HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20110719 MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Board of Health
FROM: Lee Cassin, Public Health Agency Director
DATE OF MEMO: July 14, 2011
MEETING DATE: July 19, 2011
RE: Second Quarterly Board of Health Meeting
REQUEST OF BOARD: Staff requests direction as noted below.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Health and Environmental Impact Assessment Update
The state act requires us to conduct a health and environmental assessment every five years, and
develop a plan to address whatever issues come out of that assessment. We already routinely
collect large amounts of health and environmental assessment data, and have just almost -
completed the AACP process, which sets community goals for various health and environmental
issues. In addition, each year the city surveys its citizens to determine their priorities and which
issues they believe should receive more emphasis. Therefore, staff recommended, and the Board
of Health agreed, that we should not undertake a new process, but should use the data and
community processes we already have, to develop the assessment and formulate a future plan.
The anticipated timing is to complete the assessment in early 2012 and complete the plan later in
2012. The groundwork for both is being completed and what remains is to compile the existing
information into the two documents (the assessment and the improvement plan). It is important
to note that the state law recognizes that it will likely not be possible to achieve every goal or
meet every unmet need. The plan will set priorities and note which are lacking resources to
achieve.
We would also note that we expect to use the assessments being done by Aspen Valley Hospital
and Community Health Services to cover the public medical health status of the community. This
could include a wide range of areas CHS and other non - profits provide services for, from drug
and alcohol use to teen pregnancy to tuberculosis rates. We expect to focus in our assessment on
environmental health issues and not duplicate analysis of medical public health needs and status.
Community Health Services is funded largely by Aspen residents through a countywide property
tax, and is under the County's jurisdiction, but provides services to Aspen residents as well as
Pitkin County and out -of- county residents.
Page 1 of 7
Here is a preliminary list of data we already have that we propose should constitute our health
and environmental impact assessment. We request approval from the Board of Health for this
list, or direction from the Board about any areas that are missing, should be omitted, or
need to be revised.
• Outdoor air quality (PM -10, ozone levels, asthma rates, bus ridership. An area that we do
not have data on is PM2.5.)
• Traffic levels, bus ridership
• Indoor air quality (# of homes tested for radon, # of homes remediated, asbestos
abatements, etc)
• Cancer rates by type, age - adjusted (provided by the state)
• Drinking water quality (provided by Aspen Water Department)
• Surface water quality, stormwater runoff pollution (provided by stormwater)
• Pharmaceutical and electronic waste diversion (amounts collected)
• Recycling volumes by type /total trash volume
• Greenhouse gas emissions — community and city government — by sector (provided by
Canary)
• City Chemical disposal (already tracked by EH)
• Hazardous air pollutant emissions (from EPA database)
• Pesticide use (estimated)
• Food safety analysis (foodborne illnesses, inspection performance)
• Land use and development impacts (permits, sq. footage of development)
• Child care capacity needs assessment
• Crime rates by type (collected by Aspen Police Department)
• We may be able to get other health and environmental data from the State as we continue
this effort.
1. Are there any obvious omissions the Board would like us to include? 2) Are there
any additional suggestions related to any of these measures? NOTE: Aspen Valley
Hospital and Community Health Services are conducting assessments that will include a
variety of data that we plan to refer to but not duplicate.
Ozone
The primary goal for the City of Aspen's ozone monitoring program is to determine whether
ground level ozone is impacting the health of the community. Breathing ozone can trigger a
variety of health problems including chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. It can
worsen bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma.
On July 29, 2011, the EPA plans to announce the new standard for ground level ozone.
Currently, the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone is an 8 -hour average
of 75 ppb. The range the agency is now considering is lower, between 60 — 70ppb, based on the
recommendation of EPA's Science Advisory Board. City staff supports the most protective
standard of 60 ppb since a mountain evidence points to the health impacts even at this level. We
Page 2 of 7
are in agreement with a recent letter co- signed by 13 public health, medical, and patient advocacy
organizations to President Obama urging him to direct the EPA to issue a stronger standard to
protect public health. Along with these organizations we agree with EPA Administrator Lisa
Jackson statement that "using the best science to strengthen [the] standard is a long overdue
action." Staff plans to issue a press release once the EPA has announced the new standard,
explaining how Aspen's levels compare to the new standard.
At this year's Aspen Ideas Festival, Jackson talked about the impact of natural gas production
and hydraulic fracturing on rural air quality, validating Aspen's concern with the impact of the
region's energy productions. She was quoted by the Aspen Daily News on June 29` 2011, "You
are going to have huge smog problems where you never had them before... These are rural
areas...There is a lot of activity around those wells and that has an impact on air quality...we
already know it."
With last year's addition of an ozone monitor, Aspen can begin to understand just how much the
region's oil and gas production is impacting our air. In 2010, Aspen had ten days where the 8-
hour average for ozone was at or above 60 ppb, with the highest 8 -hour average being 66 ppb
recorded on June 22, 2010. This year we have had, as of July 7, 2011, fourteen days at or above
60 ppb and had our highest day of 70ppb on June 22, 2011. Staff, with the help of summer intern
Haylen Gregory, is currently working with a modeling program to look at what sources could be
causing these elevated levels of ozone. The two most common sources of ozone in Western
Colorado are believed to be natural gas drilling and production, and vehicle exhaust.
Cottage Foods Bill
State Senator Gail Schwartz introduced the Cottage Food Bill which would encourage the sale of
locally grown foods, especially limited foods like produce, eggs, salsa, and spices at farmer's
markets and roadside stands. Time ran out in the session, but the bill did pass in the Senate. If it
is reintroduced and passes next year, there will be some impact on our workload, with the exact
level determined by the final wording of the bill. Lee Cassin has been asked by the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment to serve on a small state committee working to
draft a version of the bill that addresses some of the concerns raised by last year's bill.
County Septic System Failures (Information only)
Pitkin County recently implemented a program requiring septic system to be inspected upon sale
of a property or significant remodeling. Surprisingly, 20 -30% are resulting in major or minor
repairs. These include everything from completely replacing the system to just replacing a broken
coupling. However, the implications are clear. Systems that were not functioning correctly, or
where septic tanks were cracked, had sewage leaking into the ground and sometimes into ground
or surface waters. Contamination of state waters from old septic systems has long been a concern
in the state and Pitkin County's addressing of this issue should bring about significant protection
of our valley's river water quality.
Fluoride
Page 3 of 7
Staff from the Water and Environmental Health Departments are working on a presentation to
Council with scientific information about water fluoridation so Council can make a decision
about whether to discontinue adding fluoride to Aspen's water, or whether to lower the levels to
the reduced amounts recently recommended by the EPA. Staff will recommend discontinuing
the addition of Fluoride to our water supply.
• The EPA has lowered the recommended Fluoride level in drinking water from 1.1 mg/L
to .70 mg/L; Aspen is currently adding Fluoride to our water to reach a level of 1.1 mg /L.
The American Dental Association now recommends that infants have formula made with
fluoride -free or low- fluoride water until they are a year old to prevent fluorosis.
• Consumption of too much Fluoride can lead to an increased risk of bone fractures,
especially in women, as well as Fluorosis, a staining of the teeth caused by excessive
Fluoride. In 2010, the CDC found that 41% of 12 -15 year olds have dental fluorosis.
• Aspen has naturally occurring levels of Fluoride in our drinking water that range from
0.2 -1.5 mg/L.
• If a citizen would like to get additional Fluoride in their diet there are widely available
dietary supplements as well as oral rinses and tooth pastes designed to apply the Fluoride
in a topical manner which is more effective than ingesting it as is done with the Fluoride
added to drinking water.
At our upcoming work session on 9/27 we will provide information from various health effects
studies on Fluoride as well as a description of what other jurisdictions are doing with their
drinking water programs.
Pesticides (update)
Staff from the Environmental Health, Parks, and Golf Departments are working on revisions to
the proposed pesticide ordinance that was presented to council by a citizen in June. Due to
'increasing understanding of likely risks from some pesticide exposures, including risks of
cancers, dementia, and Parkinson's disease, EH staff believes this is an important area in which
to reduce exposures to the public. We plan to continue to work with interested citizens and
commercial pesticide applicators before scheduling a council worksession.
The following two agenda items have been brought forward by Board member Torre and the
information is provided by staff for the Board's use in discussing these issues.
Private Medical Offices in Aspen Valley Hospital Expansion: Board member Torre has asked
that the Board discuss the 27,000 sq. ft. of medical office space to be provided in the hospital
expansion, and whether the hospital board could be persuaded to convert that space to a facility
for serving un- insured or under -served populations either in the upper valley or regionally. The
issue includes use of a public hospital facility, funded with tax monies, for private providers, as
well as determining whether there is need for additional space for less expensive care.
Page 4 of 7
The hospital expansion is part of an ongoing land use application, so land use matters may not be
part of this discussion. However, the Board of Health may decide that a health- related issue like
the need for indigent care facilities is appropriate for Council to weigh in future discussions.
Some of this medical office space is already being constructed in the current phase of the
expansion and some has received conceptual, but not final, approval for the next phase.
By a vote of 4 -1, Council approved the 27,000 sq. ft. of medical office space in Ordinance No. 12
of 2010, with 12,000 sq. ft. being constructed now in Phase II and 15,000 sq. ft. to be built in
future phases pending final land use approval.
A suggestion has been made that the need for indigent care facilities be evaluated. Aspen Valley
Hospital has just completed a comprehensive health needs assessment (in draft form at this stage)
and CEO David Ressler will be able to explain the information that will be available from that
study. He can also explain how the hospital determined the need for the medical offices spaces
and the various ways in which indigent needs are met at this time.
Community Health Services is also in the process of doing a health impact assessment that will
evaluate current capacities and gaps in services for the valley. Many entities now provide a
variety of services to uninsured and under- insured and low- income populations both in Aspen
and regionally. These include Aspen Valley Hospital, Valley View Hospital, Mid - Valley Medical
Clinic, Children's Health Foundation, Community Health Services, Family Visitor Programs,
Mountain Valley Developmental Services, etc. The AVH and CHS assessments will provide a
complete picture of all of the available resources and needs.
