Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20111212 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA December 12, 2011 5:00 P.M. I. Call to Order II. Roll CaII III. Scheduled Public Appearances IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Minutes — October 24, 25, November 7, 28, 2011 b) Resolution #81, 2011 - ACRA Services Agreement c) Board Appointments VII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #38, 2011 — Theatre Aspen SPA Amendment P.H. 1/9/12 VIII. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #37, 2011 — Adopting International Fire Code b) Ordinance #34, 2011 - Code Amendment — Vacation Rentals c) Resolution #82, 2011 — Temporary Use Nugget Gallery d) Ordinance #30, 2011 — Castle Creek Energy Center IX. Action Items X. Information items X. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting January 9, 2012 COUNCIL'S ADOPTED GUIDELINES • Stick to top priorities • Involve others in community problem solving • Be thorough, deliberate and accountable for consequences when making decisions COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. VI MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM : Randy Ready, Asst. City Manager CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE: November 29, 2011 MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 RE: Resolution Number el : Services Agreement Between the City and the Aspen Chamber Resort Association (ACRA) SUMMARY AND REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Attached for City Council review and approval is a resolution that would authorize the City Manager to sign a new Services Agreement with ACRA. Since 2005 the City has had a Services Agreement in effect with ACRA that covers the management and operation of Visitors Centers within the City and the production of various community based special events designed to increase tourist visitation. The term of that Agreement ends on December 31, 2011 and staff of both parties has been discussing proposed revisions to the terms and conditions of the agreement that are outlined below and included in the attached Second Amended and Restated Services Agreement. BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council discussed the proposed revisions to the Services Agreement at a work session on November 15 and provided direction on the terms to include in a new agreement that would then be approved at a regular meeting. For many years prior to 2005 ACRA submitted annual requests through the Non - Profits Grants process for funding to help offset the cost of visitor center operation and community special event production. When the city council in 2004 approved construction of the new Guest Services Pavilion on the Cooper Avenue Mall and asked ACRA to operate it, both parties agreed that it would be mutually beneficial to remove ACRA from the annual uncertainties of funding from the grant proposal review process. Instead, a scope of work for services to be provided for a specified amount of funding was developed and included in the Services Agreement that Council approved in 2005. Operating under a Service Agreement since that time has worked well for both parties in clarifying expectations and removing some of the uncertainty in the annual budgeting and planning process. DISCUSSION: • Visitors Centers: ACRA operates three Visitors Centers located in the Rio Grande building, the Wheeler Opera House and the Guest Services Pavilion. One of the important terms of the current Services Agreement is that in exchange for City funding, ACRA shall provide information and referrals to businesses without regard to ACRA membership status from the Wheeler and Guest Services Pavilion locations. ACRA has been able to give preference to chamber members in the referrals from the ACRA office location since member dues have been used to offset the remainder of the operating costs. City funding for Visitors Center Operations started at $162,500 and has increased annually by the amount of the increase to General Fund departments. Funding for the Visitors Center operations in 2011 was $182,585. Staff has worked with ACRA staff to determine that the actual 2011 cost of operation of the Visitors Centers at the Wheeler and the Guest Services Pavilion is $186,368. A two percent increase for 2012 results in 2012 proposed funding for Visitors Center operations of $190,095. • Special Events: The 2005 contract specified that ACRA would receive $62,500 plus the annual amount of the increase to General Fund departments to produce three community special events: Winterskol, Food and Wine and the Old Fashioned 4 of July. 2011 Special Event funding amounted to $70,225. There are two issues related to special events for consideration as part of the contract renewal. First, staff recommends that the City Special Events Department become responsible for producing and coordinating the 4 of July Parade event. City departments have provided significant support including, operations, staffing, and funding of the parade. It has grown to become a very large undertaking, involving hundreds of hours of City staff time, primarily from the Special Events, Police, Parks, Parking, Streets and Transportation Departments. The Special Events and Police Departments have been funding additional security, fencing, and advertising over the past several years. Rather than continuing to have ACRA produce the parade in partnership with the City, the City Special Events department would be responsible for coordinating all aspects of the parade and will discuss the need for ongoing supplemental funding to produce the parade. ACRA would continue to use City special events funding for the production of evening activities, fireworks, porta -lets and advertising for the entire slate of events happening on that holiday. Second, per Council direction at the work session, ACRA would continue the Twelve Days of Aspen event around the December holidays. ACRA will fund the $15,000 for holiday - themed activities from Destination Marketing funds. $3,000 in Special Events funds will cover ACRA staff and administration costs for the Twelve Days event. CURRENT ISSUES: The significant changes to this agreement compared to the first agreement are as follows: • Operation of the Visitors Centers and Production of Special Events each have their own section in the agreement • This agreement ties City funding to the cost of operating the Wheeler and Guest Services Pavilion Visitors Centers • Payment section is updated per discussions and direction at the November 15 work session • This agreement clarifies the City's responsibilities for the 4 of July parade • $3000 is being added for the administrative costs of the 12 Days of Aspen • The new term extends to December 31, 2016 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 2012 funding for the Services Agreement would be as follows: City Share of Visitors Centers Operations $190,095 City Share of ACRA Special Events $ 74,625 Total Agreement Cost $264,720 The annual payment to ACRA would again be increased to account for inflation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution # , Series of 2011. RESOLUTION NO. __ SERIES OF 2011 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED AREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AND THE ASPEN CHAMBER RESORT ASSOCIATION SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE ASPEN CHAMBER RESORT ASSOCIATION AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a Second Amended and Restated Agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado and the Aspen Chamber Resort Association, LLLP, a copy of which document is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves a Second Amended and Restated Agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado and the Aspen Chamber Resort Association regarding services for the City of Aspen, a copy of which document is annexed hereto, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said document on behalf of the City of Aspen. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this th day of December, 2011, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held December , 2011. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED CITY OF ASPEN AND ASPEN CHAMBER RESORT ASSOCIATION SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this day of December 2011, by the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, a Colorado Municipal corporation ( "City ") and the ASPEN CHAMBER RESORT ASSOCIATION, a Colorado not - for -profit corporation ( "ACRA "). WHEREAS, the City and ACRA entered into that certain Services Agreement dated December 1, 2005, and the parties hereto desire to renew said agreement with amendments; and WHEREAS, the City has a vital interest in the economic health of the City; and WHEREAS, the City has the constitutional home rule power to appropriate money for the purpose of advertising the business, social and educational advantages, the natural resources and the scenic attractions of the City; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to retain the services of ACRA to operate and manage Visitors Centers located within the City and to collect, manage and dispense information related to tourist attractions, lodging and other related matters (i.e. special events) to the general public and to operate and manage community based special events for the purpose of attracting increased tourist visitation; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement to establish the terms and conditions under which ACRA will provide such services to the City. Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: I. OPERATION OF VISITORS CENTERS: A. ACRA will operate the City of Aspen's Visitors Centers located in the Rio Grande parking structure, Wheeler Opera House, and the Guest Services Pavilion. The parties may enter into further agreements to operate additional Visitors Centers on terms that are mutually agreeable to the parties. B. The centers will be staffed and hours of operation shall be: Rio Grande: 8:30 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday Wheeler: 10:00 am to 6:00 pm, 365 days a year with the exception of City of Aspen designated closure dates Guest Services Pavilion: October 1 through April 15` 10:OOam to 5:OOpm April 16 through June P 11:OOam to 4:OOpm June 2 though September 30: 10:OOam to 6:OOpm All open times are weather permitting. C. For purposes of this Agreement, section F(4) and section III.A refer to the operation of the Visitors Centers in the Wheeler Opera House and the Guest Services Pavilion. ACRA also shall operate the Rio Grande Visitor Center, including the ability to give preference to ACRA members in the referrals from that location, since ACRA member dues and other ACRA revenues are being used to cover the costs of operating that visitors center. D. The City shall have the right to close the Wheeler location on designated dates ( "closure dates "), provided the City gives ACRA notice of a closure date at least 30 days in advance. E. ACRA shall maintain traffic flow reports documenting visitor center traffic by day, and shall supply such reports to the City upon request. The parties agree to cooperate to make any reasonable adjustments in scheduling or staffing deemed necessary in order to better serve the customer. Changes that result in a significant net increase or decrease in annual hours of operation shall be subject to the reopening of this agreement for purposes of renegotiating compensation for the provision of such service. F. ACRA shall provide, through the Visitor Centers the following information and services to the general public. 1. Information relating to current events and activities of interest to visitors to the City of Aspen. 2. Information regarding the physical layout of Aspen and from time to time, as needed, directions to the location of things and activities within the City of Aspen. 3. Information regarding businesses will be provided at the visitor's request in- person, over the phone, by email, or by the method suitable to meet the visitor's needs taking into account the methods available at the various Visitors Centers. 4. Information and referrals provided under the terms of this agreement from the Wheeler Opera House and the Guest Services Pavilion locations shall be provided without consideration of the ACRA membership status of the businesses to which such referrals are made. Such information and referrals shall be based solely upon the interests of the individuals or groups requesting the information and referrals. G. Visitors Centers shall generally be a clearing house for all Aspen information of interest to guests. H. ACRA will process the fulfillment of community tourist information requests in a timely fashion to maximize impact on the potential customer. ACRA shall work with reservation agents to facilitate lodging reservations for rental properties in the Aspen area. ACRA, when working on behalf of the City of Aspen in the Aspen Visitor centers, hereby expressly agrees that it shall make every effort to book lodging properties inside the City of Aspen prior to making bookings outside the City of Aspen, provided that such a reservation would satisfy customer requirements and such a property is available. J. ACRA shall provide visitor center services to all Aspen businesses license holders in a non - discriminatory fashion. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the performance of services under this Agreement. ACRA agrees to meet all requirements of the applicable city, state, and federal laws respecting discrimination. II. SPECIAL EVENTS: A. ACRA shall produce special events for the benefit of the community and to draw increased visitor attraction. To that end: 1. ACRA will be the executive producer of Winterskol, the Old Fashioned 4 of July, and the 12 Days of Aspen. 2. As appropriate, ACRA will work with other producers to bring national events to the City of Aspen, such as The Food & Wine Magazine Classic in Aspen. 3. ACRA will provide the City of Aspen with an annual chamber special event calendar by December 31 of the preceding year. 4. Additional special events may be added as mutually agreed by the City of Aspen and ACRA. B. While ACRA will be the executive producer of the Old Fashioned 4` of July, the City will produce, manage and staff all aspects of the parade component of the day, including registration, staging, route closure and monitoring, traffic re- routing, public safety, parade specific advertising and coordination of announcing in conjunction with ACRA. ACRA will continue to produce and manage parade judging and provide parade support services including the provision of portable toilets for the day's events and overall event marketing /advertising. III. PAYMENTS: In consideration for the foregoing services, the City shall pay to ACRA the amount of two hundred sixty four thousand seven hundred and twenty dollars ($264,720) for the first year of this agreement, payable by February 15. Such payment shall be increased annually payable by February 15 of each year to account for inflation, by a percentage that is consistent with the base percentage by which City General Fund departments are increased. ACRA shall use the amount paid by the City of Aspen to provide minimum levels of funding for the following events and services during the first year of this agreement, with the annual amounts to be adjusted as described above: A. Staffing and Operation of the Rio Grande and Guest Services Pavilion Visitors Centers: $190,095 (see calculation attached) B. Special Events, including Winterskol, The Food & Wine Magazine Classic, the Old Fashioned 4 of July and $3,000 for the administrative costs of the 12 Days of Aspen: $74,625 Nothing herein shall prohibit ACRA from soliciting additional funding for such events and services, or from appropriating funds paid under this Agreement to other events and services provided that ACRA maintains minimum funding as set forth in this paragraph. IV. