~.`• ..'. i ~ 1~'4, 7~7 i~~r ~ yam.. f°K. '1 ,~ •~ ~ ~ ,.+ ., ' _ ~. +. ~ a ~ .~ t ! ~~ ` ~. ` y \ 'yam .~. ~-~. ~ s y _ J • ";_. ~ ~ ~ ~ ' r' ~;~~ ! ~ r,+~ _ •' _ • •~ ~ ~ r ••' ' l i '~~. t,~ ,• ASPEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING NOTES MEETING DATE: 8/19/08 AGENDA TOPIC: Event Flooring PRESENTED BY: Jeff Woods and Tom Rubel COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mick Ireland, Jack Johnson, J. E. Devilbiss, Dwayne Romero, Steve Skadron SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Results of the event flooring test were discussed. Based on the improved turf quality where flooring was used, staff recommended moving to the bid process. The cost of flooring, area of turf we aze able to cover within budget and lease program were also discussed. Possible use of flooring on ice was mentioned. The issue of event use versus everyday public use of the parks was brought up by Council. POLICY DIRECTION: Staff will proceed to bid process to purchase event flooring and reseazch lease option to recover or reduce cost. ACTION ITEMS: DUE DATE: Late fall 1. Staff will proceed to bid process to purchase maximum amount of flooring possible with $378,000 remaining in current budget. Trailer cost is included within this budget. Best option to be determined after research. We will reseazch all aspects of lease programs available and estimates of cost recovery time. 2. With the assistance of Environmental Health, the environmental impact of event flooring will be determined. Items to consider aze GHG emissions used to manufacture flooring, set up and teaz down, hauling to and from site versus GHG saved by less turf maintenance. 1 3. The value of pazks-- This issue needs to be determined. Things to consider aze the amount of time Wagner and Rio Grande are off line to the public for Food and Wine and Aspen Jazzfest versus the revenues associated with these events. Wagner is closed all spring to recover from the myriad of uses (Food and Wine, Arts and Craft Fair, Ruggerfest, Motherlode, kids' fundraiser, fall soccer, regular rugby games and practice through the summer, general use and dog use) and to produce a healthy turf that will make it through the upcoming season. It is then offline for 13 days for Food and Wine. Portions of Rio Grande are typically closed after Jazzfest for recovery. It is also offline for over three weeks in June for Jazzfest set up, the event and then teaz down. Are the revenues associated with these events more valuable than the time lost for public use? This is a decision that needs to be made by Council. Flooring should reduce the down time associated with turf maintenance, but it will not eliminate it completely, nor will it change the time off for the events. 4. One option suggested by Council to reduce cost for flooring was to change the event for rental. This is an option, but Jazzfest and Food and Wine have balked at the cost when this subject has been approached in the past. There is a possibility that these events would look for another venue if they were required to pay for flooring. This is a policy decision that Council would have to make. Estimated Date for Follow-Up with City Council: A contract for event flooring will be brought to Council with in depth reseazch of all relevant issues after the bid process has been completed sometime in the late fall. E --,~A..__.....~.._ ..1~ ~. ~-~ -' ~ R~.ao, ~:~~: ~~ ~F ~~