Meatless Mondays (direction requested). Board member Torre asked that we provide
information for the board on the "Meatless Mondays" movement. The Board may choose to
endorse the movement or direct staff to continue existing outreach via the ZGreen program.
(Events now receive points for offering vegetarian meals since they cause much less
environmental impact, and citizens receive points if they choose to forego meat one day a week.)
The following is summarized from the "Meatless Mondays" website.
"Meatless Monday is a non - profit initiative of The Monday Campaigns, in association with the
Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health. We provide the information and recipes you
need to start each week with healthy, environmentally friendly meat -free alternatives. Our goal is
to help you reduce your meat consumption by 15% in order to improve your personal health and
the health of the planet... By cutting out meat once a week, we can improve our health, reduce
our carbon footprint and lead the world in the race to reduce climate change.
Why Meatless?
Page 5 of 7
Tot
Going meatless once a week may reduce your risk of chronic preventable conditions like cancer,
cardiovascular disease, diabetes and obesity. It can also help reduce your carbon footprint and
save precious resources like fresh water and fossil fuel.
Read about these benefits below. But keep in mind that just going meatless is not enough. That's
why we give you the information you need to add healthy, environmentally friendly meat -free
alternatives to your diet each week. Further, if you do eat meat on other days, we strongly
recommend grass -fed, hormone -free, locally- raised options whenever possible.
Health Benefits
• LIMIT CANCER RISK: Hundreds of studies suggest that diets high in fruits and
vegetables may reduce cancer risk. Both red and processed meat consumption are
associated with colon cancer.
• REDUCE HEART DISEASE: Recent data from a Harvard University study found that
replacing saturated fat -rich foods (for example, meat and full fat dairy) with foods that are
rich in polyunsaturated fat (for example, vegetable oils, nuts and seeds) reduces the risk
of heart disease by 19%
• FIGHT DIABETES: Research suggests that higher consumption of red and processed
meat increase the risk of type 2 diabetes.
• CURB OBESITY: People on low -meat or vegetarian diets have significantly lower body
weights and body mass indices. A recent study from Imperial College London also found
that reducing overall meat consumption can prevent long-term weight gain.
• LIVE LONGER: Red and processed meat consumption is associated with modest
increases in total mortality, cancer mortality and cardiovascular disease mortality.
• IMPROVE YOUR DIET. Consuming beans or peas results in higher intakes of fiber,
protein, folate, zinc, iron and magnesium with lower intakes of saturated fat and total fat.
Environmental Benefits
• REDUCE YOUR CARBON FOOTPRINT. The United Nations' Food and Agriculture
Organization estimates the meat industry generates nearly one -fifth of the man-made
greenhouse gas emissions that are accelerating climate change worldwide ... far more
than transportation. And annual worldwide demand for meat continues to grow. Reining
in meat consumption once a week can help slow this trend.
• MINIMIZE WATER USAGE. The water needs of livestock are tremendous, far above
those of vegetables or grains. An estimated 1,800 to 2,500 gallons of water go into a
Page 6 of 7
single pound of beef. Soy tofu produced in California requires 220 gallons of water per
pound.
• HELP REDUCE FOSSIL FUEL DEPENDENCE. On average, about 40 calories of fossil
fuel energy go into every calorie of feed lot beef in the U.S. Compare this to the 2.2
calories of fossil fuel energy needed to produce one calorie of plant -based protein.
Moderating meat consumption is a great way to cut fossil fuel demand.
Staff Recommendation: Meat has a significant impact on the environment compared to other
foods, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, water use, land use, and air and water pollution. In
addition, some meats significantly increase risk of heart disease and some cancers. In fact, from a
public and environmental health perspective, the most important risk factors are smoking, diet
(poor food choices and obesity), (lack of enough) exercise, and alcohol consumption. The
challenge in creating this change in behavior may be twofold: first, there is a possibility of being
less effective in focusing on a larger number of issues rather than investing enough resources to
have strong successes in fewer areas, although endorsing this effort could be done with very little
time investment. The second concern would be whether we might create a perception of targeted
too many behaviors and losing credibility for city efforts.
Aspen Valley Hospital, Community Health Services and other agencies provide nutrition
counseling services at this time.
An intermediate approach might be to amplify something we are already doing: in both the
ZGreen Event certification program and the ZGreen citizen program, points are received for
eating less meat or providing vegetarian event menu options, as well as for locally grown foods.
We might add Meatless Mondays as an option in those existing programs. We also provide free
seeds for residents to encourage locally grown foods and flowers. We might increase our efforts
to educate people about the issue when we promote locally grown food, and at city events. And
the Board could endorse the official Meatless Mondays campaign, publically urge citizens to
participate, and direct staff to conduct education and outreach.
Page 7 of 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
THRU: JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS &
RECREATION
MEMO DATE: JULY 8 2011
MEETING DATE: JULY 19 2011
RE: INDOOR TENNIS STRUCTURE
Request of Council: Ace -It; a citizens' initiative to create indoor tennis, is requesting of
Council, the approval of the attached Agreement (Attachment "A "). This agreement in no way is
a final approval from Council, rather an agreement on direction and process by each party.
What this Agreement achieves is:
• Council support for their initiative such that a more aggressive fundraising process may
begin
• Support for Indoor Tennis by Council
• How funds will be collected and held
• The Land Use process and final approval process
• How a vendor /contractor will be selected
• Location of indoor tennis for the Land Use Application
• Ownership
• Naming Rights for fundraising purposes
What this Agreement does not commit Council to:
• This Agreement is NOT a land use or any final approval to construct the Indoor Tennis
Structure.
• Any additional future funding by the City: operational or capital for indoor tennis
Next Steps:
1. Upon approval of this Agreement Ace -It will submit a Land Use Application with
Community Development?
2. The Land Use Application for Indoor Tennis must comply with the full expectations of
the Land Use process to include: the Design Review Committee (DRC), Public Outreach,
P &Z approvals and recommendations.
3. Upon P &Z approval the Land Use Application will come back to Council for final
approval at which time Ace -It and staff will lay out particulars regarding the Pro -Forma
for operations, capital costs, set up take down, and the viability of the clay courts hosting
the membrane structure.
Note: A land use pre- application meeting has taken place between Community Development
and the Smuggle Racquet Club.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The attached Agreement with Ace -It is a direct result of a
2010 work session with Council regarding this topic (see attachments `B" & "C "). In 2010
Council provided direction and a list of concerns for operating the Indoor Tennis structure,
attachments associated with that meeting are a result of the 2010 work session and Council
requests.
BACKGROUND: Ace -It first came to Council in 2009 with information regarding their wish
to initiate a community wide effort to raise funds for the purpose of constructing a membrane
structure; bubble, for the purpose of indoor tennis (see attachments "D" & "E ").
DISCUSSION: The process of raising funds over the past 2 years for Ace -It has been a bit
of a chicken and egg progression. While local tennis players support the initiative, they won't
commit funds until they know the membrane structure has been approved. The approval process
was once thought to be a temporary use permit and after an initial submission for the temporary
use permit, Community Development determined that this application would need a full review
process and PUD amendment.
The Agreement for which Ace -It is seeking approval; simply identifies that the land use
application has Council support, but it must survive a more rigorous land use process and
approvals. This gives donors some security in that the process is now moving forward in hopes
to provide indoor tennis in Aspen. At the same time, if Council approves the Agreement, staff
could work with Ace -It in developing a Request for Proposals in order to bring a
vendor /contractor on board who can begin answering more detailed questions at which time final
approvals will come forward. Staff could release a RFP with stipulations identifying that based
upon funds being raised and final approvals, they would receive the contract. This would allow
staff and Ace -It to secure a vendor who will work closely with us in answering difficult final
construction questions.
Again, the approval of this agreement keeps the public process moving forward, but in no way
commits the City or Council to a final approval of construction and/or land use.
The recommended site by staff is the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club site. This is where tennis was
designed to be located following a 1998 bond referendum, and why we refer to this location as
the "Aspen Golf & Tennis Club ".
Aspen Golf & Tennis Club site:
Staff feels that Council and the community approved the PUD which allowed for a high level
clay court tennis facility to be constructed at the golf course site due to the fact that this was the
best location for a tennis center as it complemented the golf course and thus the "Aspen Golf &
Tennis Club ". These wonderful courts while they are top of the line are utilized 4 months at best
dependent upon the weather. Were we to cover any number of these courts for winter use, it
would add 6 months of use and extend the season for tennis players to 10 months. Additionally,
the community supported the 1998 bond initiative to place tennis at this site. This is the location
of our tennis center in Aspen and staff's recommendation is that future improvements for tennis
should take place at this site. Other benefits to this site:
• Available parking
• Restaurant available
• Restrooms /locker rooms available
• Can use existing set up and site design
Iselin Site:
• Will only hold 3 courts, once they are full then the discussion will come back to Aspen
Golf & Tennis Club site.
• Parking is an issue
• No restaurant or restroom facilities near enough
• Covenants prevent this site from being used until 2013
• New courts would have to constructed from the beginning to fit this site
FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: It has been made clear to staff and Ace -it in past
work sessions with Council that all funds associated with the introduction of an Indoor Tennis
facility will be borne by Ace -It. The cost to operate this facility cannot add to general fund
demands for funding as well.
Additional costs to be considered:
• Housing Mitigation: the Ace -It agreement says that the City will take care of this. A one
(1) bedroom unit would need to be funded/provided. The City has credits that could be
used from the construction/purchase of units at Truscott. Cost to mitigate housing would
be approximately $195,000.
• Ongoing Maintenance: This is included in the pro forma attached and would be
taken care of by the operator by contributing into a maintenance fund.
• Set up and take down of structure: Court prep costs currently funded would be utilized
for set up and take down of the membrane structure.
• Community Development Fees waived: $2,940
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff is recommending the approval of the attached
Agreement with Ace -It.
ALTERNATIVES: Let the Land Use Process run its course before approving this agreement.
PROPOSED MOTION: I, Council Members Name , move to approve the
Agreement between the City of Aspen and Ace -It for the purpose of moving forward on efforts
of a citizens' initiative to create indoor tennis in Aspen.