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF FUNDS: ACRA shall keep or cause to be kept true, accurate and complete accounting records of all business and financial transactions relating to the aforementioned functions and shall make such records available to the City upon reasonable request therefor, and without expense. ACRA agrees that the City shall have the right through its duly authorized employees, agents or representatives, to examine all pertinent records at any and all reasonable times upon reasonable notice for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this Agreement. V. TERM: This Agreement shall become effective on January 1, 2012, and shall terminate on December 31, 2016, unless terminated earlier in accordance with paragraph XII. VI. PERSONNEL: ACRA shall be responsible for hiring fully qualified personnel and for properly training such personnel to perform the services related to this Agreement. VII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: ACRA is an independent contractor, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute or designate ACRA or any of its employees as agents (except as expressly set forth in this Agreement) or employees of the City. Further, it is agreed that: A. The City of Aspen does not require ACRA to work exclusively for it. B. The City of Aspen, for whom the services are to be performed, does not establish a quality standard for ACRA. C. The City of Aspen does not provide training for ACRA's employees or workers. D. The City of Aspen shall not establish the standards or policies by which ACRA administers services to its members. E. The City of Aspen does not provide tools or benefits to complete the Agreement, although materials and equipment may be supplied as mutually agreed by both parties. VIII. RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FACILITIES: A. The City shall be responsible for maintaining the facilities at the Wheeler and the Guest Services Pavilion in good repair. ACRA shall be responsible for paying for electricity at the Guest Services Pavilion. All other expenses to maintain and improve the facilities at the Wheeler and the Guest Services Pavilion shall be borne by the City, except for maintenance necessitated by the negligent acts of ACRA or its agents. B. During the term of this Agreement, maintenance responsibilities for the Rio Grande space shall be as specified in the Lease Agreement between ACRA and the City, dated June 13, 2005, and subsequent lease agreements mutually approved by the City and ACRA regardless of whether such lease has expired. C. The City will provide signage as appropriate on main thoroughfares to direct visitors to the facilities. D. The City of Aspen Parks Department shall provide snow removal services on and around the Guest Services Pavilion as part of its Cooper Street mall maintenance work program. Such services shall be in accordance with the normally planned and scheduled work program, shall be at no additional cost, and shall not be unreasonably withheld. IX. INSURANCE: The ACRA shall obtain and maintain in force for the term of this Agreement the following insurance: A. Comprehensive general liability insurance policy, including liability, with limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and not less than two million ($2,000,000.00) general aggregate for bodily injury or death of any person or persons or damage to property. All such policies shall contain a provision that the same may not be canceled or materially changed or altered without first giving thirty (30) days prior written notice to the CITY. B. Worker's Compensation and employer liability in accordance with the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Colorado for employees doing work in Colorado in accordance with this Agreement. X. RIGHTS RESERVED TO ACRA: A. Nothing herein shall restrict ACRA from providing services to its members consistent with its mission and established policies. B. The ACRA shall have final decision - making authority regarding staffing, scheduling, and display of materials and collaboration with ambassadors of other organizations. Such authority shall include the authority to make reasonable and temporary modifications to the schedule set forth in section I(B) above. XI. NO WAIVER: No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement, nor shall such waiver constitute a continuing waiver unless otherwise expressly provided, nor shall the waiver of any default of the terms of this Agreement be deemed a waiver of any subsequent default. XII. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either party with 90 days notice, for lack of appropriation by the City or for any other reason. Any such termination shall be effected by delivery to the other party of a written notice specifying the date upon which termination becomes effective. In the event of termination, the ACRA shall be paid on a pro -rated basis, with the annual payment prorated to the date the termination becomes effective. XIII. JURISDICTION, VENUE AND ATTORNEYS FEES: The Jurisdiction and venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie in Pitkin County, Colorado. If it becomes necessary to bring any cause of action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be awarded its legal costs including reasonable attorney fees. XIV. NOTICES: Any notices related to this Agreement shall be deemed given if mailed to the respective parties at the addresses below: Steve Barwick City Manager, City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970 - 920 -5205 Debbie Braun President and CEO of ACRA 425 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 970 - 925 -1940 XV. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW: The ACRA shall not perform any of the services provided specified in this Agreement contrary to any local, state, or federal law. XVI. SEVERABILITY: Should any section of this Agreement be found to be invalid, all other sections shall remain in full force and effect as though severable from the part invalidated. XVII. INTENTION OF THE PARTIES: This Agreement contains the entire intention of the parties and may only be changed by a written document signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be made the day and year first above written. CITY OF ASPEN, a Colorado municipal ASPEN CHAMBER RESORT corporation ASSOCIATION, a Colorado not - for - profit corporation By: By: City Manager President Attest: By: City Clerk Income VISITOR CENTERS Grants /Contract for Services 3050 $ 182,585 TOTAL INCOME $ 182,585 1 Expense VISITOR CENTERS Expense-Salary Related Salaries 5020 $ 200,592.00 Payroll Taxes 5090 $ 18,05328 • 401 (K) 5095 $ 1,300.00 Workers' Comp. 5100 $ 880.00 Medical Insurance 5120 $ 4,875.00 Wellness Benefit 5152 $ 600.00 TOTAL PAYROLL EXPENSES $ 226,300.28 Expense•General Accounting and Legal 6015 $ 2,500.00 Equip. Lease & Rent 6140 $ 3,600.00 Insurance D & 0 6160 $ 6,340.00 Information Technology 6170 $ 4,800.00 Maintenance & General Repairs 6190 $ 4,920.00 Maintenance Business Machine 6195 $ 1,280.00 Office Supplies 6200 $ 4,280.00 Postage 6240 $ 6,220.00 Rent & Utilities 6300 $ 36,200.00 Telephone 6360 $ 5,600.00 Toll Free 6370 $ 400.00 TOTAL GENERAL EXPENSES $ 76,140 TOTAL PAYROLL EXPENSES $ . 226,300 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 302,440 TOTAL INCOME $ 182,585 INCOME MINUS EXPENSES $ (119,855) Calculation of ACRA2012 contract for services Total costs of visitor centers $ 302,440 Less rent allocated to rio grande 36,200 Net costs to allocate 266,240 % costs to be covered by city* 0.70 City share of costs 186,368 events 70,225 256,593 2012 adjustment 2% Adjusted contract 261,720 addition for administration of 12 days of aspen 3,000.00 contract amount for 2012 $ 264,720 * 2/3 of facilities are city costs +adjustment for more days per week at wheeler and pavillion. VI c MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: December 5, 2011 RE: Board Appointments By approving the consent calendar, Council is making the following appointments: Wheeler Opera House Board of Directors Brian O'Neil Open Space and Trails Board Karen Caner Historic Preservation Commission Nora Berko; Jay Maytin Planning and Zoning Commission Stan Gibbs; Cliff Weiss, Jim DeFrancia, Keith Goode, Jennifer Olson (alternate) VtI MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Mayor and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director } t/ 1 4 FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner 1',; RE: First Reading of Theatre Aspen SPA Amendment MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 (Public Hearing, January 9, 2012) APPLICANT: SUMMARY: Theatre Aspen, Emily Zeck The Applicant requests an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA and Executive Director a Growth Management Review for Essential Public Facilities to construct a permanent lobby structure and to retain the OWNER: performance tent framing, stage, and seating on the site during the City of Aspen winter. REPRESENTATIVE: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Will Young, Charles Staff recommends approval, with conditions, of the SPA Cunniffe Architects amendment, and growth management review. LOCATION: Rio Grande Park 1 505 Rio Grande Place CURRENT ZONING & USE - e " R , Public (PUB) with an SPA overla y :. �: PROPOSED LAND USE: - Theatre Use (Theatre Aspen) The picture above shows the performance tent framing with the stage and seating under protective cover. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Specially Planned Area Amendment for a new lobby structure and to allow the performance tent frame, stage, and seating to remain onsite year -round pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.440.050 (City Council is the final review authority following a recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission). Page 1 of 7 • Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.090.4 (City Council is the final review authority following a recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission). PROJECT BACKGROUND: The Applicant has requested an Insubstantial SPA Amendment and a Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility in order to construct a permanent lobby structure and to leave the existing performance tent frame, stage, and seating up on the site year - round. Theatre Aspen has maintained a seasonal tented performance venue at Rio Grande Park since 1989, when a first "circus" tent was erected. Theatre Aspen was established by Kent Reed in 1983 and moved to Rio Grande Park in 1989 when Pat Fallin and Carol Loewenstein managed the organization. A few years later, approximately in 1993, funds were to purchase the tent that was in place in the park between 1995 and 2010. City Council approved Ordinance 24, Series of 1995 (see Exhibit H), allowing a tent to be erected in Rio Grande Park each year between mid -May and mid - September. In addition, Theatre Aspen has used a temporary tent to house lobby and concessions, and has a number of ancillary structures that support the theatre operation. Ordinance 24, Series of 1995 gave Theatre Aspen an Essential Growth Management approval for the seasonal activities. In January 2011, the applicant met with City Council in a work session to review potential changes to the lease and to discuss options for improvements to the theatre use on Rio Grande Park. Based on the feedback at that work session, the lease was amended and staff processed a minor SPA amendment to replace the tent, re- orient the entrance, and replace some of the ancillary structures. The approval required Theatre Aspen to comply with all previous conditions of Ordinance 24, Series 1995. These approvals result in truck trips on the trails in Rio Grande Park each year for constructing and dismantling the tent each season. See the application (Exhibit C) for a copy of the lease and the administrative approvals. Based on feedback in the January 2011 work session, Theatre Aspen has applied for a Major SPA Amendment, a Growth Management Review for Essential Public Facility, and other associated reviews, to allow the construction of a permanent lobby structure. After replacing the tent earlier this year and operating in it for a season, Theatre Aspen is interested in having the tent frame, stage, and seating to remain up year - round. The application was made in the late • summer, which did not provide enough time to process the request before the mid - September deadline outlined in their existing approvals. The applicant then requested a temporary use approval from City Council to cover the interim time between mid - September and the time in which P &Z and City Council can review the Major SPA Amendment. A copy of that approval and meeting minutes is attached as Exhibit I. PROJECT SUMMARY: Theatre Aspen is proposing a new permanent lobby structure of 1,947 square feet and 24 feet in height. This is approximately the same size as the temporary tent that is used for the lobby from mid -May to mid - September each year. In addition, it is the same height and has the same roof Page 2 of 7 • form as the performance tent. The structure would be located adjacent and immediately to the east of the tent structure. During the summer theatre season, the ticketing and concessions functions would be incorporated into the structure. In the winter, the structure would be used for storage of ancillary items that are currently stored elsewhere on the site or off -site. The structure will provide a permanent presence for Theatre Aspen in the park. Theatre Aspen has been working closely with the Parks Department on this concept. The proposal would reduce the number of trips generated by the theatre. Theatre Aspen is also proposing to leave the performance tent structure (without the sides and roof), the stage, and the seating up on the site year- round. This will result in fewer truck trips (and thus less impact to the trails) each year for the erection and dismantling of the tent. City Council approved a temporary use permit to allow these items to remain up this winter season. This was done to give the community an opportunity to review what visual impact leaving these items up year -round will have on the park and surrounding areas. In addition, staff requested that Theatre Aspen articulate what signage they would like to have. The sign code does not provide direction on this unique situation, so staff as advised Theatre Aspen to submit a sign plan that will be incorporated into the SPA. A copy of Theatre Aspen's request is in Exhibit E. Finally, Theatre Aspen has indicated that there are certain requirements from the national actor's association that require adequate screening of the actors from the general public. Due to these requirements, Theatre Aspen has requested approval under the SPA for a fence in the "back of house" area during the summer theatre season. The fence is 10 feet in height and approximately 25 feet in length. A site plan showing the approximate location of the proposed fence and a photo of the fence from this past season is attached in Exhibit K. Attached as Exhibit L are two letters from the tent companies Theatre Aspen uses- one who sold the tent and framing to Theatre Aspen and another who assembles and disassembles the tent. STAFF COMMENTS: SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA to construct a permanent lobby structure, and to leave the performance tent frame, stage, and seating up year - round. The Theatre Aspen tent is currently erected each year in mid -May and removed each year in mid - September. This generates approximately 48 truck trips a year on the trails in Rio Grande Park. The permanent structure will eliminate some of these trips by providing storage for ancillary items on -site rather than in off -site storage. Leaving the performance tent frame, stage, and seats up year -round will eliminate a majority of these trips. The applicant proposes to leave the performance tent frame up, with no covering during the time when the Theatre is not in use (mid- September to mid -May). The regular canvas roof and sides will be removed by mid - September and stored for the winter to avoid weather damage. The frame was designed to withstand weathering. The applicant also proposes that the stage and seating remain on the concrete pad under protective covering. Trips will continue to be required for deliveries of food during the performance season, and the removal of the canvas covering of the tent. Page 3 of 7 Staff Comments: The proposed improvements do represent a visual impact on the park. Staff believes that the new permanent structure will be an improvement to the site by providing a more permanent presence for the theatre in the park, and by creating a "visual cue " for park visitors to walk access the John Denver Sanctuary. Staff suggests that the applicant explore additional design options for the permanent lobby structure, including a flat roof or shed roof form, the use of a different roofing material (like corrugated metal), or a slight difference in height between the lobby and the performance tent. Staff believes more visual interested is needed for this structure. Staff had some concerns with the original proposal to allow the tent frame, stage, and seating remaining on the site year- round. The original proposal would have the framing remain up, with a tarp covering the seating and stage. Staff was concerned that this created a look.of incompleteness akin to a defunct construction site. Staff has worked with the applicant to explore other options to address the visual impact the tent frame, stage and seating will cause. Staff supports the revised plans that would provide temporary "walls" around the tent frame to help screen the stage and tent, while providing the feel that the site is not an abandoned construction project. Staff supports the use of these "walls," and supports a basic design/shadowing pattern on the walls to help make the site look more designed and complete (see Exhibit F, page 3). Both Parks and Planning staff are supportive of the improvements because they will result in less wear and tear on the Rio Grande Park. Currently an average of 48 truck trips are generated through the putting up and taking down of the tent and ancillary items each year. This use impacts the trails and the park in general. This proposal will significantly reduce these impact to the park and park users. The applicant has worked with staff on a signage plan that would create a common look for theatre signage. The signage would include two "poster boxes" announcing the shows that will be playing during the season. The boxes could not be used for advertising of anything unrelated to the Theatre. In addition, the applicant had originally proposed a large "marquee sign" that would clearly identify Theatre Aspen. Planning and Parks staff expressed concerns related to this sign because of its height and "urban" feel in a natural park setting. The applicant has agreed to eliminate this large sign and replace it with a more subtle sign on a large rock. Exhibit J illustrates the recommended sign type and location (both from the Parks Department). Staff finds the request meets the SPA review criteria and recommends approval of the request, with conditions. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW - ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY The Applicant is proposing to construct a permanent lobby structure that will require a Growth Management Review. The new lobby structure is approximately 1,947 square feet and 24 feet in height. This is approximately the same size as the temporary tent that is used for the lobby from mid -May to mid - September each year. The tent framing, stage, and seating do not require a growth management review. Page 4 of 7 Due to the current existence of a ticketing and concessions area, the applicant does not plan on hiring any additional employees (FTE or full -time equivalent) following the construction of the permanent lobby structure. The applicant has provided documentation of the number of employee /volunteer hours for 2010 and 2011, and what is being proposed for 2012. A FTE (full - time equivalent) is described as an employee who works 2,080 hours per year (40 -hour work week X 52 weeks out of the year). By utilizing this formula, the breakdown of employees for each year is as follows: 2010 24,908 _ 2,080 = 11.98 FTE's 2011 25,408 - 2,080 = 12.22 FTE's 2012 25,249 = 2,080 = 12.14 FTE's The Planning & Zoning Commission determines the number of employees generated pursuant to section 26.470.100.1. Based on this information, and pursuant to Section 26.470.090.4, Growth Management Review: Essential Public Facilities (EPF) of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the "City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals." The applicant states that the seasonal use of the structure will not generate any new employees. In fact, the hours provided by the applicant show the potential for a decrease in the number of FTE's from 2011 to 2012. The Housing Board has recommended that an employee audit be required to verify that no additional employees are generated from this development. Staff Comments: Staff finds the request meets the Essential Public Facility Growth Management review criteria and recommends approval of the request, with conditions. Specifically, based on comments from the Housing Board, Staff recommends an employee audit be conducted after a year of operation to determine if any new employees have been generated. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Staff from Housing, Parks, Engineering, Fire, Building, Water & Utilities, Sanitation, and Environmental Health reviewed this project. All the comments are attached in Exhibit B. Applicable comments were incorporated into the Ordinance. The original approval in 1995 permitted the tent to be assembled in the park from "mid -May to mid - September" of each year. The Parks Department has requested that the timeframe the tent is up be changed to April through October of each year. This change will enable the Parks Department to better coordinate the seasonal changes and needs of the park. This change has been incorporated into the Ordinance. The Environmental Health Department monitors all noise and food service in the City. They have requested a noise monitoring plan for the site. Theatre Aspen has worked with the department on these in the past, and this condition will formalize the requirement. This requirement has been incorporated into the Ordinance. Page 5 of 7 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTS: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -0 to approve the request. The Resolution is attached as Exhibit M, and their meeting minutes are attached as Exhibit N. P &Z had some questions related to the construction of the permanent lobby and compliance with the funds used to purchase the Rio Grande Park. The Rio Grande Park was purchased with finds from the Seventh Penny Sales Tax Receipts. The Seventh Penny Fund was rescinded by the City in 1985. At the time the property was purchased, the Seventh Penny Sales Tax was authorized by voters to be used for the payment of food tax refunds, capital improvements and capital expenditures, acquisition of land, payment of indebtedness incurred for such capital expenditures... No Open Space Funds were used for the purchase. The City Attorney's office and City Parks staff have examined the issue and reviewed the relevant documentation and determined that the proposal as outlined by Theatre Aspen does not conflict with the Seventh Penny language. In addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the approvals be contingent upon Theatre Aspen's continued location in Rio Grande Park. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommended that if Theatre Aspen leaves their current location, the approvals become void. These conditions have not been incorporated into the Ordinance, as staff would like to hear from City Council on these issues. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request with conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the request for an Amendment to the Rio Grande Specially Planned Area and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review to allow Theatre Aspen to construct a permanent lobby structure of 1,947 square feet and 24 feet in height and to allow Theatre Aspen to maintain their performance tent framing, stage, and seating year- round, with conditions as noted in Ordinance No. 3$, Series of 2011 on First Reading" ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A — Review Criteria and Staff Findings EXHIBIT B — DRC Comments EXHIBIT C - Application EXHIBIT D — Additional Materials from Applicant (Dated September 9, 2011 — responses to Planning Staff questions and information on employees) EXHIBIT E — Additional Materials from Applicant (Dated October 3, 2011 — site plans and master sign request) EXHIBIT F — Additional Materials from Applicant (visual renderings) EXHIBIT G — Additional Materials from Applicant (Dated October 12, 2011 — responses to additional Planning Staff questions) EXHIBIT H — Ordinance 24, Series 1995 (original approval) Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT I - Temporary Use approval (Resolution 60, Series 2011 and minutes) EXHIBIT J — Visuals of staff recommended sign changes EXHIBIT K — Site plan and picture of proposed actor's privacy fence EXHIBIT L — Letters from tent manufacturer and assembly company EXHIBIT M — Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 20, Series of 2011 EXHIBIT N — Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes from November 1, 2011 • Page 7 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. oel (SERIES OF 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) AMENDMENT, AND AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, FOR THEATRE ASPEN TO CONSTRUCT A PERMANENT LOBBY STRUCTURE AND TO ALLOW THEATRE ASPEN TO MAINTAIN THEIR TENT FRAME, STAGE, AND SEATING ON -SITE DURING THE WINTER AT RIO GRANDE PARK, 505 RIO GRANDE PLACE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: LOT 1 OF THE RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION. Parcel ID 2737 - 073 -06 -851 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Theatre Aspen, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, requesting approval of a Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment, and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review, to construct a permanent lobby structure and to permit the theatre tent framing, stage, and seating to remain on -site year round; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council for a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment, and Essential Public Facility Growth Lodge Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the property is located in the Rio Grande Park and is zoned Public (PUB) with an SPA Overlay; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the requirements of a Specially Planned Area (SPA); and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 1, 2011, Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 20, Series of 2011, by a four to . zero (4 — 0) vote, recommending city Council approve an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA and an Essential Pubic Facilities Growth Management Review for Theatre Aspen; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440, the City Council may approve a SPA Amendment, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470, the City Council may approve an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review, during a duly noticed public Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page I of 5 hearing after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January _, 2012, the City Council approved Ordinance No. , Series of 2010, by a to ( — ) vote, approving an SPA amendment and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council approval of a Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment to the Rio Grande SPA, and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review. Section 2: Design The permanent lobby structure shall comply with the plan shown at the November 1 s `, 2011 P &Z meeting, and attached as Exhibit A. The tent framing shall be covered with a roof, as weather allows, from April to October of each calendar year. From October to April of each calendar year, the tent framing shall not be covered with a roof. Temporary sides shall be installed to shield the stage and seating from view. The stage and seating shall be under protective cover and located on the existing concrete pad. This is attached as Exhibit B. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 2 of 5 Theatre Aspen shall provide a security check of the site at least three times per week to ensure the site remains safe and secure. Section 3: Signage A revised signage plan reflecting changes discussed with staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be submitted to staff prior to City Council review. This shall include replacing a proposed marquee sign with a less imposing sign on a low -lying rock, as outlined in the P &Z meeting on November 1, 2011 and the staff memo for said meeting. Section 4: Temporary Fencing The temporary fencing shown in Exhibit C shall be temporary, and shall only be erected during the theatre season when theatre performances are conducted and when required by the Actors' Equity Association Small Professional Theatre Rulebook, Sec. 48.A.2 - 4. The fencing shall be constructed in a manner that does not prevent or limit the use of the trash enclosure for trash storage. Section 5: Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review - Affordable Housing Mitigation Theatre Aspen shall conduct an employee audit one year after final City Council approval for the permanent lobby structure. Volunteer hours shall not be included in the audit. Any additional employees that are not a result of the Rio Grande improvements shall be indicated in the report. However, only those employees that are a result of the improvements shall be subject to future mitigation. The Housing Authority shall request the audit from Theatre Aspen. Failure to request the audit shall not render any of the approvals invalid. Theatre Aspen shall provide the Housing Authority and the Community Development Department with the audit report. The Housing Authority and Community Development shall forward the audit to the Housing Board, P &Z and/or City Council for review, as applicable. Section 6: Parks Theatre Aspen shall coordinate all improvements with the Parks Department to ensure they comply with the Parks Department's Master Plan for Rio Grande Park. The applicant shall ensure the site is clean and secure at all times. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to ensure compliance during the fall and winter months when the tent is taken down each year. Section 7: Environmental Health Theatre Aspen shall undertake a noise monitoring program for its productions to ensure compliance with the City's noise ordinance. The noise monitoring program shall verify compliance with the noise ordinance, by Theatre Aspen staff, before opening night of each production. It shall also include continued monitoring throughout the summer theatre season given background noise levels may vary. Noise level readings shall be taken at multiple locations along the property line of the Rio Grande Park. The noise monitoring Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 3 of 5 program shall be filed with the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department, who may require it to be updated as needed. Concessions at the tent historically have only been pre - packaged, non - potentially hazardous foods, and beverages without ice, due to the fact that Theatre Aspen does not hold a food service license nor have permanent plumbing. For special events serving food held at Theatre Aspen a temporary food permit must be submitted for approval to the Aspen Environmental Health Department prior to the event to ensure the protection of public health. Section 8: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan should be submitted as part of building permit. Section 9: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting. No lighting shall be permitted in the stream margin area (fifteen (15) foot setback area from top of slope) or in any area below the top of slope line (toward the river) unless it is in the exact location of the existing lighting and requires no additional disturbance to the stream margin area. Section 10: Theatre Aspen Lease Within 180 days of City Council approval, Theatre Aspen shall re- execute their long- term lease on the Rio Grande Park to reflect any changes that result from said approvals. Section 11: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 12: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 13: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 4 of 5 The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 14: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 9 day of January, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12 day of December, 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2012. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Plans for the permanent lobby structure Exhibit B: Rendering of tent framing and screening Exhibit C: site plan indicating location of proposed actor's privacy fence. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A Sec. 26.440.050.Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A. General. In the review of a development application for a conceptual development plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Staff Finding: A theatre use is appropriate for the site. Theatre Aspen has been operating in Rio Grande Park since the early 1990s, and recently signed a 10 -year lease with the City to continue operations. Theatre Aspen has been working with the Parks Department to coordinate improvements around the site, including landscaping. The Rio Grande Park Master Plan is being used to guide landscaping improvements, including storm water improvements. Theatre Aspen has also been working with the Parks Department on the physical improvements to the theatre site, including the addition of a permanent structure and leaving the tent framing up on a year -round basis. The Parks Department is supportive of the improvements because they create a permanent presence in the park and a gateway to the John Denver Sanctuary. It will also result in fewer truck trips on the trails due to the yearly tent construction and tear down. The proposal will have a visual impact on the area. Theatre Aspen has worked with staff to come up with a solution that will minimize the impact. Planning staff has some suggestions for design solutions that may be more appropriate for the site. Staff suggests that the applicant explore additional design options for the permanent lobby structure, including a flat roof or shed roof form, the use of a different roofing material (like corrugated metal), or a slight difference in height between the lobby and the performance tent. Staff believes more visual interested is needed for this structure. See also Review Criteria 4. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding: The Theatre Aspen tent is currently erected each year in mid -May and removed each year in mid - September. This generates approximately 48 truck trips a year on the trails in Rio Grande Park. The permanent structure will eliminate some of these trips by providing storage for ancillary items on -site rather than in off -site storage. Leaving the tent frame, stage, and seats up will eliminate a majority of these trips. Trips Page 1 of 4 will continue to be required for deliveries of food during the performance season, and the removal of the canvas covering of the tent. The Parks Department has requested that the timeframe the tent is erected be changed from "mid -May to mid - September" each calendar year to April through October. This change will enable the Parks Department to better coordinate the seasonal changes and needs of the park. This change has been incorporated into the Ordinance. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen has operated in the same location since the early 1990s. The site is suitable for the continued use of the Theatre. The area is generally flat, and is located out of the stream margin review area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. Staff Finding: The Theatre Aspen tent is currently erected each year in mid -May and removed each year in mid - September. This generates approximately 48 truck trips a year on the trails in Rio Grande Park. The permanent structure will eliminate some of these trips by providing storage for ancillary items on -site rather than in off -site storage. Leaving the tent frame, stage, and seats up will eliminate a majority of these trips. Trips will continue to be required for deliveries of food during the performance season, and the removal of the canvas covering of the tent. The Parks Department is supportive of the application because of the significant decrease in wear and tear on the park and trails. There are no protected view plans in the Rio Grande Park. However, the proposed improvements do represent a visual impact on the park. Staff believes that the new permanent structure will be an improvement to the site by providing a more permanent presence for the theatre in the park, and by creating a "visual cue" for park visitors to walk access the John Denver Sanctuary. Staff believes a slight change in the design and/or materials of the structure would provide a more appropriate design for the site. Staff had some concerns with the original proposal to allow the tent frame, stage, and seating remaining on the site year - round. The original proposal would have the framing remain up, with a tarp covering the seating and stage. Staff was concerned that this created a look of incompleteness akin to a defunct construction site. Staff has worked with the applicant to explore other options to address the visual impact the tent frame, Page 2 of 4 stage and seating will cause. Staff supports the revised plans that would provide temporary "walls" around the tent frame to help screen the stage and tent, while providing the sense that the site is not an abandoned construction project. Staff supports the use of these "walls," and supports a basic design/shadowing pattern on the walls to help make the site look more designed and complete. The applicant has also worked with staff on a signage plan that would create a common look for theatre signage. The signage would include two "poster boxes" announcing the shows that will be playing during the season. The boxes could not be used for advertising of anything unrelated to the Theatre. In addition, the applicant has originally proposed a large "marquee sign" that would clearly identify Theatre Aspen. Planning and Parks staff expressed concerns related to this sign because of its height and more "urban" feel in a natural park setting. The applicant has agreed to eliminate this large sign and replace it with a more subtle sign on a large rock (see Exhibit J) Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The Theatre Aspen use provides arts and cultural opportunities consistent with the Art, Culture, and Education section of the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposal will reduce some costs borne by the applicant for the removal of the tent structure each year. This may enable the organization to use more of its resources on programming. The proposal supports general policies and goals in the Parks, Open Space & the Environment section of the 2000 AACP in that it will result in a lessened impact on the trails in Rio Grande Park. In addition, the Civic Master Plan (CMP) was adopted in 2006 as a Regulatory Document that includes sections of the Rio Grande Park. The CMP acknowledges the Theatre Aspen use in the park, but does not speak to any specific design or development requirements for the Theatre. The CMP does discuss the important of providing gateways to the John Denver Sanctuary and to including storm water improvements in the park. The CMP supersedes the Rio Grande Master Plan from 1993, and any development in Rio Grande Park is no longer evaluated against the 1993 plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding: The Parks Department has been working on a master plan for the Rio Grande Park for a number of years. The improvements at the theatre Aspen site have provided an opportunity for the Parks Departments to collaboratively work with Theatre Aspen to improve the drainage in the area, and to create another "gateway" to the John Page 3 of 4 Denver Sanctuary. The proposed permanent structure will create a visual cue for visitors to visit the John Denver Sanctuary. (See the second to last page in the application for a copy of the Parks Press Release related to these improvements) The proposal will not require the expenditure of additional City funds. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20 %) meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Subsection 26.445.040.B.2. Staff Finding: There is no development proposed on slopes. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding: The applicant has applied for a growth management review for the new permanent structure under the Essential Public Facilities review. There are no specified allotments in the land use code for these types of projects, but the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the applicable review criteria. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Variations permitted. The final development plan shall comply with the requirements of the underlying zone district; provided, however, that variations from those requirements may be allowed based on the standards of this Section. Variations may be allowed for the following requirements: open space, minimum distance between buildings, maximum height, minimum front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot area, trash access area, internal floor area ratio, number of off - street parking spaces and uses and design standards of Chapter 26.410 for streets and related improvements. Any variations allowed shall be specified in the SPA agreement and shown on the final development plan. Staff Finding: There are no specified dimensional requirements for the Rio Grande Park SPA. The proposal will result in 1,947 square feet of new Essential Public Facility space to construct a permanent lobby structure. The tent framing is not considered floor area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A Sec. 26.470 Growth Management Quota System. (Review Criteria) Sec. 26.470.090.City Council applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments and development ceiling levels. 4. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and /or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen received approval in 1995 for the temporary tent as an essential public facility. Staff believes Theatre Aspen continues to meet the definition of an Essential Public Facility. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen states that no additional employees are generated by this approval. The proposal is for a structure that will house existing operations in a more visually pleasing manner, and will be used as storage when the Theatre is not in use from September - May each year. The Housing Board reviewed the proposal, and requested that an audit of employees be done after one year of operation. Planning staff and the Housing Board are not prepared to make a recommendation on the amount of mitigation required at this time, as it is anticipated that no new employees will be generated from this proposal. Staff recommends that if the number of employees has increased due to the development (not general changes to the operation or specific plays shown that season) that Theatre Aspen return to City Council to determine if any mitigation is required. The Planning and Zoning Commission supported this direction. Sec. 26.470.100. Calculations. A. Employee generation and mitigation. Whenever employee housing or cash -in -lieu is required to mitigate for employees generated by a commercial or lodging development, there shall be an analysis and credit for employee generation of the existing project, prior to Page 1 of 5 redevelopment, and an employee generation analysis of the proposed development. The employee mitigation requirement shall be based upon the incremental employee generation difference between the existing development and the proposed development. 1. Employee generation. Applicants may request an employee generation review with the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Growth management review procedures, and according to the following criteria. All essential public facilities shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine employee generation. In establishing employee generation, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following: a. The expected employee generation of the use considering the employment generation pattern of the use or of a similar use within the City or a similar resort economy. Staff Finding: The number of Theatre Aspen employees can change each year based on the various productions. In addition, they use a significant number of volunteers during the performance season. They do not anticipate new employees to be generated based on this development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Any unique employment characteristics of the operation. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen offices are located off -site in the Red Brick. They have been located there for 10 years, and anticipate remaining there into the future.. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c. The extent to which employees of various uses within a mixed -use building or of a related off -site operation will overlap or serve multiple functions. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen offices are housed off -site and will continue to be located off -site following the development of the proposal. The off -site operations support the theatre operation. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. A proposed restriction requiring full employee generation mitigation upon vacation of the type of business acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff Finding: Theatre Aspen is not proposing to relocate or change the type of business conducted on the site. They operate a theatre and have done so on the site since the 1990s. Staff finds this criterion to be met. e. Any proposed follow -up analyses of the project (e.g., an audit) to confirm actual employee generation. Staff Finding: The Housing Board has requested that an employee audit be conducted after one year of operation to determine if any new FTEs were generated Page 2 of 5 from the project. This requirement has been incorporated into the P &Z Ordinance. Staff finds this criterion to be met. f. For lodge projects only: An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for the lodging component of the project may, at the discretion of the Commission as a means of incentivizing a lodge project, be applied as a credit towards the mitigation requirement of the free - market residential component of the project. Any approved reduction shall require an audit to determine actual employee generation after two (2) complete years of operation of the lodge. Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. Sec. 