City Manager Comments:
Attachments:
"A" Ace -It Agreement
"B" 2009 Memo submitted to Council for initial meeting with Ace -It regarding indoor
tennis
"C" 2009 follow up meeting on Indoor Tennis
"D" April 2010 work session memo on Indoor Tennis
"E" Follow up memo on discussion topics in April work session with Council regarding
indoor tennis
"F" Ace -It Memo
"G" Pro Forma for Operations
"H" Site Plan
"I" Computer Generated Renderings of Membrane Structure located on site
AGREEMENT — ACE -IT Attachment "A"
THIS AGREEEMENT, made and entered into this _day of, 2011, by and between
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation ( "City "), and ACE -
IT, a community based citizens' organization ( "Ace -It ").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Ace -It is a community based citizens' organization formed to promote
tennis in the City of Aspen City and currently desires to assist the City of Aspen in the purchase
and installation of a structure, commonly known as a bubble, to be located at the Aspen Golf and
Tennis Club that would permit indoor tennis during the winter months; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is interested in pursuing a joint effort with Ace -It to
design, fund- raise, construct, and operate such an indoor tennis facility as a public facility; so
long as revenues generated by programs at the facility are able to offset all expenses related to
the operation of the facility
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements
herein contained and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Funding by Ace - It. Ace -it agrees to conduct a fund raising campaign to raise
sufficient funds necessary to fund all aspects of the proposed building (the bubble structure
depicted in Exhibit "A" appended hereto.) The funds so raised shall be sufficient to cover all of
the costs of purchasing an inflatable structure and locating it on City property. Those costs shall
include, but not necessarily limited to, the following costs: the cost of preparing construction
documents and specifications, design, biding of contracts, purchase of building materials,
construction of all requisite support facilities, construction of all utility support facilities, the
construction of any requisite accessory structures (if any), administrative and inspection fees, and
any construction management costs.
Exhibit "A" identifies an air supported structure covering four courts. In the event that funds
raised are insufficient for covering four courts as depicted in Exhibit "A" an alternative plan may
be implemented, upon the agreement of both Ace -It and the City, that allows for a structure
covering two courts (the "Alternative Plan").
2. Receipt of Funds. Ace -It shall be solely responsible for all fund raising. Ace -It
shall deposit with the City all funds it receives along with a copy of a receipt given to donors,
and the names and addresses of any such donors. In the event that the City receives monies
directly from donors, the City shall provide receipts to the individual donors and shall provide
Ace -It with a copy of such receipts. All funds received by the City directly from individual
donors or from Ace -It shall be deposited by the City in a separate segregated account. Said
account shall be maintained by the City and the funds from such fund shall be expended only as
provided herein. All donors shall be advised by Ace -It or by the City that any donations made
shall be used for the purchase and installation of the proposed structure and all costs necessary to
design, estimate the cost of, and bid for, the purchase and installation of the proposed structure.
All donors shall be notified that their donation may be returned to them if the total amount
necessary to cover all anticipated costs is not deposited with the City within a reasonable time, as
determined by the City, in its sole discretion. In addition, donors shall be advised of all
conditions, if any, placed upon the operation of the facility by the City as part of the land use
approval process.
3. Land Use Approvals. Within two weeks of the execution of this
Agreement, Ace -It shall meet with staff of the City's Community Development Department to
initiate any requisite land use approvals necessary to obtain a development order for the
installation and operation of the structure. This Agreement is specifically conditioned upon the
receipt and approval of the requisite land use approvals from the City to install and operate the
facility as described herein. In the event that the requisite land use approvals are not granted, this
Agreement shall be null and void.
4. Competitive Bidding Process. Within two weeks of the receipt of the requisite
land use approvals from the City the parties hereto shall meet to discuss and agree upon the type,
size, and nature of the structure to be purchased and installed. Within two weeks of said meeting,
the City shall provide Ace -It with an estimate of the total costs for the purchase and installation
of the structure. Within a reasonable period of time following the deposit of the total amount of
the estimated cost figure, the City shall conduct a competitive bidding process pursuant to its
Procurement Code to obtain fixed pricing for the purchase and installation of the structure.
5. Selection of Vendor. The City shall be solely responsible for the selection of a
vendor and any other third parties necessary to install the structure. Before making such
selection(s) the City shall invite Ace -It to discuss with it the relative merits of any bidders or
proposers, but the final decision on the selection for vendor(s) shall remain with the City. Ace -It
shall have the right to review and approve, before execution by the City, all procurement
contracts or contracts for the installation of the structure. Within a reasonable period of time
following the deposit with the City of an amount equal to or exceeding the fixed price for the
purchase and installation of the structure, the City shall issue a Notice to Proceed upon the
approval of a resolution by the City Council. The passage of a resolution by the City Council for
the approval of a contract for the purchase and installation of the structure shall be within its sole
and unfettered discretion.
6. Purchase and Installation. Once the Notice to Proceed has been issued to the
selected vendor(s), the City shall be responsible for ensuring that the structure is purchased and
installed in accordance with the bid documents and complete the installation in a reasonably
prompt and diligent manner. Ace -It shall have the right to approve all proposed change orders
that would have the effect of increasing the fixed price of the procurement and installation
contracts. Ace -It understands and agrees that it shall be solely responsible for the payment of any
such change orders. The City shall be responsible for any change orders initiated by the City, but
not agreed to by Ace -It.
7. Purchase and Installation of Structure. The City agrees to supervise the
purchase and installation of the structure upon the Aspen Golf and Tennis Club using its Asset
Management and Parks & Recreation employees. The installation of the structure shall, to the
fullest extent reasonably feasible, not interfere with the City's normal and usual summer tennis
programming.
8. Ownership of the Structure. It is understood by the parties hereto that the City
shall own the structure after it is purchased. Despite the fact that the proposed structure will be
purchased and installed by the City with funds furnished by Ace -It as set forth in this Agreement,
Ace -It expressly agrees that it shall not claim any title, equitable or otherwise, in any real or
personal property associated with the acquisition and installation of the proposed structure, or
any related facilities constructed or otherwise provided by the City.
9. Naming Rights. City understands and agrees that Ace -It, following
completion of construction of the indoor air supported tennis structure, in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the Agreement, shall have the right to offer naming rights for certain
facilities, amenities or fixtures associated with the Indoor Tennis Facility, tennis courts, and
related amenities, as an inducement to potential donors. City covenants and agrees with Ace -It
that City will honor such naming rights subject to the following conditions and procedures:
(a) The facility, amenity or fixture is listed on the City- approved Schedule of Naming
Opportunities attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made part hereof by this reference.
(b) Each amenity or fixture made available for naming rights shall have the right limited to a
reasonable period of time. (i.e. the useful life of the amenity or fixture.)
(c) The particular donor has exercised its naming rights within one (1) year following the date
of the donor's contribution or pledge, whichever first occurs.
(d) City is given an opportunity to approve the name chosen for a facility, amenity or fixture to
ensure good taste and compatibility with the overall design of the Tennis Facility(s) and
neighboring facilities; provided, however, that City shall not unreasonably withhold its approval
of names chosen by donors.
(e) City approves in writing any portion of a facility, amenity or fixture that is not listed on
attached Exhibit `B" for which an offer has been made by a potential donor, which approval
shall include the chosen name and, however, City shall not unreasonably withhold its approval of
names chosen by donors, eventually, the design of the sign that is proposed to be placed on or
near the portion of the facility, amenity or fixture chosen to be named.
(f) The design of all signs proposed to be placed on or near a facility, amenity or fixture
identified on attached Exhibit `B" shall be approved in advance by city, and shall be in
compliance with the sign regulations of the City of Aspen. City shall not unreasonably withhold
its approval of a proposed sign, but shall determine the appropriateness of the design and text
thereof in the context of good taste and the overall design of the Tennis Facility(s) and
neighboring facilities.
10. Additional Covenants of City. City further covenants and agrees as follows:
a. The City shall dedicate and thereafter reserve the land necessary for the
installation of the proposed structure for a period of twenty (20) years from the
date of this Agreement; subject, however, to any annual land use approvals that
may be required for the installation and operation of the facility.
b. The City shall be responsible for the cost of putting up and taking down
the structure at the start and end of every winter tennis season.
c. The City shall be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the proposed
structure and the operation of any winter tennis program created by the
City. Ace -It shall be consulted before the implementation and for the
continuing operation of any winter tennis programs operated by the City.
d. The City shall be responsible for any housing mitigation obligations that
may be required by the Aspen Land Use Code for the construction and
operation of the proposed structure.
e. The City shall not charge Ace -It for any Community Development
planning fees that may be associated with the installation of the structure.
11 The City shall continue to own, operate and maintain, for a period of no
less than twenty (20) years from the date of this Agreement, no less than
four (4) full sized indoor tennis courts during the months of November
through March of each calendar year; provided, however, that:
i. the City may replace the four (4) indoor tennis courts with a facility equal
to or larger than the existing indoor operation;
ii. the structure can safely and efficiently be used during the entire twenty (20)
year period;
iii. the facility is operated as a public facility;
iv. the facility can be installed and operated according to land use approvals
granted by the City as required by the City Land Use Codes;
v. the facility can be operated economically as describe in subsection g, below;
and,
vi. The parties hereto do not decide to implement the Alternative Plan, in
which case this subsection (f) shall apply to two (2) full sized indoor
tennis courts.
g. Notwithstanding any language to the contrary contained herein, the City
may reduce the length of winter operations or even cease winter
operations (installing the bubble structure) if the City determines, in its
sole discretion, that it is no longer economically feasible to continue
winter operations for tennis. In the event that the City determines to curtail
or cease winter operations, Ace -It will be consulted beforehand.
11. Additional Covenants of Ace - It. The parties hereto understand that the success
of this proposed endeavor will depend upon the City granting the necessary land use approvals
required by the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Accordingly, Ace -It further covenants and agrees
as follows:
i. Ace -It shall make application with the City's Community Development
Department for all requisite land use approvals; and
ii. Ace -It shall conduct outreach activities with the neighbors of the proposed facility
and other interested members of the public in order to educate the public on the proposal for an
indoor tennis facility and receive comments and suggestions for improving the land use
application.
12. Notices to Donors. All donors shall receive a receipt on behalf of Ace -It
notifying them of the conditions imposed upon their donations as set forth herein and any
relevant conditions set forth in the development order obtained as part of the land use approval
process. The notice shall be approved as to form and content by the City Attorney.
13. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or
unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of their
Agreement itself or any other provision hereof, and there shall be substituted for the affected
provision, a valid and enforceable provision as similar as possible in substance and effect to the
affected provision.
14. Governing Law, Jurisdiction. The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern
the interpretation, validity, performance and enforcement of this Agreement. Any legal action
brought in connection with this Agreement shall be commenced in the District Court of Pitkin
County, Colorado, and each party hereto voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of such court.
15. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon the City and upon the
personal representatives of Ace -It that execute this Agreement. It shall not be interpreted,
construed or implied to benefit any other third parties.
16. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All prior representations or
agreements relating to the subject matter hereof, whether written or oral, are herby merged into
this Agreement.
17. Advisory Committee: The Aspen City Council may decide, in its sole
discretion, to establish a Tennis Advisory Committee to assist the City in making decisions
affecting the design, operations, or maintenance of the tennis facility. In the event that the Aspen
City Council establishes such a committee, it shall simultaneously adopt By -Laws setting forth
the composition of membership of the committee, the powers and duties of the committee, and
for the conduct of business of the committee in substantially the form as set forth in Exhibit C,
appended hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the
day and year first above written.
CITY: THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
a Colorado municipal corporation
By:
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
ACE -IT:
By:
JPW- saved: 7/6/2011 -1593- G: \john \word \agr \ace - it.doc
Exhibits:
"A ": Site Plan and air supported membrane structure
"B ": List of Approved Naming Rights
"C ": By -Laws - Tennis Advisory Committee
Exhibit A:
-/
rt L.
ii
. 4 .. . / i 401.,„,,____ _ • '11' ■ZI
It
'II I a/
■
0 i' .. _____ ,..... a) 1111 C-D
Ai
�
II II II
II II I I_ II ;� IlL
` I I
1
tii.:____________ .
Aspe Tennis Center .
1
1
Exhibit `B"
ACE -IT request permission to offer the potential components for naming opportunities subject to
City Council approval of specific name chosen by donor:
Bubble structure
Individual courts
Landscaping
Seating or benches
Current reception building/office or reception area
Bricks on patio areas or paths
We also request permission to acknowledge donors on a plaque to be displayed in reception or
appropriate area
Exhibit "C"
BY -LAWS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
TENNIS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(a) The City of Aspen Tennis Advisory Committee shall be made up of 5 individuals
representing the following groups: youth needs (1 representative), adult needs (1
representative), tennis professional needs (1 representative), and at large
community needs (2 representatives).
(b) All members of the Tennis Advisory Committee, at the time of their appointment,
shall be residents of Pitkin County for a period of no less than one (1) year, with the
exception of 1 representative who may come from down valley (Glenwood Springs
to Aspen) as to represent the potential tennis contingent in the valley who may
utilize this facility. Members shall continue to be residents of Pitkin County during
their participation as members of the Tennis Advisory Committee. Residence for
purposes of this section shall mean having a principal residence in the City of Aspen
or Pitkin County, as appropriate, with only occasional absences from the City of
Aspen or Pitkin County not exceeding 3 months in any calendar year.
(c) No member of the City Council, Mayor, city employee, or any appointed officials
shall be eligible to serve on the Tennis Advisory Committee.
(d) The Tennis Advisory Committee shall remain in effect until 1 year following the
initial opening and operations of the Indoor Tennis Facility. At that time the need
for such committee functions can be reviewed by City Council.
Section 3. Powers and Duties. The Tennis Advisory Committee shall have the following powers
and duties, all of which shall be exercised subject to the laws of the State of Colorado, including, but
not limited to, the Colorado Open Meetings Laws and the Colorado Open Records Act, and in
accordance with the public interest:
(a) To consider, advise and recommend to the City Council and the City's professional
staff on matters relating to the following:
* The formulation and implementation of guidelines, policies and procedures
relating to the use and operation of the Indoor Tennis Structure.
* The programming and scheduling of all uses of the Indoor Tennis facility
and the establishment of scheduling at the facility as to priorities consistent
with other Public Recreation facilities.
* All fee schedules for public or private use of the Indoor facilities should be
adopted by the City Council as part of its annual budgeting process and
incorporated in the City's annual fee ordinance, following consideration and
advice and recommendation of the Tennis Advisory Committee. The fee
schedules adopted should be properly allocated between youth activities,
persons' abilities to pay, availability of facilities, and frequency of uses of
the facilities. In addition, the fee schedule should reflect usage by local
residents and non - residents.
* The hiring, performance and termination of the City's professional staff
employed to operate and maintain the indoor tennis facility;
* Any other issues, concerns, suggestions or recommendations determined by
the Tennis Advisory Committee to be related to efficient and economical
use, operation and maintenance of the physical plant or programming within
the Indoor Tennis Facility, or any other matters referred to the Tennis
Advisory Committee by the City Council or professional staff.
Section 4. Rules of Procedure. With the consent of the City, the Tennis Advisory
Committee may amend these By -Laws at any time to establish such additional rules of procedure as
it deems necessary and appropriate not inconsistent with the original Agreement between the City
and Ace -It, including the following:
(a) A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of no less than four (3)
members. If a quorum is present the affirmative act of a majority of the members
present shall be the act of the Tennis Advisory Committee.
(b) The Tennis Advisory Committee shall establish regular meetings with special
meetings being called by the Chair of the Tennis Advisory Committee on at least
twenty four (24) hours notice to all members, provided, however, that special
meetings may be held on shorter notice if all members of the Tennis Advisory
Committee are present or have waived notice thereof.
(d) The City's professional staff shall be notified of all regular and special meetings.
Notice to the City's professional staff shall be accomplished by providing written
notice to the City's Director of Recreational Services.
(e) All special and regular meetings of the Tennis Advisory Committee shall be open to
the public except duly authorized executive sessions called in accordance with the
State of Colorado Open Meetings Law (Sections 24 -6 -401, et seq.) Citizens shall be
given a reasonable opportunity to be heard during a portion of all public meetings.
(f) To assist the Tennis Advisory Committee and the City's professional staff to
establish operational policies, the following decision making process shall be
followed:
(i) The City's professional staff shall prepare operating policies and procedures
for all activities offered at the Indoor Tennis Facility. Said policies and
procedures shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, personnel policies
and procedures, operational policies and procedures, fee schedules, and
event scheduling. Before any such operating policies and procedures are
implemented or amended, the City's professional staff shall forward the
same to the Tennis Advisory Committee for its review and approval.
(ii) In the event that the Tennis Advisory Committee does not approve a
particular policy or procedure, in whole or in part, it shall meet with the
City's professional staff in an effort to reach consensus on the particular
policy or procedure not approved by the Tennis Advisory Committee.
(iii) In the event that the Tennis Advisory Committee and the City's professional
staff are not able to reach agreement on a particular policy or procedure, the
dispute shall be forwarded to the City Council for resolution at the earliest
opportunity. Both the Tennis Advisory Committee and the City's staff shall
have an opportunity to address the matter in front of City Council. City
Council's decision in such disputes shall be final.
(g) The City shall provide a meeting space for all duly noticed meetings of the Tennis
Advisory Committee, and shall provide all reasonably related administrative services
for the proper function of the Committee. If and to the extent requested by the
Tennis Advisory Committee, a member of the City's professional staff shall attend
duly noticed meetings of the Tennis Advisory Committee, and shall keep records
and minutes of the meetings so attended.
Attachment `B"
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION
TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
CC: STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER
CHRIS BENDON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
MEETING DATE: APRIL 20, 2009
RE: INDOOR TENNIS COURTS
Request of Council:
Staff and members of the tennis community are seeking direction from Council regarding a
partnership for the purpose of constructing a membrane structure over 4 of the 6 tennis courts
located at the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club. The Decision points we are seeking at this time are:
1. Is Council ok with the construction of a membrane structure over 4 tennis courts
located at the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club for the purpose of providing indoor
tennis 6 months of the year? (Funds for capital construction to be raised entirely
by the Tennis Community.)
2. The City will operate and provide oversight of the operations of the courts both
during the winter and summer months under a professional services agreement for
a period of 3 years at which time we will re- evaluate the operation.
Individuals interested in seeing public indoor tennis become a reality in Aspen are requesting of
Council the approval to move forward with fund raising efforts in order to construct and operate
4 indoor tennis courts within an air supported membrane structure at the Aspen Golf & Tennis
location.
Staff has been working with representatives of the tennis community recently in pursuing further
information regarding the construction and operation of an air supported indoor tennis structure
to be located at the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club. The tennis community is pursuing this direction
due to the fact that the private clubs are eliminating their indoor tennis facilities or have
increased pricing to where many locals can no longer afford to be a member. A priority in
constructing the membrane structure over the existing courts thus creating indoor tennis during
the winter months is to provide and maintain public access to tennis courts in the winter as we do
in the summer.
This group approached Council at a March 10` work session asking for the approval to move
forward and work with staff in gathering further information for Council regarding this idea.
Council agreed to look at this idea with the understanding that the tennis community would raise
all of the approximate $500,000 to $600,000 in funds necessary for the capital construction and
contingency for the membrane structure. In addition Council identified that the operational costs
would not significantly affect the current subsidy level of tennis operations and the General Fund
budget. Staff feels an initial 3 year contract would be entered into between the contractor and the
City to be revisited at that time and evaluate current operations and how the future operations
should look.
Maintenance of the courts would be provided by staff with existing funds to include:
• Set up and take down of the membrane structure
• Storage of the membrane structure at Parks each summer
• Snow removal from the site following the operator blowing the snow from around the
structure.
Staff feels that if the tennis community raises the capital funds necessary for the construction of
the air supported structure, that the operations will come very close to the current tennis subsidy
level (see pro forma attachment provided by Beth Mehall). At this time staff has identified other
temporary indoor municipal operations for which this pro forma is working. Under a
concessionaire or professional services agreement, Steamboat Springs and Salt Lake City each
have indoor tennis operations that are working well. Staff feels that the model of a professional
services agreement works and that the current pro forma should be flexible as to react to the
needs of the operations.
Further information as to how these operations work and could work in Aspen may be found in
the "Discussion" portion of this memo.
Previous Council Action:
On March 10` Council provided direction to staff that assistance should be provided to the tennis
community in gathering further information regarding the introduction and operations of indoor
tennis at the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club location. Furthermore, Council identified that the cost
of the capital construction would be borne by the tennis community and not the City of Aspen
and that operations would not adversely affect the general fund subsidy.
Discussion:
Staff first contacted Welch Tennis Courts who constructed the existing clay (har -tru) courts.
Welch said that covering and maintaining the existing courts as indoor courts was not a problem.
They further identified that the air introduction systems used today spread the air flow out such
that they do not affect the play. They also are adjustable to a point of keeping the humidity level
satisfactory as to not promote drips inside the structure and at the same time not to dry out the
court surface. Staff spoke with private clubs who operate indoor tennis courts (Flying Horse
CC, Colorado Springs; Ranch CC, Westminster) and they identified minimal maintenance on the
indoor courts as compared to the outdoor operations. Welch Tennis Courts Inc. repeated this
sentiment. In addition Welch is able to assist us in retro -fitting the irrigation lines to the tennis
courts and valve off what would remain as the two outdoor courts such that we have a system
that is functional for both indoor and outdoor applications and free of any issue with freezing in
the winter. They have constructed these types of facilities and retro -fits in the past and are
willing to assist with this application.
Once the courts are constructed we have found a couple municipal applications that are similar to
how we see the operations being handled. Steamboat Springs and Salt Lake City each have
covered courts which operate during the winter with 4 to 5 courts. Each of them is using a
professional services contract or concessionaire type contract for operation of the courts. In each
case the City takes care of the capital maintenance and about 80% of the utilities. Staff feels this
same type of professional services agreement would work in Aspen as well. Other
municipalities such as Park City and Breckenridge have indoor tennis, but it is attached to their
recreation centers and the fees generated and the expenditures are comingled with the recreation
facility. South Suburban Parks & Recreation District also has a 6 court facility that remains an
indoor operation year round. They too find this facility to be highly successful as the courts are
utilized 80% of the time. South Suburban operates the facility with paid district employees and
not a contract, but finds the operation to be successful and well used in their opinion.
If we were to construct a cover over the existing courts next to the golf course this would have
ancillary benefits as well. The restaurant operation at the golf course has been willing to operate
in the winter months during the Nordic season, and by adding a tennis operation they have more
patrons to market and support this operation. This benefits the tennis players as well as keeping
a successful restaurant operation at our golf course.
By constructing the air supported structure over the current court location we also have parking
available and restrooms adjacent in the pro shop /restaurant.
Under City of Aspen code, the tennis membrane structure may be granted a temporary approval
for 3 years. At which time if the structure was to remain it would require a PUD amendment.
Under the PUD amendment housing mitigation would have to be addressed. The addition of
winter operations would generate approximately 1.5 FTE's, (dependent upon the level of
programming) and require the mitigation of 1 bedroom or the cash equivalent of $130,000 per
FTE or $195,000 in this case. The City still has housing credits remaining from the construction
of the Water Place housing for Council's information.
Financial/Budget:
Staff has found that the professional services contract works within other municipal tennis
operations at a minimal subsidy by the City. The subsidy is identified as solely due to the utility
costs and some maintenance. In other municipal operations we are finding that the pro usually
picks up 20% of the utility costs and the City takes the remainder. The remainder of utility costs
is found to be from $20,000 to $25,000 annually. Currently the City of Aspen tennis operations
are subsidized by $30,000 annually, so as identified in the attached pro forma, staff sees the
indoor tennis operation as viable and virtually no additional impact to the General Fund subsidy
if we go with a professional service agreement to operate the courts.
Staff feels the pro forma is conservative in showing a successful operation with the use of
existing city funds which subsidize tennis. We feel that the technology of the structure will help
to reduce the utility costs further. In addition we feel that pricing could be increased by 5% if
needed and generate another $12,000 to $15,000 annually, but in this pro forma we kept
programs affordable and accessible.
Environmental Impacts:
Council will find by looking at attachment "C ", that the current technology of the membrane
structure we are looking at is as energy efficient as you can hope for in one of these air supported
structures. The estimated costs for energy are below what we are being quoted from other courts
operated under an older membrane structure.
Recommended Action:
Staff feels this operation will work in Aspen. The tennis community should raise all necessary
funds for the capital construction of the membrane and the retro -fit of irrigation lines necessary
to cover the 4 courts. All funds will be donated to the City who will oversee the construction of
this project. Capital Costs identified in this memo include sufficient funds to cover city asset
management overseeing the project.
An RFP process should take place through the city with the tennis community involved in order
to seek out and hire the proper individual(s) for this type of operation (community access must
be a priority). The City would contract with a tennis pro in a professional service agreement and
have them handle all expenditures and the collection of all revenues in operating the courts. The
City would cover up to $30,000, or the current tennis subsidy level of tennis operational costs to
assist with utilities.
Staff recommends moving forward with this project and feels it fills a recreational void in the
community.
Managers Comments:
Attachments:
"A" pro forma for tennis operations under a professional services agreement
"B" Memo from the tennis community representative(s)
"C" Energy Information
WORKSESSION SUMMARY Attachment "C"
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
THRU: STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER
CC: JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION
MEETING DATE: JULY 14, 2009
RE: INDOOR TENNIS DISCUSSION
Summary
At the July 14` work session, staff and Beth Mehall; an ACE -IT representative, approached
Council to see what their philosophical views and feelings would be regarding the addition of a
permanent structure covering two of the tennis courts. Staff felt that there were opportunities in
this plan which could benefit both tennis and the golf course, but at the same time recognized
that a permanent structure would create new challenges as well as opposed to the Temporary
Membrane Structures.
Council informed the ACE -IT group and staff that they could not comment in advance to the
level of approval they may or may not provide to a project until it came through the proper
channels with all pertinent information to render a decision. Also mentioned was the consensus
that this community really doesn't wish to see any further structures go up around town and that
a permanent structure near the entrance to Aspen would be of great concern. Furthermore, staff
heard from the Council members that it was felt that the Membrane Structure would be the first
step in trying indoor tennis at this location to see if it indeed would be supported. This seemed to
be the preferred route at this time. If Indoor tennis shows a great need then a permanent
structure might receive more consideration at that site.
At this time the ACE -IT group needs to decide what path they wish to take. If it's the membrane
structure, they can pursue a temporary use permit and if the choose to go for the permanent
structure they must meet all requirements set forth. In either case it is clear to ACE -IT and staff
that this venture shall not cost the City of Aspen any additional funding over what is spent on
tennis at this time.
Council Direction:
Council has left the decision of pursuing a membrane structure or a permanent structure to the
ACE -IT group and projects will be weighed on the merit of the components brought forth to
Council in the future.
Attachment "D"
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
CC: STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER
JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION
MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 2010
RE: ACE -IT TENNIS GROUP & INDOOR TENNIS FACILITY
• Summary:
Council will find attached an Agreement for consideration by and between Ace - It (the group
raising funds for indoor tennis) and the City of Aspen. Ace -It wishes to ratify this agreement
with Council and move full speed ahead on fund raising efforts to hopefully construct the indoor
tennis facility in the fall of 2010.
Primary discussion at this time should be focused around section (8) of the agreement addressing
naming rights this group is seeking as part of their fundraising efforts.
The group has re- organized themselves in 2010, hired a professional fund raiser, and hopes to
raise the some $600,000 +/- needed to construct the membrane structure over 4 courts. The costs
include the membrane structure, the footers for the anchoring of the structure, the air and heating
systems, the lighting, and the necessary retro -fit work to the sub - surface irrigation on the har -true
courts such that they work properly within the indoor setting, and any other costs associated with
the construction of the courts.
Attached is the Agreement by and between Ace - It and the City of Aspen for which Ace -It hopes
to get Council's blessing. The Parks & Recreation Department understands that Council has
stated in the past that this cannot cost the City additional funding. The plan is for Ace -It to raise
all capital costs, at which time a Professional Tennis Instructor would be contracted with to
operate the facility at their own cost. Public access would be a priority in operating these courts
as well.
Background:
In early 2009, a group interested in raising funds to construct an air supported membrane
structure for the purpose of Indoor Tennis formed and called themselves Ace - It. They came to
City Council informally to announce their goal of constructing an air supported structure over 4
of the tennis courts located at the Aspen Golf & Tennis Club and asked for Council's approval of
this. Council informally agreed to look at this and support it as long as it didn't cost the City any
funding. (Site plan and membrane structure information included in attachments).
Council felt at that time that as long as this didn't require any City Funds it was acceptable to
them. The Ace -It group was directed such that they must raise all capital funds associated with
the construction of the facility and the operations could not depend upon City funds for
operations. (See attachment "C" for a pro forma of operations)
The agreement attached identifies the responsibility of Ace -It to collect all funding necessary and
associated with the construction of the membrane structure or bubble.
Current Issues:
The single most items to be looked at in this agreement which has not been deeply discussed in
the past are the list of naming opportunities. Ace -It is moving along as in the past and within the
parameters set by Council, however, in an effort to boost fundraising efforts the Ace -It group is
taking a similar path as did SPARC with the ARC by identifying what elements of the indoor
tennis bubble and associated fixtures may be sold for their naming rights.
Council has provided direction as to funding, what can be constructed on the City's property, and
operations, but naming rights are void in previous discussions and draft agreements.
Manager's Comments:
Attachments/Enclosures:
• Agreement Document
• Exhibit "A" of Agreement — Site Plan and Membrane Structure
• Exhibit `B" of Agreement — Requested naming opportunities
• Attachment "C" — Potential Pro Forma for Operations
• Letter of Intent from Ace -It
Attachment "E"
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
THRU: STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER
JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION
FROM: TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
DATE: APRIL 28, 2010
RE: RECAP OF APRIL 27, 2010 WORKSESSION REGARDING INDOOR
TENNIS
Summary:
At the April 27, 2010 work session, staff and the group ACE -IT (interested party in fundraising
to construct an air supported membrane structure for indoor tennis) met with Council to review a
proposed agreement between the City and ACE -IT and to update Council where the group was in
their efforts.