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi -year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Finding: There is no specified number of allotments for Essential Public Facilities. Theatre Aspen is requesting 1,947 square feet of new Essential Public Facility space to construct a permanent lobby structure. The structure will be used for concessions and ticketing during the Theatre season and will be used as storage during the time the theatre is not in operation (approximately Mid - September to mid -May). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The Theatre Aspen use provides arts and cultural opportunities consistent with the Art, Culture, and Education section of the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposal will reduce some costs borne by the applicant for the removal of the tent structure each year. This may enable the organization to use more of its resources on programming. The proposal supports general policies and goals in the Parks, Open Space & the Environment section of the 2000 AACP in that it will result in a lessened impact on the trails in Rio Grande Park. Page 3 of 5 In addition, the Civic Master Plan (CMP) was adopted in 2006 as a Regulatory Document that includes sections on the Rio Grande Park. The CMP acknowledges the Theatre Aspen use on the park, but does not speak to any specific design or development requirements for the Theatre. The CMP does discuss the important of providing gateways to the John Denver Sanctuary and to including storm water improvements in the park. The CMP supersedes the Rio Grande Master Plan from 1993, and any development in Rio Grande Park is no longer evaluated against the 1993 plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Finding: There are no specified dimensional requirements for the Rio Grande Park SPA. The proposal will result in 1,947 square feet of new floor area. The tent framing is not considered floor area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60 %) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. (Ord. No. 6 — 2010, §2) Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable, as the project is being reviewed as an Essential Public Facility. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30 %) of the additional free - market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Page 4 of 5 Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ( "voluntary units ") may be deed - restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26340.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee /Square Footage Conversion. (Ord. No. 6 — 2010, §2) Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to not be applicable, as the project is being reviewed as an Essential Public Facility. The Housing Board has requested that an employee audit be conducted after a year of operation. Any mitigation would be reviewed based on the audit and the Essential Public Facilities review. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, §1) Staff Finding: The Theatre Aspen tent is currently erected each year in mid -May and removed each year in mid - September. This generates approximately 48 truck trips a year on the trails in Rio Grande Park. The permanent structure will eliminate some of these trips by providing storage for ancillary items on -site rather than in off -site storage. Leaving the tent frame, stage, and seats up will eliminate a majority of these trips. Trips will continue to be required for deliveries of food, and the removal of the canvas covering of the tent. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Page 5 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Department FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: September 22, 2011 RE: THEATRE ASPEN Parcel ID No. ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to build a permanent ticketing/concessions area on the site in the Rio Grande Park. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting approval for the aluminum tent frame, the seating and stage platforms to remain up on a permanent, year round basis. There is currently a ticketing and concessions area on the site, but by making it a permanent structure, the applicant will be able to store items during the winter season allowing for less traffic into the area in the spring. Due to the current existence of a ticketing and concessions area, the applicant does not plan on hiring any more employees. The applicant has provided documentation of the number of employee /volunteer hours for 2010 and 2011, and what is being proposed for 2012. A FTE is described as an employee who works 2,080 hours per year (40 -hour work week X 52 weeks out of the year). By utilizing this formula, the breakdown of employees for each year is as follows: 2010 24,908 - 2,080 = 11.98 FTE's 2011 25,408 _ 2,080 = 12.22 FTE's 2012 25,249 _ 2,080 = 12.14 FTE's Based on Section 26.470.090.4, Growth Management Review: Essential Public Facilities (EPF) of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the "City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals." The applicant states that the seasonal use of the structure will not generate any new employees. The City Council, under Ordinance No. 24 (Series of 1995), granted Theatre in the Park an exemption from affordable housing mitigation under Section 26.470.090.4. The hours provided by the applicant shows the potential for a decrease in the number of FTE's from 2011 to 2012. Staff would recommend that an employee audit be required in September 2012 to verify the number stated above. If at such time the number is over 12.22 FTE's, the applicant must provide mitigation for the additional FTE's. 1 RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting • held September 21, 2011, and recommended approval with the condition that after one year of Certificate of Occupancy, an employee audit be provided to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA), and if the FTE is greater than 12.22, the applicant meet with the APCHA Board to discuss some type of mitigation in the form of a cash -in -lieu fee based on the average of Category 2 and 3 as stated in the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines in effect at that time. 2 MEMORANDUM To: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Department From: Jannette Whitcomb, Environmental Health Department Date: September 7, 2011 Re: Theatre Aspen, Major SPA amendment The City of Aspen's Environmental Health Department has reviewed the referenced land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. AIR QUALITY: The proposed project consists of building a permanent ticketing /concessions area on their current site which will provide winter storage of tent material. Currently, the tent is broken down and the majority is hauled to an offsite storage location. The application did not specify how many trips would be reduced during pre & post production, only that there would be a reduction. Findings: • This project decreases the volume of traffic on streets in and into Aspen during pre & post production of Theatre Aspen by an undetermined number. NOISE: Historically, Theatre Aspen has had difficulties maintaining proper noise levels (50 decibels after 9pm) at the perimeter of the property during performances with amplified music. For the 2011 season a new tent was designed and constructed with aspects to mitigate noise. During the 2011 season, the Aspen Environmental Health Department did not receive any noise complaints related to Theatre Aspen's performances. In addition, Theatre Aspen staff monitored noise levels at various locations along the Rio Grande Park's property line for each production to ensure compliance. It is staffs opinion that the combination of the type of amplified music, the implementation of a noise monitoring plan and the new tent design was the reason for the reduction in complaints. Given the variety of performances with amplified music that Theatre Aspen produces, a permanent noise monitoring program is recommended for Theatre Aspen to ensure continued compliance with the city's noise ordinance. Staff recommends Theatre Aspen also consider concluding performances by 9pm when the type of amplified music could potentially exceed noise limits. Therefore staff recommends the following be added to the SPA approval: Theatre Aspen incorporates a noise monitoring program for its productions to ensure compliance with the City's noise ordinance. The noise monitoring program shall verify compliance with the noise ordinance, by Theatre Aspen staff, before opening night of each production. It will also include continued monitoring throughout the summer given background noise levels may vary. Noise level readings shall be taken at multiple locations along the property line of the Rio Grande Park. FOOD PROTECTION: Concessions at the tent historically have only been pre - packaged, non - potentially hazardous foods, and beverages without ice, due to the fact that they do not hold a food service license nor have permanent plumbing. For special events serving food held at Theatre Aspen a temporary food permit must be submitted for approval to the Aspen Environmental Health Department prior to the event to ensure the protection of public health. For details on food safety requirements at temporary food permits contact CJ Oliver at 920 -5008 with the Aspen Environmental Health Department. 2 Memorandum Date: September 1, 2011 To: Jessica Garrow, City of Aspen Planning From: Brian Flynn, Parks Department Re: Theatre Aspen SPA 1. There is a request to Amend Ordinance 24, section 2, item 4, speaks of a financial reimbursement if changes to the tent area need to be made on behalf of the Phase 11 storm water project. Please confirm that Parks Management is supporting this amendment. 2. Theatre Aspen project staff is encouraged to re- evaluate the access roads (trails) into and out of the service area. Considerations should be made for site lines, turning radius, bus stops, curb cuts and possible conflicts with multiple users Building and Zoning DRC Comments Building comments 1) The permit issued this spring will need to be extended or the work needs to commence within one year of permit issuance. 2) The overview platform will require guard protection. 3) The applicant needs to provide a plan to secure the site to protect against weather and pedestrian traffic. 4) The emergency access to the tent and through the park will require Fire department approval. Zoning Comments Below, please find our concerns and requests: 1. Provide clear dimensions of existing and proposed square footage/FA with complete with floor plans. 2. Provide existing and proposed elevations. 3. 26.435.040(C)((i) provide survey /plan which illustrates the development does not exceed the delineated height limit from top of slope. 4. 26.435.040(C)((j)lighting plan: please provide specifics for proposed plan. For example, the "party lights medium base stringer, 90'length' it is not evident the light is opaque. Per the site plan the `Iceland 44' are located in the trash enclosure? The lighting schedule has more lights than illustrated by the lighting plan. 5. Proposed and existing signage shall meet current sign code. The proposed clear material of the lobby change the previously compliant signage on the concession and ticket structures. 6. Please provide one site plan to avoid confusion with multiple scenarios. ...- fib if. 11:s E Q A CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS September 9, 011 Jessica Garrow, AICP Long Range Planner Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Jessica, Thanks for the questions I have combined our responses which are in italics below. 1. On the Growth Management piece, we need more information about employees. You state that there will not be an increase in employees (FTEs), but there are no figures. Can you provide a more detailed explanation, including how many employees /volunteers are needed for the operation now, how the new space will be used in the future, and how that will impact the number of employees /volunteers. See Pdf attachment for employee breakdown. Though we will be converting part-time cleaners to a new full -time position, the full -time administrative staff will see a drop in the hours that have been devoted to the project thus far. Hence, total employee hours from 2011 to 2012 is a net loss. Please note that these include "staff" only— not our creative personnel such as actors, directors, and designers; the number of these employees and hours are highly variable with programming choices, and programming choices are not affected by the proposed development. This development is a seasonal venue. Also, how do you envision the space being used when there are no shows (i.e. mid -Sept — mid -May when nothing occurs there now)? We do not intend to actively use the space in the off season. If the lobby structure is permitted under this Major SPA application to remain standing year round it will be used for storage of seasonal performance items which would normally be exposed/tarped on site. Theatre Aspen would not be operating out of it in the off season. Will it be used as storage? Will you be operating out of it? The existing growth management approval is for a seasonal use, so any increase to a year -round use will impact the growth management review. It may also impact the comments from environmental health about food service if there is food service year- round. See response above. Also, what are the dimensions (i.e. square footage, height, length, width) of the new concessions area? (On a side note, it's not clear from the SPA application that these areas are existing and were part of the original approval, so if you could provide that info as part of your supplemental info that would be helpful.) This application is requesting approval to allow the "Lobby structure" to remain up on a year round basis. The lobby structure houses a free standing ticket booth (64 sq. ft. x 10' high) and a concession booth (192 sq. ft. x 10' high) within its overall enclosure. Both these structures fall within the size and height limitations as outlined under Ordinance No. 24 (series 1995) and the 2011 Lease agreement. The lobby structure is approximately the same size 33' x 59' as the past years lobby tent. Its maximum height, which is the top of the cupola is 24' just under the max. height of the previous tent enclosure of 24' -2 % ". All three of these structures along with the performance tent were existing structures on DA • CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS the site previously and had been granted under Ord. 24, the approved Insubstantial SPA amendment and the 2011 Lease agreement to be replaced. 2. The application shows some signage that is larger than what is allowed under our sign code. I know that Claude brought this to your attention during her building permit review earlier this year. If you want to have the signs as depicted, please provide additional information including size and location. We may be able to lump that into the SPA, but before I know for sure we need more info. A detailed signage plan might be helpful. Per Sect. 26.510.100 Sign Allotment- We would like to request the signage allotment increase as stated under item 7. - Lot of 27,000 or more square feet with one building and one 1 tenant shall be granted twenty 20 square feet of signage per applicable frontage The limitations for individual sign size shall match that of Lodge Use signs (26.510.110. E). Given our remote location within Rio Grande Park and that we are the only tenant in this location, we would also like to request an increase to the allowed max. height of a freestanding sign from 6' max. to that which we have illustrated on sheet A3.1, included in the SPA package. This would allow for greater site usage and visibility for this "remote" site location. We will submit a signage package /application for approval prior to the lobby construction. 