Council identified several concerns in the agreement as did the City Attorney and City Manager.
Staff is going back to agreement and addressing the concerns identified. Concerns as staff
understands them are as follows:
• Ensure that all parties understand that under a temporary use permit you may only
operate 6 month of the year.
• Language needs to be included in the agreement identifying the need for the land use
approval (temporary use permit) must be approved by Council for the agreement to be in
effect for construction of the membrane structure.
• Outreach to the Community at large must take place as well as the neighbors due to the
recommended location being at the entrance to Aspen.
• Why Aspen Golf & Tennis Club and not Iselin; staff will come back with that
information when presenting the agreement.
• Detail on the pro forma and a contingency plan. How are the utilities being paid, what
would the operations look like, how is the set up and take down of the structure being
handled and funded.
• Public Access must be the priority
• The term of the naming rights should coincide with the temporary use permit.
• Narrow the naming opportunities to 15 or fewer realistic components.
Staff is working on the agreement language to address all concerns and will provide detail as to
the operational pro forma and specific questions regarding the utilities, set up and take down of
the structure and a contingency plan for operations if the original pro forma does not pan out.
Additionally, staff will obtain more information from Welch Tennis regarding the detail and cost
of retro -fitting the courts for the membrane structure and seek information on other facilities
using the air supported membrane structure over clay courts.
Staff expects this agreement to come before Council either late in May or early in June if any
other concerns arise.
Attachment "F"
Aspen Community Effort for Indoor Tennis
Seasonal Indoor Tennis Facility Site Selection Summary
ACE -IT and the Aspen Recreation Department have studied possible sites for indoor tennis for the last
three years. The City of Aspen currently has two tennis facilities: The first is Aspen Golf and Tennis
Center off Highway 82, with six outdoor har -tru surface courts. The second site is Iselin with two hard
courts located near the ARC. There are currently no plans to build additional courts. Although other sites
were considered, and may still evolve in the distant future, the above sites were our primary focus. If, at a
later date, finances and circumstances dictated a currently unidentified additional location where courts
could be constructed, the same structure could, at that time, be used at that location. The Aspen Golf and
Tennis Center emerged as the clear solution. Below is a summary of primary considerations taken into
account.
Flexibility: The Golf and Tennis Center Site is the only site that can accommodate two to four courts
using the existing set -up with very little added infrastructure. Iselin, can accommodate two courts, with
three the maximum possible, using the existing two courts and expanding west toward the berm. Three
courts would require significant and costly foundation work on west side, and the construction of an
additional court. It would also entail slight encroachment into trails. Especially with the addition of the
new artificial turf field adjacent to the court area, there would never be room to expand. Park City fills
seven indoor public courts with much longer hours than Aspen is proposing. Steamboat fills six. Limiting
Aspen to two or three courts is very short sighted, limits programs, and limits financial potential resulting
in increased cost to users.
Existing Layout: The existing layout of the Golf and Tennis Center allows for storage, reception,
viewing and office space between the two sets of courts with no additional construction or foundation.
Foundation for a similar area at Iselin would need to be constructed. Furthermore, the existing layout at
the Golf and Tennis Center allows for covering either two courts or four, (structures can be expanded or
reduced with panels) so there is a great deal of flexibility.
Existing Infrastructure: The Golf and Tennis Center has infrastructure in place that is underutilized in
the winter. There is plenty of parking, existing restrooms and lockers, a restaurant, and it is on the main
bus line. At Iselin, ARC restrooms are much further away meaning additional restrooms may need to be
built. Parking is already overcrowded, and although tennis would not generate a significant increase,
convenience for tennis players would be impacted, especially at peak times when the high school lots are
already needed for overflow. Any additional demand for parking is a concern at the ARC.
Visual Impacts: Wherever this facility is located there will be visual impacts. The Golf and Tennis
Center is in our main corridor, whereas Iselin is not. Aspen prides itself on being a highly active
community and having facilities to accommodate those activities. We have chosen to allow chairlifts to
run up our mountains. There is a half pipe at the base of buttermilk, artificial turf and lights at the high
school. Aspen's main tennis center is already located at the Golf and Tennis Center, and only that
existing footprint will be used. No trails will be affected. There are already fences and parking visible
from the highway. The existing courts are 12 feet below the highway, reducing impact somewhat. Visual
impact is limited to seeing the structure while driving by. No views are blocked, and there are no
individual property owners significantly impacted. The structure is white, and will be up primarily while
its surroundings are also white. Landscaping and large tree planting is planned, and can soften the impact
to some degree.
Court Preparation Cost savings: Every year the recreation department spends time winterizing all six
courts. The lines must be removed before winter sets in. In the spring, several weeks of maintenance is
required to recondition the clay after it has been under snow. Covering four of these courts in the winter
will result in significant cost and time savings, because only routine maintenance would be necessary.
Savings could more than cover the set up and take down of the structure, and the courts would be ready
for outdoor use earlier. If the structure were at another location, there would not be this benefit.
Continuity: Aspen's existing programs are currently run out of the Golf and Tennis Center as all six
courts are needed. Continuity, other than a few days for set up and take down of the structure, would be
seamless using this site in the winter as well.
Proximity to public transportation and schools: An advantage of the Iselin site is its proximity to
schools. Both sites are on existing bus routes and near existing stops. The Golf Course Site is on the main
route.
Surface: Significant consideration was given to the existing surfaces (hard at Iselin vs hartru- clay at the
Golf and Tennis Center) and how these surfaces would respond to being enclosed. Hart courts require
moisture, which is currently turned off when the courts are unused in the winter to prevent freezing.
Welch, The Company that built the hartru courts, was consulted and confirmed that with minimal
retrofitting, pipes can be valued to isolate those needing water circulation, and freezing will not be an
issue. This is a common practice and is of no concern. (See letter attached) Additionally, vendors and
similar facilities were contact to review potential condensation issues inside the structure.
Vendors confirmed that improvements in air flow have reduced problems experienced with older
structures. Similar structures (notably a three - year -old four court clay bubble in Colorado Springs, which
is very similar to the one proposed) are not experiencing problems.
Covenants: Current covenants at Iselin limit construction. No new structures are allowed to be built for
another two years. Waiting is an option, but with the above limitations there is no reason why this would
become a preferred site later, and no reason to delay year round tennis.
Conclusion: Indoor tennis in the valley is long overdue. The Recreation Dept. has investigated the use of
indoor tennis in other resort communities similar to Aspen and found the demand for indoor tennis to
be justifiable "and it would be successful. The Golf and Tennis Center site IS the tennis center in Aspen.
The city has no plans to create additional courts, and doing so would create more of an impact than using
an existing foot print and existing infrastructure. Currently, courts sitting empty and unused in the winter
at the Golf and Tennis Center site create their own aesthetic impact. Enclosing those courts uses an
existing footprint and existing, underutilized infrastructure, therefore creating less impact than any other
location. It is, of course a very visible site, off highway 82, and this is a concern. However, the impacts
here are limited primarily to seeing the structure while driving by. The site is 12 feet below Highway 82.
It does not impact any trails or views, and it will be a temporary structure over an existing facility. ACE -
IT and the Recreation Department propose jointly that the Aspen Golf and Tennis Center be the future
site of year -round public tennis.
Attachment "G"
Indoor Tennis Proforma -02
Scenario Manager
Mar 15, 2011
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Seenerio l Scsnado 2 S4aaifla,# .
Operator Private Contractor City of Aspen City of Aspen
Pro Compensation n/a Hourly (Regular $25 and Lessons $75) Salary Plus Private Lessons
Number of Courts 4 Courts 4 Courts 4 Courts
WP- Indoor Tennis Proforma-05
Energy Calculations
Mar 15,2011
[A] [B] [C]
2 Courts 4 Courts
us *o clksltlon
[a] Average Hours of lighting Per Day 8.00 8.00
[b] Days of Use 210.00 210.00
[c] Cost of kWh $0.12 $0.12
[d] Number of Lights 20.00 40.00
[e] Subtotal Lighting $4,032.00 $8,064.00
SiMtfil * er Calculation
[f] Hours Inflation Blower Runs 24.00 24.00
[g] Days of Use 210.00 210.00
[h] Cost of kWh $0.12 $0.12
[I] Inflation Blower Power (5HP or 3.73kW) 3.73 3.73
0] Subtotal Inflation Blower $2,255.90 $2,255.90
Oat Sae Catwrlation
[k] Hours Heater Blower Runs 12.00 12.00
[I] Days of Use 210.00 210.00
[m] Cost of kWh $0.12 $0.12
[n] Heater Blower Power (4 court 22HP or 16.4kW) 5.20 16.40
[o] Subtotal Heater Blower $1,572.48 $4,959.36
Gas — z Calculation
[p] Units of Gas Used (MFC) 2,355.00 4,173.00
[q] Cost of Gas MCF (1000 cf) $5.00 $5.00
[r] Subtotal Gas Heating $11,775.00 $20,865.00
Salirlise Gain Savings
[s] Subtotal Gas Heating 11,775.00 20,865.00
[t] Solar Heating Gain of 15 °F Savings - 15.00% - 15.00%
[u] Subtotal Solar Hear Gain Savings - $1,766.25 - $3,129.75
[v] Total Energy Cost $17,869.13 $33,014.51
WP- Indoor Tennis Proforma -11
Scenario 1 P &L
Mar 15, 2011
[A] [B] [C] [o] [E] [F]
Scenario 1
Operator Private Contractor
Pro Compensation n/a
Number of Courts 4 Courts
Meson +!+►
[a] Revenue Winter $186,576
[b] Revenue Summer $45,504
[c] Revenue Shoulder $36,448
[d] Revenue Grand Total $268,528
Ceilff...Z tel f Pro
4b�t f` rl'
[e] Expenses Winter $94,603 $36,412 n/a $131,015
[f] Expenses Summer $62,250 $0 n/a $62,250
[91 Expenses Shoulder $25,850 $0 n/a $25,850
[h] Expenses Grand Total $182,703 $36,412 $0 $219,115
[1] Net Revenue $49,413
WP- Indoor Tennis Proforma -12
Scenario 2
P &L
Mar 15, 2011
[A] [B] [C] [ [E] [9
taw* It
Operator City of Aspen
Hourly (Regular $25 and Lessons
Pro Compensation $75)
Number of Courts 4 Courts
11GaNrb�'
[a] Revenue Winter $186,576
[b] Revenue Summer $45,504
[c] Revenue Shoulder $36,448
[d] Revenue Grand Total $268,528
4 COWS.*
t flea- 4 , POIlt
COI li tgAtait a ES01401
[e] Expenses Winter $94,603 $36,412 $37,740 $168,755
[f] Expenses Summer $62250 $0 $25,160 $87,410
[g] Expenses Shoulder $25,850 $0 $12,580 $38,430
[h] Expenses Grand Total $182,703 $36,412 $75,480 $294,595
[i] Net Revenue - $25,067
WP- Indoor Tennis Proforma -13
Scenario 3 P&L
Mar 15, 2011
(Al [B] [C] [D] [E] [Fl
scenario 3
Operator City of Aspen
Pro Compensation Salary Plus Private Lessons
Number of Courts 4 Courts
: 4
8euon
[a] Revenue Winter $186,576
[b] Revenue Summer $45,504
[c] Revenue Shoulder $36,448
[d] Revenue Grand Total $268,528
4 Courts -
Contradtor 4 Courts pro toht
COS COACost Waage; 41411000414
[e] Expenses Winter $94,603 $36,412 $53,340 $184,355
[f] Expenses Summer $62,250 $0 $35,560 $97,810
[g] Expenses Shoulder $25,850 $0 $17,780 $43,630
[h] Expenses Grand Total $182,703 $36,412 $106,680 $325,795
[i] Net Revenue - $57,267
. R
Attachment "H"
•
T �� � -. ooe _0_0_0 , •....,.., .