3. I was walking by the site last week and noticed a large fence that seems to shield the trailers. I have looked through the planning approval and the building permit, and no fence was approved. If you would like a fence we should probably memorialize it in this approval. Please provide information on the fence — its dimensions and purpose. Actors' Equity Association Small Professional Theatre Rulebook, Sec. 48.A.2 -4 states: "Toilets and lavatories shall be...separate facilities from those provided for the audience....Any walkway between the dressing rooms and toilet facilities shall be masked from the view of the audience." The fence is our attempt to comply with this rule. It's approximately 10 feet tall and spans approximately 25 feet. Though originally a union compliance issue, it provides the added benefit of shielding the backstage personnel area from view of the audience, making it a more professional theatre environment for both audience and staff. It is a seasonal structure put up and taken down each season. 4. You make some statements about how leaving the tent frame, stage, and seating up year -round will decrease truck traffic in the area. Can you quantify that? It would decrease the truck traffic in the area in relation to the amount of trucks going to and from the site in mobilizing, assembling and disassembling the tent, stage, seating platform and lobby structure each season. Primary access to and from the site currently is down the pedestrian path between the skate board park and Rio Grande field. We approximate that 48 truck "legs" through the Park would be rendered unnecessary by this approval. This includes 1 truck load to bring the tent frame at the beginning of the season, 1 truck to bring the heavy equipment (forklift) required only to raise the tent frame, approximately 10 trucks to bring the stage and seating in from off site, and then the same numbers in order to remove everything from the site at the end of the season, totaling 48 trips to the site through the Park. Because we are limited by the size of trucks we can bring, this often leads to an increase in the number of trips. There would also be larger equipment i.e. hoists /small cranes needed to Q A CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS erect the lobby structure. The City of Aspen Parks Department greatly favors mitigating traffic in this heavily used portion of the park. 5. Will the new censessien- lobby structure increase traffic around the site? This kind of goes back to point 1 — if the space is used year- round, what are the impacts in terms of traffic? No; it will actually decrease traffic — the alternate solution (the temporary lobby tent used in 2011) required 2 truck trips, and the new structure would require none if completed. See response under item 1, no usage during the off season. N N H H O 0 N N Z Z Z Z O O ✓ FT L7) O 0 a a w w 2 2 r IT N el r J J 0 Z 0 > w LL LL z C 0 in aL O Lu w w cc 1- 0 0 z z > s 0 a O 0 a w * O U 0 w 0 N O c7 0 CC 0 Z z F Z Z .�-i a o O w w O ry 1n = cc = 0 U U Z p r w w H Y co CC un L S W W 0 a 0 1JJ r r F r O z u LLI O v r CC N r CC CC • Z < a nn J — z r 0 0 m o o m w 0 / N n e n M N Z v) 'y N O - Lin w tIJ o - T - 4 N w 2 U 0 } _ Z 3 O J — N w Z C C .a 00 0 P m m 0 w W N ti O ri N c o a J o U 0 cc Q 0 0 O O u r Z z a LLI w w w w >- 0. LL F 0 w Q Q r--; ~ U D W t J CC -� ce w 0 u a O Z CC Z Z a z a 0 z 0 ~ z z ^ Z > W te 0 0 Z a' O Q w = la r O r w w w Z w O 0 O >- N in 1/1 r * m ey.hibit E Jessica Garrow From: Will Young <willy @Cunniffe.com> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 3:54 PM To: Jessica Garrow; Emily Zeck; Paige Price; Charles Cunniffe Subject: Theatre Aspen P &Z submittal drawings Attachments: 0831_E2.1.pdf; 0831 A1.3b.pdf; 0831_A1.1.pdf; 0831_A1.2.pdf; 0831_E1.1.pdf Jessica, Attached are drawings which address the questions asked in the DRC review. As I mentioned recently, Parks has proposed eliminating the overlook deck and substituted stone landscaping steps down to the water's edge. Both Theatre Aspen and CCA are in favor of this as well and 1 have revised the site plan to reflect this change. Sheets A1.2 & A1.3 are new drawings, A1.2 addresses the FAR and height questions asked and includes a site section reflecting the flood plain question. Sheet A1.3 is our master signage proposal which we feel is appropriate given the remote location and nature of this particular site. I have revised the Electrical drawings per the concerns and questions asked. Regarding the site security issues, Emily met with security company on Friday; definitely installing an alarm system in ticket and concession booths, and possibly a surveillance camera, pending pricing. Should pricing become an issue for the camera surveillance, Theatre Aspen will patrol by foot 3 times /wk. Will Will Young Senior Project Architect Charles Cunniffe Architects 610 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tel: 970.925.5590 Fax: 970.925.5076 willy @cunniffe.com www.cunniffe.com AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS CO WEST 2010 FIRM OF THE YEAR! 1 ■< .ec m.ixv. 1 OlW !Mil 11111 r i we+mo,.v. OUMOIOO'N3dSV e - e EE i e O•fl1w re anmaua 1 fl11e wvmee � wY 1O3MW �! a `. 7 f r I 51031M32fV 3j31NNf10 83 NUSN 3211tl3H1 g' 4 I I 111 N • @ ilk t . ( g g p /�� � / ..�i�� - - -.1-- //! • i ` r \ \` \k %� ° �, iii/ 1 � ' ��/f _ ��i' di fit - TIT V . ., 1 � f � �� ell �pll P$1 III I I I / - , 1. . � i I,II /e \ • r �) Asset, I II ® 8 I /7 ,,„, ,-:- ' t \ T -4 4Witi i 1/4-_-- ___„.-- . 0 \ 1 111 "Sr �-�� 11".:;:':;/)( �� ! > ' ■ • 111 111/'� V U. 7 r.- -� •- •C I \ I \ \1��, / (b, s i r • + ` . /� ■4 mvin av�li mre,vu.a ima mawne'1 w,auvr x.ve o OlO3'N3dStl e c 1 1 e., 8 N 1 00 g S13 311H321V atINWIO S31HVHO N3cISV 3aLV3H1 a 4 a B g 4 i < f 5 6 i g I ?t iii in a 8 TTI < e e X9 nn_ J A qq 2 i d kb : il alb ( �l (/ �y /iii'% N HI it til==7 csk _ - e i �( / �i.�' - e ` B . 9 i t fr --------- .---..----------....., 9 ,./ 1-4 /)/ / / ///// I irr, S, -2 i gnirA' _....--.<\;:-.--- ___ --- \. - - - - . A s 'f i l ti __!--> / / $ , p i img4ta: / \\ e t-- -I fi*9."...P3? " pri ,-t.- pi e !:_ii_fil=illo, 1 Pr 2 / � . &a 6 • ;; IIY I ��� • �r,. 1 11 : . 1 ,, :f ii ;: =fi, f;: : : =, -_ : ;� e ' �� .-ln S /f , ice / ; i� \' �u— t , - /BA // \ I, i /( 1I, -6 I lif • .I a ve.a m,v Can owsrim.v% OOWOl00 e Q /� n�aso,c^.� agvv.a ...n pans 1 �..mmwu++oi. ! q : 1 £ �� g Q CEA i a 1 S10311HOHV 3ddINNf1D S3li1VHD N3dSV 3a1V3Hl ' �`0' 8 i 1 v ! I z F _ ^ 6 z N¢ o z. z o r w W z w O ° _ _ I -1 i e tit it ft 4 3p = a tr E ° q `' 1 u S P €ll g I og s F n 1 5: ,1 les w =_2c] CC 0 W ` ? 0 OECD - a` ^ z w- y . u n s aaau Z m � =— ,v) ug U b o _cc w z ~� s z a M ..« •.« r O w w LL 0 1.< oareowo'H3esv 2t _ e 1 EA s - T 1 310311HOi1V 3ddINN110 STRAVHO N3dSV DUIV3H1 I �////7// /� /ice _�� ��___��7/�////// 1/ : I / ill °� ` / / � //'\':;51,,s;---;;;., ` / Oh il //� j ,,,V7: _< ;;;; 11 a m // // ,- / /' op, 1 / / /. / �, arr� 'O� i� 11 / // // * ' �� "'ir \ • r It / k \ 4 i..III �' -J` • / �% / j 7�, /r tit I I' :i f (r / /f // / \ \ :;, ; ;" y 4. 1 ti o _ / / gym 'I 1 I \ / - ice i`- ��'► ✓� / / / I / \ / / / A 4 / . / , r. �/ ��w / / /© '" \ Q i cwou�u mn w�uunv� i wmno•: OOVYO1OYN3dSV -- r 510311HO8V 3ddINNf10 S31NVH0 N3dSV 3TJ1V3H1 °' JAL �' _ i 5 1 fig ,° 4 , nil ___ ,� 4. 4 -1111 .i� , � o i `� 1 I i I I i _lItI— g� o� -. 0 '1• ill E i it G, ®NX i 1 ;At I, - 1 4 gs ,2,2'11 ill, I l � n I" � lr.�I Y i 11118 iii i lli t ii i ° 1 i, —• 1 11111 1Rii i i1, oh' �1 � i ilS W iU E1,Qlilliiiiiiil N 1 :1,, k 11111111II III 1 al Ifili t Y2 I AO ,� I� 1 � : - fi___iG■•__ ii Z E CR) : 1 tr,Aresit 11 1 . IF g 1 1 II!! 1 1 e -I I v 11 0 e 2 ge €® Z 1 1 I' $ �n 1 1 0 i d 0 ii,i ,� 1 iiiiiMiii! 1* o 'V _____] 1e fi1 as 1 012g1 it. _ I SRI i i l l 11 � i 7jt 0 6 1 iI 7 i &v d �i n1 O ° -c i ®®® , Rimmnis 1 4 a Q c irm 4 h UNOUODOPIU li o h iJ I h t f � � Hp ;' m MIME i o !!!!! ! ! o a ��� a �� ;;if ■3 g8 & i fl l _ ... a € ees e2: a ..sa „ e� [I� ihn O ,i► • - - - _ . . .. . ._ .- ., • 4. , / ,0.45 . e. ...., 1 ..., . I ‘ , iril Il 1 ' .4. '7 t . _ . TII i•tb....., I . , 4. . 1 ti ,1 ,,,,, ..0.., ,i,... 4' I 0 . , , ?, ■ • • . • - r - - - . . • ' , ,o . . 1 ,., . • + 4 1'11 i ' . eV, - - .. ... ...• .••• ' • ' \... i '' - ‘ . • 1 1 % •• `,•'! ,., • - ': ^ .. / 4 4 ,. 1%kippvcr, , . . ,,....‘ 4 1.4 INN ,,,.' •• ,' ( . . . , .I ,,,•--- ' . : 'N - • i . _. i i. -;;,:, 4, _ .,-1, / - • / - - - sl _,•„ , - i .- •Ii.p. ....,,,A , . /.. .....- ... , t - ,'' ' • • - ' i. • ,-, , ,, - , • 7 '• • ; , f C5 I 41 \ P Ilk ; :to, r , . • :. ,...... .... . •: 0: c.--,, . - • . .-- -Li - .. - ; I - ' 1 _ - ..."F ---'- ' • r - p - :.,...:.':,.. - • ..__ . ,- - - y - .• I ., , / ' ' ' ' •,• , . __,...-- ,itio. • Nk; -.(- -- : sot ,,•• 6 i .-•_... ,..., • , -4.....0.•-,,-.,„7„ ji... • 1 ,d•ovvo. - , .o.. , --' •ItA''...-7,-' o • ill .: . - .• - ■ ,. ... ■ . /. ; • l , '‘..... I IP - .101°:, , \ 0 41( , 4 1111 . 4 ■ , . ... • :I, - /,' 4\ A -' • if ■ ..... .1 , , ,iiittega .,•L .. /1 ‘ , I 1 I ' • , I 1 1 1 •1 1 0 . 1 t: 1 1 I i ' . ' . ,, : , : • . „, , i . ■ ', •' 4 ,..i . '"' : .. ' . , • civ we ' , ! ,...- ■ f I. .' ' i • aup ' 1 I '. • ' • ' ' f j ' ....-.• : .... j-.- • - '- a - 6 -- -- f rii - 1 a , 4 li 6 - , 614; -' '* • -. •111111' il i• 11 / •, ' ' 1 . i 11 1 • ' ' :' ' -• ,- - ,..f.s.lcir,)i . I ,. ...r=.1.4, _-_, • , 4.. ,.. , \ /'• - ....r ., . _ . '':'. • .• IT . 74 * / - 4 , 4••:_lrile di. ' - ' • -• r .1 • . - .'. -' -- ' ..r.. il‘ , . F '' '• ir . 4 :o.c., - . - ,TIO 7 1.. :. ., *411r • ..:. ' .7 -----. .-....,._, Iroproml . .. ...„ "•""' • - i• ,, e - . , _• ---1 -71 ::‘:-:1. - • .'• Tjgaiiic°5"'33.. __ . ii i% '......., - wt . ._ ....••• r4 .4 .,... .4, .., - . __,..... 1 ... ;\. •- •'•• ..... ' , M ' q • ..- •, •-• - ..41r4 - ...... --- . : "- ' .1 4i 41 a 1 ' t ! ...it. ..- f - . . ' - 4 , -....11144- - • ' • -7,i4' jj . ^....; •- i:/ '-•-•'..--- , . ..:;i ,-... .44. ' ' %) - • -..: ' ,elf 1 I I •••• -• • • • ■ ' . .45P ..• 55 • • '' . • °t 4 . L; f ,', , i .,;•ti .. •• '' --, P55 - ' • -.• 4 4: • . L , . ( , ' 1 i 1 P ' • - 7 :: •• l• '4 ,:' - :1- 3--wisiver_sto.. -- - - • , . .. _._ , „ , torr ''' .4' • .... , . _„„5, 5 . .-54 0 '..... "W--._ •••-•Z,4i.'5•.''•••‘ \. A .‘„i.), .-.: 4. .:..•.... A._ .. 1 r14. li i .e. • '-, .-..- • . ... • . J .444-- - .. ...,,. -_-• - 4 ,,,, .„ . .;`,- . ) • Is • ir ' '' ft "-nir".:"... ''''''- - . ; .- ' 4. 4 • .7-* -1.. I tnt - . '. .' ''''''''''.. : .''- 7 ' '2 .. • k- +2 - ' - - . -- ' . 7 - ■?4 , TS.4 . - .;'r'. . - .. , _ ,, - • - --- .* vilai1,- • ....,,,,.;,„!. .- ,........., .7 ••„, . . ,„... .,lt ...,,,..,, . , M '' ' ' • i ' - ,,,...--at 1... --'-'. 4 - 7 -14." - • - ' -- -r. . • ;.. _•.,-,...." • k ip.- .- ,. ,,,,i: -v .16t7; .s "vit. - . ••• .. •''''' it . -... ''''. '. 4.-• - '..„bv,-, -:. 7:7,• _,..1.,. I* .14111 't ,•. : -- gr,i. ,.. • : ''. • '',.',' ,;-..•/ . ''z i . 1 . 1 ." . . - v. ,. - v ,4 ._,, „ ,...--- .., -1,,.._ . 74.. N „,-14.,- -,..•- , „i_ o ' • % .4, Z.'•.. • -- ..- • -, ...•;' 1- '.....-..;-_.:.-_ ,., • 7.1f • .. '• ..... ' . .` ., ..' , . '•.::. 7... - -,.-- ..."' .:' , V ' 's . • . . V - - • • .1.. t ' '' . ..,-„,- .. r , , r • ,. ,. .... . ' . . -. • 4 IC ' C , • ,. 1,, .-- ' -„: . . 1 • - 't ---. •0 .. • - ......\ __ - .. , - -- - n - ,.7-_,..... -ie . ... ...., ..,.v -,„ • 1 I vi %; ,, "41 . , -1,, . 144 .. • 7t r",.4 -• ' ...e ,1•-• .; • 4 --... • '' e , ---,-),),':,..i \.. . . . , . ,.' .. 1... { ' , .. • . 1 , 1'V • - ", ' 41 . • ■ ' r !. i 41 ; . ••,!, I.: .., .. . t I.. , , s, , : ,,,_./. _ N oty ..• , .. :. . •,... offmamea• f..M. •.‘ *.4, ,_ . .1...%-......,._-:.,...7 . , '..- ‘ N O . -1%.* • . _____. • ' -' / - „ --, ' - ... '.', ..: ":-.- i -- J. -°.__,..; . l l • N % ,,, . .:'.. ''..4 .. NI ■, i. • 4 ..• ' .. ' ...- 1 • •I ' 14 ' _ ! „ . • \k . - `',/".1 ''"---.-- .,.. . : / • :' •-. \ ...,„....., L\ , ' \ , I. , eti • \ .- ... - f - .-:, ' •.- *a. ■•■••• y , 4-. .. . -.... \„...... , . ,,,.........• , , . •-•., .?,::,„, :,,,.,... i . : ,\. ---:. --....... • .. - 1 - '•,- ---•••• ' . II, ' , ( l N , • '' ..,... ' ••,, .. ‘,N; ' 1 - - , -.. ::::-...5...--- - '.'' .'---_,-..• , ' ' . 4,' - _ ---.-..- . ,--.--....__ • ..) .,,,ed .,, , 4 - A; • _.. , ' • '. -, ; • ......1 ".' ... \ •.,.. 4- • . - ' ' ' . ,4" '. .. 1" ,--1 " . '• ..- 't • -.: .,r T, • . ,. / ., . .,...../1 , .......7„ . ._ Ili • ....., ••• • A ,.. , • / I . . , .7 . „ ,, t h ,,,, ' ''' ' ■ 4 •• j ;" 5 . - ' 4 .,,r---.; - - -- ,,„4 4 : - .,,th• ,, • .. 1, _../ - • • • • ....: - ...- •' ..4. :. 14j .... • • , . • * " .- V......rollor l f, ; 404 , • ..,•-- • - -,...---- ' ' ."..• - . -.X. ...,--.•ipdh' -- -- -1' ' - - . , . i __- .._....• At - . ... -, r: 0 6 . i • - ,„ 1.- - . • ..' -77,-- • .7•.•-•J - .,-,- - • 1 I I„ 1 --„,...,....., , 5 -. .55411... • • :ir , tp - r 1 1 , . - . , ' g k ' • it•NPAr--1 ••••-• .V. - • 4a '''' ' ''' % 4 ' • ' * ... ° ' • ' - ' '-''' ' . . .- - ., '* .1 - ' . -4141111111111! :-.. - - • ^- -- •'- . _ . 1 1 r ' - -... ig '.'"*.: -: • "it . -... - - _ 4..• 'e .- r - - . ''', . 1..Ly ' I ','' '' . _ •": : - • . - ' - - - 1 , .; ' . if -- ie..: .„. • - 4 - • - ..• . . - --........; '',_ Alia ..,...... . . ..'••■• . ',Ike -... "..- --' • . • '''': 4.. 411 "'• 7-4%--• •'' - !l -!'''''' .7-: • -, . `-',. . '. k '.. lo • ...)..c - •;!'. iii ,. . ,. .,of.,,- - .. , . . • ' 4 1 4 . • ' -*--1 4t4I■iais . .• -.41' • '..4.,, . __-,. . "--. • :.,, V8V 4, ‘-1. ' •• ' -.- V• t '.. / 7' . , ..I . '„1 , 4 V ' . `. `".. •-- . - - '' - '..... f, ! • 5., '"7 •'• ' . . ... . . • ... . . . . ,.. 4 , . ' 4 .. .. , -.., • • II WI. " ' • , . , ... V" 1. . . , i __....__ • i- _________ _ r 7 .,..- I 44,-.--. .14. • C. • ., , 1, . - • . 1 - . P • 7 .-- .. ty ,,,,, ,...' .,...; ,a'' 0,.2?: ; r t 1.,-;.' ..:.1'..1.$:.ii:*;'''''''./.:,7"..4.,„ . t ., -4. lib. 7..• • ,•, * s • NO, ".% . A ;•-■ F'‘ '...? . .-. ., _ • 4 Am I „...„,„,' x,, .■ ,: .. • ."" , , ..4 ,. .. 4,.... 4 . ,,,,,.. , . 1 • 'IVII • " ' ,,- : ... .,, - 11F ZA ‘,„ .' )■'. , ''' ' ' ' .4" . .. .'"' i ' I ., . . , , _ x•.:-....,.i. • ..,ir....:. , Jamming '4 al 11 " ` .. t•t 2 ... • , m itt - t''' • • ' °b. f.!' ' -....r . • (. . ''' ' ' .. r ',‘• - L ' 0-t`i i 0 4 ,-, - A: '‘ ' 11 . s... ." ' ' ' 4 ' ' ' '" .• . '1, .- ... • 4._ • • . 1 ' i .;,.!,..,',,.. •"•„.•'!:••• ;.‘fg , . „.f!',41:- . - ,,14:'Nk... -.. ;- I ' L ' I ,, ; ` ,, . _ - . *.." . , •,-.. • '4...,., .;1 . . , . ' . ': „ ,t.. .2 ..., -• ... ■ . • P . t._ . . 7 .7 ' ' *- ,,•', Llf 'f' , . , , • 1 ' '' ‘° . . , S . - 1 .. • I 1 . $ ' I ' ,. : 4,,,;• , ' , ''ff, .,;.‘ - l''' ' • '., .' . . . _ - , • • • . 1 ' ,P.; }, * r t ., . . ' '.,,, , '.„ P.4., ..:' , 4 Or' CI i 4, 0, . , . .. ..• 4 "' ' ''.4" , „_._ . r . . I . ... 1 , ;• 1, • ' ' . . 7 , ._,-^ '.' ' , - • ..-- - ,• . .1 :-''' *" e . .1 • •,, :` :. • - . , ., .... . „ ''. • • - -:,- • I. 4. A , cri . , .: .'''.- i\ '■-•_' -- .....- ; - Imi 7 , •• ; • .. ' . it . ' . . ...4.:+0 .*• : "''''''' . • '".-- 4-‘ . . , , 1 J11111 •• ' . • •41 ' ' . - • •• • , , . • . , ; , 0 A ,, . -....a-.t.mpir....ratit~1 - - _ . ..- • , \ ....,..., - 1 ,, P il 1 / l . - ' ....; • • - . r • r„i: i , 41\ - .■ . f - I, . ■ ,. ; - • -.• ..,-,%.. ,.i .e , v ' - ' ,' • / ■'' ' takNilk.,1' t. -- ., ._ - -- V .... . . • -...f.: .1,L . ,,,* - ,, . • . I ' ' • - r .-. ' ' 1 ' . ' .. ' . ,-1 A ..*. ' . , t.4V - k • . -. , X-. . 4 , .,. . • • ' .. ....1 , ",:',;::.;• .. . . ,: • . .. , 4 , , , . fi) - ;i i:. - . ,- • • • , ., , . , , „ .,.., , . • _ •.. , .,, 4 A ft , • .., - . • ',.0 -1 - All ...•'• . .. ._ ,. 1/ . ,•• —,41 , ...... • 0 4.4 ;-. -• , - . • . i*.. • ‘..,,. ,. . , -. . , [ ,.:-- t•t 7, , . • tl, ,i_ :- ',..: , Ait • 1 / „,,,,. _ „ i •, :. ,- ,,,.. j •-.; -.., '....- - - ,. ._ , . , .. .,..,..f.: . .. 4 ,•• •:/: ,,i ., . r •,..i7., ",...,..„..„•;... ,,......:-., . .. • . • , • • ii .. . . ., ' ” ■ , , . ,:, • .4 OS ..... ... V . (4 ' e, f . - '.- t r ./ . , ' " " ••• ' At ''' .' t„ ' t- , . . • - ' . . . - W I 1 ' ..1■6 14 ::=.1: A 'teit . 4.' % .•' , 1 • . ' - ''. . oj e ''.( '... ' ' e . . 3 ,...... *.i.,.. • , • : , ,,,,...--- • ,. f . . .y. 1 , , I i 1 • ...-4- i , — 74 .,'.' - • • '"'..- '-' ... : .... , ' - -' - ' , ' ' • e ..,.... . -: ....... -. • - P ' "... ' • '1 ' ' f '; - ... - - _ _ ‘ . ''' ' • l :. ' . 0 . , ' :'''.' ,.1 ' . 4; , , :..1: . .N,', , c - • : . . .1 :,,, '..' -- . i! . r i ' -'‘ - ., • • .•,, . ., , . ! L , ; ,,..., t... t ..• . . . . . • "... ..„.. : r - ' . • ,. . . " . r ' . ' ' 1 . ' . . '4 . . I , • . . . '. . :, :,, -, 4 d it ',. . ' „ ....: • „, I ...., k S ' ', ' ,ABM , j :4, • ''1;, /' ' . - IM . . L 1.410 ” i ili . ' " • 1 . 1 .41.1 -ill --, ..: ,, ,., . . ' , , . • ___ I • • , ' : • . • • *it " — ; , 0 • , .... e - , •.; .' ."'• 1 ‘, '''' : . • . ., i , ,,,, — t e .- ,--._. - ..., i t . ,,, ".. .-. i ,j fr . , L, 1 4 ,, .? / i r....rn t- • ..- 1. 1 ii it 4 ( I k ' PIO 4 4 1 4 ----...;.i ' . • , s ' .. '.. ,: ,,,-.' . i , . ti , I 1 . ),1 ,• . ,,,...i f .. • ' ' \ • - , , ; c . , F , It t ' , • '7' . • l • •V ' Ni v. , • - 'I g ' 4,.. • ,,, ,- . i.re. . — .,. , , 1 - , ,, ' •' -,. ". .f, .1 „,14.),,• • ?' - i • '. ' '. ''' 4 • 1 ;', ....I..' .11., -..,.. ".. ,i • • \ 4 4.- . ■' . i f U. 1. ‘. i I A e r_ . , ‘, . _ , ,,, . • . .. , - , .. .1 _311 r .. ,...• :_.- .-.. .. , k ,) ,,o ,. ,‘ . 1 4,, 1 , . A / ' .11 i f fr ' r . 1 . . - . . " i . ' %, , • "1 `, P ' \ . P ,' b i I ' AA ; . , , , ,.., A • . • A, 4 ., A ... ' , t ' , , . •; ' '• . :IN • N. V.oves. 1 r a t , 7 '-• W' I y S7i �. ss.. • �, ' , r t J r , • r •,ry ti a ^ •. A Yt }..c ' ' r, st,r r J 4 ; r: 1 c 5 - .0 gy : 0 -.' ' I: --.'",. it %. r a I , iwsX1 9 1 s.� • Y •r MM +arlgr�►+ �f+�► ',W., • ; . , , . .p . • . . . r.-:. f ,i,e I ' VN , Sr i 1 .,, 1 f, 0 n. 6 . 't ilt...". itk . , • , 1 i,' Q 1 tt k •.. t.,,.. , , . . ..... ,.,„..r,,,,,..% . , _:•'..„.(.... . - . . . .., -.....,. ,.... ..,..„,..:. , , . ., .., . „..,..,_ . • 4. . .,..„ ,.,. , . ,,,„ -I \ I, ; ' V ', _ i'd '''), \ .„ , .., . t *040 f "Si ," '.l.. • I i . - 14), ' . : 1 ! ', V 1- a � a4 __ ' • / ‘ 1 ''- : 4 4 i14 '' .' • firpiiH.T. , '..i. - . ii . i . -....4, t''''. • ,. i t * . I 1 \ y ` , f 4 ,4 ,' t yy ,• ... 1 ,1 .' r ' , � " " '� . r tr ■ t l , '� r • • ,. v > -1 . '...-a. tv'iV),t' ', ' ' # ' ' ' ...t.: 1: ' - t -.:..• ...-. 1 .. 4 ' , ,� / �. ' . s i + r ' -":"-. iti . trib MCI Responses from Applicant to Staff Questions, October 12, 2011 1. Please provide more detailed renderings of the site. a. See attached renderings. 2. Please provide more detailed information about why the tent framing cannot be collapsed. Could the seating and stage could simply be moved to the west and then the tent frame collapsed on site. How would this impact the truck trips? Is it even possible? a. Architect: Very difficult if at all possible, the tent frames are raised and lowered using a crane /hoist attached to the frame center /peak which is the center of the tent. Due to building code requirements the engineering & construction of the stage and seating platform required extensive amounts of framing and numerous bolted connections to the concrete slab. It became radically more complex that anything the Theatre had previously installed, unfortunately there is nothing simple about moving it. It was built to building codes which required a very solid sound structure able to resist movement and collapse. We are sensitive to the perceived covering; hopefully the new studies we are creating will present some alternatives. The number of truck trips with heavy equipment use would be greatly increased. b. Applicant: I'll also add that during subsequent conversations with the tent contractor, who assembles and disassembles the tent, he does not recommend attempting it under current conditions, and removing the seating would only be a minimal improvement. Other complications that he did not forsee are the electrical panels and distribution system and their proximity to the tent frame, and whether a crane of the magnitude that we would need could access the site at all. The latter largely depends on Parks' final revisions to the surrounding area, including both weight loads of the entry paths and the quantity of space surrounding the tent in which the crane could operate. 3. The Parks Department expressed interest in leaving the tent up for a slightly longer period than currently permitted. Is this something Theatre Aspen is interested in? a. Architect: Leaving the tent up longer is very problematic as the tent fabric is not rated to carry snow loads, heating it would be costly and not entirely fool proof with regard to snow build up. It might also effect how the building & fire departments view the structures usage. Their current mid -May to mid - September time frame is already somewhat into the "snow" shoulder season. b. Applicant: True, we are definitely not interested in keeping it up in the primary snow season. However, we are trying to find a way to accommodate the Parks departments' wishes, and simultaneously address the off- season aesthetics. I would be interested to know more about what the review process would be, if we were to request permission — which we may or may not utilize year to year, based on weather and other factors — in the lease for earlier assembly and later disassembly. 4. Signage. There were some concerns at a staff level about the amount of signage proposed. The information I have is a bit unclear regarding the specific locations of the free - standing signs. Are 2 needed, or could it be achieved through two smaller free - standing signs? a. Architect: We did not feel the amount of signage was excessive especially given the remote location of the site. The two signs, 33" x 44" were based on the existing sign frame dimensions in which the season's show poster slides into, the locations would be Page 1 of 2 along the bike path around the new bridge and the back of house entrance. They are meant to inform the general public traveling along the bike path as to the upcoming shows. 5. Actor Fence. Please provide an explanation of what would happen if you did not provide a fence in the manner proposed. Are there any other options? Would you lose certain actors or be unable to put on certain performances? Also, could you send us the exact rulebook citation? The citation makes it seem that there are other potential options besides a fence, though a fence might make the most sense. Some additional background would be helpful. a. Applicant: Actors' Equity Association Small Professional Theatre Rulebook, Sec. 48.A.2- 4 states: "Toilets and lavatories shall be...separate facilities from those provided for the audience....Any walkway between the dressing rooms and toilet facilities shall be masked from the view of the audience ". We are open to other suggestions, but we did find that the fence seemed to make the most sense. The only part of the entire site that's hidden from the view of the audience is the north side of the tent, and this space is completely occupied by the dressing room trailers. (And if the trailers relocated, then THEY would be in view, still violating this rule.) If you requested that we add a clause where we would use the minimum amount of fencing necessary to achieve compliance with union regulations, we would happily agree to that. I am not certain whether or not the previous fence size was excessive for our needs. If we were to be found in violation of this rule (compliance on site is checked periodically), it would indeed jeopardize our standing and contract with the union. And yes, the worst possible outcome of that would be to lose our ability to employ union actors, and the production standard of Theatre Aspen would suffer significantly, affecting every single area of our operations. I'm happy to give more details on this if you like. Also, please keep in mind that lack of a fence also exposes the unattractive underbelly of the backstage to the patrons as well — all of our tools and supplies, crew hanging out, etc. This masking is not a requirement for our operations, but it does facilitate a level of professionalism that I believe is expected of us by our patrons and the community. Page 2 of 2 &ib ORDINANCE N0.24 (SERIES OF 1995) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING TO THE ASPEN THEATRE IN THE PARK AN AMENDMENT TO, THE RIO GRANDE FINAL SPA DEVELOPMENT, FINAL SPA PLAN APPROVAt,.,AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF YEARLY CONSTRUCTION OF THE THEATRE TENT AND THEATRE PRODUCTIONS AT THE CITY - OWNED RIO GRANDE PARK IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Rio Grande Master Plan and SPA Development Plan were approved in 1993; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director did receive from the Aspen Theatre in the Park (Applicant) and has reviewed and recommended for approval an application (the "Plan ") for an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA Final Development Plan, Final SPA Development Plan, and Growth Management Exemption for an Essential Public Facility to undertake its yearly tent construction and theatre production at the area historically used for this purpose; and 411 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the development proposal in accordance with those procedures set forth at Section 24- 6- 205(A)(5) of the Municipal Code and did conduct a public hearing thereon on May 2, 1995; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the plan, agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 8 of Article 7 (Specially Planned Area) and Division 1 of Article 8 (Growth Management Exemption) the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the Aspen Theatre in the Park's amendment to the Rio Grande SPA Final Development Plan and exemption from growth management competition and mitigation subject to conditions, 1 to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plan meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Plan, with conditions; is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Section 24 -7 -804 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's SPA development component: 1. The Applicant's final plan submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval. 2. The Plan is compatible with and enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity. 3. Sufficient public facilities exist to serve the development. 4. The parcel is generally suited for development considering topography and natural hazards. 5. The Plan employs land planning techniques to limit impacts to the environment and provides public and private amenities. 2 6. The Plan is in compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 7. The Plan does not require the expenditure of public funds for the subject parcel or the neighborhood. 8. No development is proposed on slopes of 20% or greater. 9. No GMQS allocations or exemption are necessary for the Plan except for as approved within this ordinance. Section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1 above, the City Council grants SPA Final Development Plan amendment approval for the Aspen Theatre in the Park subject to the following conditions: 1. All parking, handicap parking and handicap parking dropoffs will be consistent with the Rio Grande Master Plan as adopted by City Council. 2. Prompt clean -up of the site after each summer season is required. No storage of materials is allowed on the site in the off season except for the tent structure, under protective cover. Materials and props stored on site shall be kept out of view in accordance wiht a landscaping plan including fencing if necessary to be approved by the Community Development Director with the ablility of Council to review if it is not working. 3. The tent will be erected in mid May and removed in mid September of each year. 4. The amended Rio Grande SPA Development Plan shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the amended SPA Development Plan within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the PUD Plan approval invalid and reconsideration and approval of both by the Commission and City Council will be required before their acceptance and recording, unless an extension '. or waiver is granted by City Council for a showing of good cause. 5. Any overhead utility wires shall be undergrounded by the applicant within three years. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department on and appropriate digging schedule. Section 3: Pursuant to Section 24 -8 -104 (C)(1)(b)(i -iii) of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the 3 Applicant's request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption for essential public facilities: 1) The Applicant's annual tent construction is essential for their continued use of the Rio Grande property. 2) The programs and activities sponsored and or hosted by the Applicant at the Rio Grande facilities have historically provided cultural enrichment to the citizens of the City of Aspen without which the City would not have attained its present character. Furthermore, the Applicant's programs have served and continue to serve important community needs and continuation of same will only enhance their value and accessibility to the citizens of the City of Aspen and the general public. 3) The Applicant's proposed development involves essential public facilities, will enhance existing essential public facilities, and is not - for - profit in nature. Section 4: Pursuant to Section 24 -8 -104 (C)(1)(b)(i -iii) of the Municipal Code, and the findings set forth in Section 6 above, the City Council awards and grants growth Management Quota System II I development exemptions from competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for the theatre tent and normal accessory uses of the tent on the basis that such development is for essential public facilities. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the Plan approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 6: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding 4 now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 8: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 9: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the y day of, 1995 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, III Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /5 day of ` i , 1995. Pofrui—lie:1 Attest: GeoV Seahhoi cehn6tti / Kathryn . Koch, City Clerk 5 41/ / � F , � I � N , A ,, L � L � Y, adopted, passed and approved this 4' day of Y '" '9= , 1995. et()Peann Wallamagi , A at: i _ p Kathryn Koch, City Cler JJ (1/ 6 • x RESOLUTION NO. 60 (Series of 2011) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO THEATRE ASPEN TO KEEP THEIR TENT FRAME, STAGE, AND SEATING CONSTRUCTED DURING THE WINTER AT RIO GRANDE PARK, 505 RIO GANDE PLACE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID 2737 - 073 -06 -851 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant, Theatre Aspen, has submitted an application for a Temporary Use Permit to keep their tent frame, stage, and seating constructed at Rio Grande Park, 505 Rio Grande Place; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant has approval to maintain a seasonal tent from mid -May to mid - September and accessory structures in Rio Grande Park for theatre performances; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has a long term lease with the City of Aspen to maintain their seasonal tent and accessory structures; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval for a Temporary Use Permit to keep the tent frame, stage, and seating up during the interim time when their season ends (mid- September) and when the City can review a Major SPA Amendment to the Rio Grande SPA and associated reviews; and, WHEREAS, Community Development Department reviewed the temporary use application and recommends that the City Council approve the temporary use permit with conditions; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the proposed temporary use is consistent with the character and existing land uses of the surrounding parcels and neighborhood and that granting the temporary use will not adversely impact the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on September 12, 2011; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the temporary use request under the applicable provisions in the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the temporary use permit meets or exceed all applicable development standards; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Resolution No. 60, Series of 2011 Page 1 of 2 Section 1: In accordance with Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant Theatre Aspen a Temporary Use Permit to maintain the tent framing, seating, and stage on Rio Grande Park, with the following conditions: 1. The temporary use is valid from September 15, 2011 to that time in which the City Council reviews and votes on the pending Major SPA Application and associated reviews, but shall last no later than May 15, 2012. 