• II
1 i 1. i
'; 111 .ME
01,,,„41,,.., I _ mill: /.
.1-4.: i <1 ::::::: _
..,,,, 1. ...4
. • 4,W ' 1 .5 linil • IMMIMir , .
M L)i1
: : is?-.1 %.:.....,....`-------. ,--..-"' nr- ig■a_. ...A. Art i : BM MN
400,1 "%ENO *Mum milmt. . Z. ip *; • I
. • ''‘c,' !,-)P-e4 C4 fito
-0 :.°'---
0. etalit
.- _ V m
Attachment "I"
P 1
R
0
P .
S � ,
D • 411i-
s , C 7.
E
A
S
o __
N
T
E
N
N
I
S
U mo o..,
B re-- •••,............- .,...... „.., _
E ,
AT ASPEN GOLF CLUB
THE Crry or ASPEN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John Laatsch — Project Manager
THRU: Randy Ready — Assistant City Manager
Scott Miller — Capital Asset Director
Jeff Woods — Manager Parks and Recreation
DATE OF MEMO: July 15, 2011
MEETING DATE: July 19, 2011
RE: Galena Plaza — Conceptual Design Presentation
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff will update City Council on the progress of the Galena
Plaza/parking garage roof repair project. Staff is currently in the Conceptual Design stage of
project development and will be seeking City Council design direction from four (4) Conceptual
Design Options that will be presented. Each Design Option illustrates a different primary design
structure or framework. Staff will be seeking City Council direction on which design
structure /framework to further develop and to obtain concurrence to proceed with the project.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City of Aspen Asset Department staff obtained Council
approval authorizing funding and staff time to provide primary design services for the
comprehensive design of the roof restoration to the City's Parking Garage in September 2009.
Staff received additional City Council direction to proceed with conceptual design of revisions to
North Galena Street, Library Alley and a plaza/roof expansion over the open second level of the
garage in February 2011 at a joint City Council/BOCC work session.
BACKGROUND: In April, 1998 Walker Parking Consultants were retained to review and
report on the condition of the garage to protect the investment and to maximize the useful life of
the parking structure in a cost effective and efficient manner. Short and long term repair
recommendations were made both for the rooftop Plaza and the parking structure. Drainage
issues for the plaza and the structure were noted in this report titled, "Condition Review."
The 2005 Walker Parking Consultants report titled, "Plaza Level Walk Through Assessment,"
recommended complete removal of the existing plaza wear surface, sod, trees and landscaping,
concrete and sidewalk pavers associated with the plaza to the boundaries of the foundation wall
of the facility. (Refer Attachment A) The recommendations then included the installation of a
new waterproofing system and concrete wear surface to the garage roof and a new plaza design
surface. This work would extend the service life of the facility with a protective and sound
waterproofing system. This recommendation was repeated again in the 2007 Walker Parking
Consultants report, a supplement to the "Plaza Level Walk- Through Assessment." The 2007
report included an Opinion of Probable Repair Cost of $1,920,000. •
Page 1 of 5
THE CITY OF ASPEN
In September of 2008 staff obtained proposals from three firms to complete design services
associated with this contract. Following interviews and evaluation of the proposals, Carl
Walker, Inc. was selected as the preferred consultant.
The design team, including staff from the Asset and Parks Departments, held a Community Open
House at the Rio Grande building on May 20, 2010 with a 12:00 pm and a 5:30 pm session. The
open house presented significant information in four areas:
• Project Need: existing conditions of the garage and the garage roof waterproof
membrane;
• Value of the garage to the community and the monetary value of the garage;
• Activity of the Pitkin County Library, including the report, "Library Use and Space
Analysis" and considerations for possible plaza/roof expansion over the open second
level of the garage;
• Development of "sketch" concepts and identification of opportunities and constraints
from numerous preceding meetings with agency and utility stakeholders.
Utilizing the information that has been collected and direction from City Council, staff has been
developing various options/scenarios for a comprehensive design of the project. As part of this
work staff has been considering the constructability, cost and fulfillment of the project
objectives. While the design options are being developed, staff will revisit the design options
with the stakeholders to solicit additional input and recommendations. Staff is proposing a
schedule to complete this phase of work in late January 2012.
City staff slowed the work effort to permit the Pitkin County Library to proceed with the "Library
Use and Space Analysis" study and to engage an Architectural Design Team. On July 12, 2010,
the selected Library Architectural Design Team was introduced to city staff, and staff introduced
the Library Architectural Design Team to the work effort that had been completed to date for the
Galena Plaza. City staff and the Library Architectural Design Team have been coordinating a
linked design effort since July and will continue to do so as the library expansion and parking
garage roof waterproofing/Galena Plaza projects proceed.
DISCUSSION: Staff are presenting four (4) Conceptual Design Options that represent
combinations of desirable elements that staff has heard from the public and from Project
Stakeholders. Each Design Option illustrates a different primary design structure or framework.
Each Design Option will be presented with staff seeking City Council direction on which design
structure/framework to further develop into Criteria Design.
One important base assumption illustrated in the Design Concepts is the inclusion of the Library
Expansion. The ideal development scenario is a sequential coordination of garage roof repair,
plaza reconstruction and expanded library building construction. If the Library Expansion cannot
be fully coordinated with the garage/plaza renovation due to public funding constraints, the
garage/plaza renovation work can still proceed. Flexibility to the western edge of the plaza
would be integrated into the design.
Page 2 of 5
THE CITY OF ASPEN
Funding and funding partners are an important component to this particular project since the
project needs engage with almost every utility, the county library, jail and courthouse, streets,
stormwater management, engineering, parking and parks. The allocation of fund sharing for the
project will be dictated in part by the final design. Staff, however, does see opportunities of cost
sharing and savings by working in a larger project integrating all of our needs at the same time.
While this is a complicated effort, the opportunity to save community resources in man hours and
money is a challenge well worth pursuing. Staff will talk briefly about these opportunities in our
presentation and will incorporate funding options throughout our continued design efforts.
Option 1: Is titled "Plaza"
This design is a strong expression of movement from the fringe areas of the plaza toward its
heart. A central water feature, contrasting paving materials, open areas for special event tents,
and an expanded garage elevator to include a second story overlook platform are proposed. Also
included in the design concept are small gardens and more intimate picnic areas.
The plaza is expanded to the north in order to cover the open parking bays on the second level of
the garage but also to create an overlook to Rio Grande Park and Red Mountain. A grand
stairway from the plaza level to Rio Grande Place is proposed to provide a critical linkage to the
park. An elevator has also been proposed at the northwestern edge of the expanded plaza to
provide adequate ADA public-access and improved connectivity between the plaza level and Rio
Grande Place level. The existing parking lot at the Mill Street/Rio Grande Place intersection has
been redesigned to increase the total available parking by approximately 15 cars, to provide a
better visitor experience and to enhance a park -like connection between Rio Grande Park and
downtown Aspen. Options 1 -3 include variations of these proposed design elements.
With this first option, points of discussion include the proposed one -way circulation of the alley
and North Galena; the preference for a greater pedestrian presence in North Galena versus auto
dominance; modification to Main Street; the grand stairway; expansion of the garage roof to the
north; an elevator to the northwest comer of the plaza is proposed to facilitate better public
access to /from the plaza level; and reconfiguration of parking in front of the garage.
Option 2: Is titled "Quad"
In this option staff has explored a "quad" expression to a large open lawn providing more hard
surfaces, detail gardens to the north expanded end of the plaza, a higher level of pedestrian scale
paving in the alley and North Galena, similar curb line and pedestrian improvements on Main
Street, a slightly modified grand stairway and similar elevator and expanded parking along Rio
Grande Place. Staff has also revised the landscape in front of the jail to better align pedestrian
circulation and to strengthen the circulation tie between the Jail and the Court House. This design
provides opportunities for detail gardens, sheltered sitting areas and greater areas of hard surface
suited for a variety of programming options.
The Option 2 discussion points are similar to Option 1, however the expression of pedestrian
movement is greater. Additional parking is provided in the alley and an improved relationship
between the jail and courthouse is created. -
Page 3 of 5
THE CITY OF ASPEN
Option 3A: Is titled "Park"
The primary characteristic of this option is a large open lawn as the focus of the plaza that then
ties to the Library Expansion, North Galena Street and Library Alley pedestrian improvements,
joined to Main Street with intersection clarification, enhanced curb lines and pedestrian
crossings. An open stage structure has been proposed that provides a venue for outdoor
performances. The rectangular lawn with perimeter shade trees, seat walls, stage and hard
surface circulation provides a great deal of use flexibility within the space. The open lawn
provides ample opportunity for special event use and informal park use. Picnic areas, overlook
areas and gardens are proposed along the north perimeter of the plaza as well.
This Design Option contains many of the design features of Options 1 and 2 but adds a stage
structure intended for special events that is integrated with an improved garage elevator structure.
Option 3B: Is titled "Park 2"
This option is very similar to Option 3 and focuses on the creation of a plaza lawn and improved
alley with an accented pedestrian walk along the south edge of the plaza and an accented walk
from the plaza to Main Street. The garage roof remains the same as the existing condition
without a roof expansion, with the exception of the grand stairway which covers part of the
second level of parking. The proposed elevator provides the only ADA accessible route from the
Rio Grande Park and Garage to South Galena Street. The proposed parking reconfiguration and
green space improvements along Rio Grande Place shown in Options 1 -3 are eliminated.
This design alternative minimizes the scope, cost and elements for discussion.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: We have started the more detailed project costing effort
necessary for the Criteria Design and we will be prepared to look at the magnitude of value for
the design elements within alternative construction scenarios for that next effort. At present we
expect to request a supplemental funding request for necessary engineering consulting efforts
depending on the outcome to this conceptual design review and its related design demands.
The estimate of cost for all options presented is within the range of $3.3 million to 4.5 million for
the parking garage replacement. In addition, there are adjacent projects including utility,
drainage, roadway, parking, and pedestrian elements which may be advantageous to accomplish
during the parking garage repairs. These elements and their associated costs are outlined in
Attachment F and would be funded by multiple funding sources and multiple partners. These
costs are very preliminary costs and are intended to be a starting point for discussion.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The environmental impacts are generally positive with
enhanced stormwater pickup, improved water quality, revitalized landscape and pedestrian
enhancements. Staff will be analyzing the deconstruction of the existing plaza in a manner that
recycles the most materials while maintaining a safe and manageable project site.
Page 4 of 5
r
THE Crn of ASPEN
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that City Council provide a preferred option
for the design of the parking garage replacement. Staff will take this preferred option through a
specific design and costing effort for Council's further review, including funding opportunities
and constraints.
ALTERNATIVES: Stop all design efforts except the plaza deconstruction and garage roof
repair that would include a lawn and walk surface to the existing library.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Galena Plaza Removal Diagram
Attachment B: Galena Plaza Site Plan Option 1-`Plaza'
Attachment C: Galena Plaza Site Plan Option 2- `Quad'
Attachment D: Galena Plaza Site Plan Option 3A- Park'
Attachment E: Galena Plaza Site Plan Option 3B -`Park 2'
Attachment F: Galena Plaza Funding Plaza Partner Diagram
Page5of5
ATTACHMENT A
WHAT IS THE PROJECT? The Garage roof is leaking, causing damage to the
garage structure. Galena Plaza must be removed to repair the garage roof. The
City will be initiating a public process in the summer of 2010 to help determine
what the new plaza design will be over the garage roof.
i 'evl ' Nilik
1 RIO GRANDE
, ; PARK
;,, i tk i l 1 \ ' - , 4 .
C h
r
^ 1 II --"
1 r p- nim
ip 1 .s.
_ , ..., -4, .4„ti- lop, • -
''' , ; . ■O v•-- - pi e 17.7"....."'"...........4 I 1 ,, ,' „:-.:„
, 4 if
1 "__ -__ �_ �, j r y e
, • : 4 i.
r No.-
d
ATIP .1
fr / -
n �r
:-{ 1 1 . j r I r
f e ms,.,, -_ ‘-^t' / +' ,, ` i ` ffil„,
_A
All of the approximate 18" of existing material (paving, planters, turf- grass, trees,
etc.) will be removed to access the entire concrete roof structure for leak repairs.
Roof leak repair is absolutely necessary to protect the longevity of the parking
garage.
elm" GALENA STREET GARAGE. PLAZA alk
CITY OF ASPEN ASSET AND PARKS DEPARTMENT
CC
H
Z
Z
U
F
H
r x
104e, A F< - It a I i y i —E s ` R V a C.J W a
g3 y g � r z A a0
1, .' en ii 1 I i
six
't l - 4 , a 0.
s_ „.....- ,,,, om !,.._ --.-
„,,,,.
_ , _ . 0.,. E
_ 0
- .' i , I 0
iv
' _ .I 1 , /`
J r ,Nr
* / il - i, _ ..
c r ` a
o h h r- I
P
•
it
,.1 " :c. P ii 2 1 li! —
d . 6
z
t5 .. PeA r141R < RR r d 11i cli ~
V
H
z
W
x
U
d
H
H
1.1111111111111 :0 i-
Z
a
a z w a.
z
y a u., O F
r it, s a #x ¢ Fc tN a
5 G k Y N = E O N
;� -9 $g ›- V u � a z
a b h. ii rt .: d C7
II a a
\ \6'
r - ap L 4
.!. -i
0
, -wale* - r% 10
t ; l e J
• P r i�
!Ut
,.,_■ / 7
T3 f
IA /
iii / 6
11 S 7 d S5 20 “i :0 le 8r
* t r \''
p y 1/ §I "Ili' a5 Il a 1
aIS d 2 —i : ,22 Pc ' <E8 $:� ke. A i a
H
z
w
x
U
H
H
H
w
rv° 1116k
= a
I C4
a z
m x - z o:?,
, E ' w �, a
at g _ a - a. O P+
- • •
obi - _ _ = v'
c
ti
ll s z r 'bS _ GL < N Q
cn
ill 90 - L,4
,. it f 1
c„,
VI
y
2 • ' , l et 1 1,. '
, 11 1/1 4, , - -- I r
r;r
it f
I tot
, •
J •
i .. i f
Ill r
1 h z a
V
y 21 ; ; i 2 � u � a .i -g! •-___ a ts
Y 5 WIC l = :- 4 0 €
W
Z
U
EI
E1
. A 4 PI IIIII"NIIIIIIII" MP ' ,. , . ._:. . : .. .. . . ,. . . _,,,..:,... .._,... ._,..,,,,.. : 4111111f r .: ,n: , , *,.
z
( 1 Z &a
v , as a: a M
a a' <Fy > v
% 1 I? $' a c
4 l
.T ,.:, 4.,. , , • v < G L'. �S Se ir°
; :11 ''.*:"...:' ' ' 4 _,
, ,„, 4 . 4 lila
� V
r
. , .,.f1----...,is.,:,,,,,,, ... Lja, ,:
r, u �r�� r1 ,
k�
g
, ,,,,. . ..-"" I, . . . -
V i i t iri
i 3 ii !I i i z i o t
1.
11 220@ Cki 6 ?
li 41 1
PTO
Z
0 •-.9.
1 74
..2
7 8 .
U X e
414 '-g N
i" ..
§ ._.
4 ‹ n .-■
I § cc
tr,
en
• t g f.,
A stippliN110,:er ,..) N -.
en o o
1 .1'
-, . s. n
d0 ........ ig
A II .
. ,. ...
..
Ai * I
A m
, No
5, i
lima. C.)
l ir: / / * ‘• ', • • 1 I I e- ,,, 0
E m °
VI . 11
0 z
I.,3
% 2
0 1/ u r ; ) 1 va c g al
/140
1 1 -
a. P at., ij
cii ad a .4 :5 g Oh OW 4R ii:
,:t _ --.- •—., --.-
e en .t v-1
46 6
lit a !--•-,----
il k
t at , w.
'limn 7 3 ..P
* .
..,
Il lrlib'
.
i
...
.e.
ci
11 //
7
7 i \\ l'
11
til iir 40„ ,. / 1r
:: , : f i f - 1 7 , .... ,;I /II
V ..... ‘....
•
1.• / - /
ii
;..•,.-=. . 1 1.11
I
„ 1- ----- -- -. 1
.1 r-..i
. i
i l , I • •
i ' li ''' f. • ,,,,
• . il ii/i
... „
, self / , --,
... . . ..__. _.. . , '''.. i
1 i
/
r / r i 11 ,_,, ,
....-.... r , .1 ._
.......
1 .•
Y E
— . . .... .-
4 g:
• 1 ...] g
. ,...
••4
Z 0 . . • 1.1.1
' III
C.,
* 6
Jackie Lothian
From: Kent Reed [irkent @mac.com]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 2:37 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: ATTN: Jackie -- Galena Plaza Work Session
RE: Galena Plaza Work Session
Dear Council Member:
The Hudson Reed Ensemble has been providing free Shakespeare productions to our community in the Galena
Plaza over the past five years. Over that period our attendance has grown from 250 our first year to over a thousand
last year and this summer we expect upwards of fifteen hundred since we have added two more performances of
this summer's production of "The Taming of the Shrew' set in the Wild West opening August 18.
With the revamping of the Galena Plaza complex, we feel there is a rare opportunity to realize an integrated "master
plan" for the entire area that would provide a cultural, civic and educational resource for the entire community.
This integrated complex would include the Library, Galena Plaza, Old Youth Center building and Civic buildings yet
to be built.
We feel that first and foremost the plaza should be thought of as a "Performance Park." ... a destination park.
A beautiful and practical space for theatre, dance, acoustic concerts, outdoor movies, festivals, poetry readings,
lectures, etc. This is not to preclude its' use as an exhibition space whether as an adjunct to the farmers market, art
installations or other various special events.
Folks need a reason to cross Main Street and a lovely, vibrant space that has interesting activities will draw them.
We have seen that with our very popular Shakespeare Series. People need a reason to visit and that can certainly
happen with vision and imagination.
Further, we feel the area should be kept as a circular plaza, shifted to the east. it is the only plaza in a town that is
full of rectangular parks. Being a circle, it has a pleasing aesthetic built in...an amphitheater like feel. And although
steps away, it would be an oasis separated from the throb and bustle of downtown Aspen.
Seating, storage and other amenities should also be taken into consideration in the design of a space that is
comfortable, welcoming, beautiful and practical .
Thanks for your time and consideration.
Respectfully Yours,
Kent
Kent Hudson Reed
Director
— theHUDSONREEDensemble
970.319.6867
irkent @mac.com
hudsonreedensemble.org
1