2. If the City Council denies the pending SPA Amendment, the tent framing, stage, and seating shall be removed by the Applicant no later than May 15, 2012. 3. The tent framing shall not be covered. 4. The stage and seating shall be under protective cover and located on the existing concrete pad. 5. All material representations made in the application and in the hearing by the Applicant and the Applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. 6. Theatre Aspen shall provide a security check of the site at least three times per week to ensure the site remains safe and secure during the temporary use. Section 2: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED, September 12, 2011, at a public hearing before the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. LL q- 20 -20,/ CGs Michael C Ireland, , ayor orcester, City Attorney ATT :T: Kathryn S. Kocil ity Clerk Resolution No. , Series of 2011 Page 2 of 2 Re¢ular Meeting Aspen City Council September 12, 2011 yor Ireland moved to adopt Ordinance #28, Series of 2011, on first reading; seconded by • Co cilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Skadron, yes; Torre, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Moti.. carried. ORUIN • E #29 SERIES OF 2011— Electric Fees Councilman Torre • oved to read Ordinance #29, Series of 2011; seconded by ayor Ireland. All in favor, motion , : 'ed. Councihnan Johnson returned to Council tabl ORDINANCE #29 (Series of 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI COUNCIL OF THE CITY • ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 25, UTILITI : , OF THE MUNICIP • ODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO AMEND SECTION 25.04.040, ECTRIC SERVIC ' • TES; AND TO ADD NEW SECTIONS 25.04.130 AND 25.16.100 ILLING ERRS ' S was read by the city clerk Dave Hombacher, utility department, remin.• ed Co • it in 2009, they decided to not have a rate adjustment given the economy. In 2010, the c' i •ntracted a rate study to look at the effectiveness of the implementation of tiered -ra - and a 2011 adjustment. The study in 2011 looked at the cost of service and a series of r. - alt- . tives. This ordinance is based on a cost of service model including a transition over 4 . 6 years. There are proposed adjustments to the tiers where the higher users will have in eased energy : tes. Mayor Ireland said the city cannot s •sidize people's elec • ity and has to charge what it costs. Councilman Frisch said an issue i ow long it will take to ge p to full cost recovery. Hombacher said there is a table plaining the rate adjustment . each class of service, residential, commercial — lar: - and small and city facilities. Mayor Ireland moved to . • opt Ordinance #29, Series of 2011, on first •- ading; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Councilman Skadr• asked about energy conservation incentives and how th tier structure encourages that. - ombacher said there are 4 tiers within residential which v. • based on the size of service . residential customer using a small amount of energy pays a sma er amount/unit of energy. P e amount charged increases with the amount of energy used. Counci r : Johnson • asked if • rates should increase when the MEAN rates increase. John Worcester, ci attorney, said the ates have to be reasonable to all consumers and the city could tie the rates to in eases of M'AN to the city for their electricity. ' .11 call vote; Torre, yes; Johnson, yes; Skadron, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motio carried. RESOLUTION #60, SERIES OF 2011— Temporary Use Theatre Aspen 6 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 12.2011 Jessica Garrow, community development department, told Council Theatre Aspen has permission to erect a tent from mid -May to mid - September annually on the Rio Grande. Ms. Garrow said there were amendments to the plan this year to allow them to replace the tent and make minor site changes. Theatre Aspen has applied for a major SPA amendment to allow for a permanent lobby structure and to allow for the tent frame, stage and seating to remain up year round. This amendment is going to P &Z in October. Because of the timing and the requirement that the tent come down by mid - September, Theatre Aspen has requested a temporary use approval to allow the tent frame, stage and seating to remain up this winter. Staff recommends granting this temporary use request. It will have a visual impact and this will enable the staff and public to see what this will look like if the SPA amendment were approved. Ms. Garrow said this meets the criteria for temporary use. Ms. Garrow proposed two changes to the resolution; the date for the temporary use should be extended to May 15, 2012, rather than March 15 as it would be difficult to remove a structure in March; and an addition to provide periodic security check of the site to make sure the site is safe. Councilman Torre said it seems as if Council approved something and now they are being asked to extend those approvals to something else. Ms. Garrow reminded Council at a work session in January 2011, staff went over the lease agreements and the SPA amendments. Those amendments are just being processed; there has not been any change since the January work session. Councilman Skadron asked if this application honors the intent of Council's previous approvals. Ms. Garrow said there have been no land use approvals in 2011; there were changes to the lease and minor administrative amendments allowing Theatre Aspen to replace the canvas on the tent. Ms. Garrow said this request reflects what was discussed in a work session in January 2011. Councilman Skadron asked if Theatre Aspen is moving towards a permanent theatre structure. Emily Zack, representing Theatre Aspen, told Council they want to remain seasonal and this is an attempt to make seasonal arrangements work logistically. There is a lot of disruption and truck traffic at the site erecting and taking down the tent every year. Ms. Garrow said the parks department will provide changes as part of the SPA amendment and they have been working with Theatre Aspen. Councilman Skadron said he would like to know the history of Theatre Aspen; this seems like mission creep. Ms. Garrow said the theatre has had a presence in the park since 1989 originally in a circus tent. Since 1995 Theatre Aspen has been operating the same way, under an approved SPA agreement. Last year, Theatre Aspen received an amendment to the SPA to allow replacement of the tent and the entrance to the tent was flipped to ease impact on the trails. The size of the tent has not changed since 1995. Councilman Skadron said he would like to see the Rio Grande SPA. Councilman Johnson said he likes the idea of looking at this before approving it long term; the community may not want to see a skeleton throughout the winter. Councilman Johnson asked what is involved in taking the tent down and what the impacts to the park are. Ms. Garrow told Council staff wants to look at the skeleton to see if it meets the criteria of an SPA amendment and to see the impact on the park. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. David Kudish asked how much it costs to take down and put the tent up without the environmental costs. Emily Zack said it is about $50,000 /year. Kudish noted the skeleton at 7 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 12, 2011 Stage III was not attractive to neighbors and the public. Kudish said people come from out of town to go to the Theatre Aspen, which is very professional, and this helps increase the taxes. Junee Kirk said this amendment has not gone to P &Z and has not been viewed by the neighbors. Ms. Kirk said there will be visual impact on neighbors from above the site. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. Mayor Ireland said this is a request for a temporary use so that people can see what the structure would look like throughout the winter. Mayor Ireland asked staff about the temporary steel structure over the James E. Moore pool and what the experience with that was. Mayor Ireland said the tent is not staying up, just the framework. Councilman Torre said he feels like the approvals Council has granted to help Theatre Aspen has ended up costing them more money and is a greater entitlement than Council anticipated. Councilman Torre said this feels like the applicants are asking for approval to do something but first they want to do it. This seems like a test scenario. Councilman Torre asked if there is a more discrete way to store the tent on site than is being proposed. Councilman Frisch stated he supports trying to come up with a different solution; however, he also supports giving this a one year trial. Councilman Johnson stated that P &Z will see this at the SPA amendment. Councilman Johnson said this is a test and he can support this test. Mayor Ireland said he will support this as the erecting and taking it down costs will not have to be spent. Councilman Johnson moved to approve Resolution #60, Series of 2011, amending the date to May 15 and adding a (6) that the applicant will provide reasonable security checks; seconded by Mayor Ireland. Councilman Skadron stated he would like other options explored. It is Council's responsibility to consider the community comprehensively. Councilman Skadron said he feels there is a danger in allowing incremental step process and that this lack the appropriate caution. Councilmembers Frisch and Johnson and Mayor Ireland in favor; Councilmembers Torre and Skadron opposed. Motion carried. • '. • ANCE #25 SERIES OF 2011— Aspen Chance Subdivision Amendment Amy Guthrie, commum • • -velopment department, told Council the • : hance subdivision is located off Ute Avenue. This ' • 7 parcel subdivision; the • - re no affordable housing requirements. The approval allowed up • ots to h- - aretaker units. This parcel has a category 3 unit which was occupied for so - . e property owner is requesting to pay cash -in -lieu fee to be allowed to re!. • - e unit from - • se. Ms. Guthrie said this is a one bedroom unit accessed thr • . t e kitchen of the main house. 'tchen for the caretaker unit will have to be re •. : - • so that it does not become a separate unit. reland opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Ireland c • = • the public hearing. 8 hibii alitri. 1, `,.., , h t • 4 'N 'N, - I. . fWt - tir It yr ■ 4 \4 ,., 4 , • 4 „.... 1 II . 1;,... 4- .. it ri," ;. ,, i , ;..... .2,1 4, 1 1, • N. .4 •- 4 7 , - e ,. - i . . i . WI! ' , , .. , ,,.. 4 . i 1 k . . ) ': • : 4 ,." 7.: - . : i ' 7 1 ''' 1 '' '' • $ i'- el • ' ` ° 4■.,.11 .0 ■ , I 'Al' . .- ',. .. : ,'''•#: .., I I 6 - • 1 .'' " t l'Ir t , ': ". ' ! _, , , f .',, e .„'eekSs tz..„ e" ' : e ' V • 4 ' .. It= ill 1I , AO 1 . .._ -___.:-. ....‘, t• , . ,\,.1 .1 ' - ,lk '16 ie. ' % ., 'Ig e ...1t '40 i i• 1 -; . - - - ,- . 't ...., 4.,•:-e , to 1 •.;,,,N , ■ i it; , . .......1 . • `,-,,, :-.%-", - ... , , .\4 . 'It /4. 1 e lfC- - ' .1 • e 4 e ie. 4 ..., , .■ .., ... .. „ ' ' s „ . 4, =. • ' ii4 * N r, ' P . % . ;;• . q ' lf '. ' , , .... '. '' , ',,,_,- „‘ ,i 1 , e.i.; .. ..- ..., , , .,, : , • ,. ,-.-,.. - ..•.. , ' - ' •.- " . ...,„ ;* 4. ; yo.'..V. •. ; 1.— ■ "- - '-''. r `).. .r. i,'",'. k ' -!- ' '' '''-- , 7 ,'-.;,7_,. -" ; - ; 1 ' , , , _- . - - / . i ,, . .... iw— - ‘,1 ! _ __ 1 - ' t t .*.-.‘N,,'17 1/4 \ Asir ' , -- ; - % , -.1 1 , 4. _ ; 4.,... ,._ el t ... , r ,, •;•,f i ---- -- • . ..., ---(...e'l-r I 1 11 — „ - 1.,... 1- • % '. : 4 * - t • - 1 -- . ° ' -- 1- . 4 4 1 • ,// 1'.1 ' •4?' '' '' ‘ ' A tA 11 . i "‘ „. ''. '1 ...,. 1 14-■: . . "- -' - i 4 1 i 4 i . ... . •, ), i• -. . , •: .... , _ •••.- - • - , N -. d — , . ,. ■ rl . . ;#1• ‘ • Z I , I I ' ' i . , . - ,,It - , • • , f , ....:Apv • "4: _ ... - ... )1 ''--"P 1 . , .fs• ' -' : ,. .1! b jr1 s'‘-...- • 1 \ / '04. , - .—:- 1 , •!: i L 7 - ' 1- _ , ' ; \•• ' ., 4 ‘ , .4'1‘• • ' s- '• •,,, . 1 1 ' 'r . ..* \ = N\ ( -''' ; :4: ' ..0 t ' 1 i '. 1 I . ' '''' ' 1 ' . . r' *." • ' • - ' . - t .. • s. ••.,. .- . , ... • i: - • .- ' 'Al ' ; - - A ts; . ; . ..0 ... ■ ., ^ ' . : ' f I - . a ,,,_ ■ 1‘, ' A ‘ - - • - :.,4.. -,,.,-- -.., ----,,„ 4 , K, , , „ ., , . , , • I '. - - 4 ' ' • ' •.- ‘,. • *3 ''7r4 ',-,•.* 'I • • . '''''' :.= ..*--.• \ '1 `^ ` ., -, '. ...,,, , 4' .• .. a ` -.. -., : . i i 7.. , ,e,,- ...s,. • , . „ ..,-, / '.1.9144.,,Aitlit, • ', - le it ... ' -.s. , _ ' 7. %.,, -..., - / • l ./ AY s. ‘1 I) • ... . g ' ' ' ...Atilk l'ir;01•1 - • 1 ''' t -1.-_ ; , ' : - • /V 1 I. ; i ,•11)1,4 - .. ;.,..),..:•: , I ‘..it ., -4,11 • . .' e / J I; ‘ •■ „. 4 . -,/,-./ .-: ,. / - 1 - • kw 4 / - • , , .. ,.. . • ..: i 4111 fir . e ... ' = • • : ......1• • ,.._ s, , . . • • ' , ,‘. ,, ., , -- • • •'' • 4 ,. .'‘' ' ' . • ,• '-' '• .i,' ' • • 40 ' , . A ^ 1 ...t.. ( ,, y, ..X ' .„i s(■';..s',. e. ' •••• . s • " ' , • . • , = -4 = 0/ ,., .. , • 1, 4' r• 1 ‘1' '', 4 , • . 1 t " 4 l' ; ' 14 ' 1 ' • 4 ; ' j, .,. , 1 0,4,',=: , ,, 1. ..,!•-,4 . , ..., ,.„ - 4 At ',,,,••' I • t ,•‘4,1:4,,,, / 41 4,. ','"•..Yi to ! ..s.`...0i"\ 4k `. - 11 i IF ' ' 1 . q l' ...\!.P'/,''..„ 1 , 111 ,,.,,,....i ,,, ,. ,,, •, i' A•1"4k,.•:-'.: • ‘ . • • : • • ' .'. w ,, ,,,.), ,.„.,,,., ..,.. , / , 04.4,,,,,,vkl, , ,eircAs\to). .., .,,, .„,,, . , .... 4 yt,„,„ te, ,,,,, , . ,t, , A . , , ,, 1, /. , „-.. . .t..": , , ,,,t.,•, , I ''''' .12 i ,,,, 1 04 11e 'f ' i t, 4- 4.';-',• , ,, i0: , ' 14,,, , ' '',,,, . ,., IV % ,..'•,:i ' • & , `, , . , , " • i / r 4 3; :i 11:4 '4.! 4' ''. 1. ^ , ''' : ' ' 'if : l'i .. , I, '''', ' 't '. . I k". ".. ., ,,, ' , + . ,. . ,.. • ' " .„ AIi . , 1 • ,. ,, . . . , , , , , , ,,. : „ - 4 , ; ... 4 ''te,,l'4, , t ''.. ,.„ I, ' , , , •,,, ,` ., .4 ..', ' (.1L Pg, 1 A , ; . * *, A, , ' ' 1 L.. 4 , I 4 • `' '', ' •,' . Jr '.. • 4., '. • ■". 0 : '''' -•,..-''' 4 . s,i7.4#4 ,;,, - ."`".'-- • =. l' '•• t ' ;„ '' > v.' •-• , t . „ 4 , ' 4 ,,-, '' - =. 4 r ` : ' ' '- . ' ' f (',. % pNo ',, ,... • •,• ,, ; 1 "' i ' " .4- .% ., l' .' \i 4 ' '4 ' , ' • •e„ "' ' 4,,,,',, ' ", , '4„ , , 4 r 4 .4. ' .4 4 •"• to'IT,44 , , . , , I - • ,,, ‘, - , s 1,) .. I ,.- 0 ...„.1,-.1 . -. , t„; 4 ,.,„ , :,$, ,, • `, ,.... . i s ' p . } r -r q ;/ ;i r p '' t � , M !R r Lt y kj f f j t! M f r � y �d ' y + • • 1 ��� ,S rA� :ti. t�ii 14 � � . + i i; ► � ..''‘‘.4 '4 4t.' ' it .( j 3y , , ,, ? = ,- . rn • f it. '4 , �� ; 3 ‘ , , ....:2.,4%.*-*.' . . : , A Wit/ S: ' , . z , 1 ;.� ti N _te �" ° . S -.. iDa�rr ti � �dK 4 � ~, '' y '4 [[ .yam 'i .' , lip �.. r_' ' . -...-V 1."`E r " • w • t i , , , 4144: 04: .". - . . 3 • S . ' ... - 4 r- k.: - VII 4 f '.�Vt ` le a \ - _ • 4e, x hibrhL El z * o > u, -1 m > X -t1 M ,....> (f) s , ' \ \ ..,,,,,,, , - - . - —\..._ ,.. ' OZ \\‘\!2 ", . f ' ■ ' t ..- 1' _ , , .... - - „: • t 1 '' ' A .... • ' !'/,‘ ) / . '. ). •,_ - 7- ja st;' - ') ..--x.'2 - },. ., ■ , \p-0) __„.... \s,:: , ; , , -, --..-, ----, . , .fr" k--_,,„:„,-., ._ r" . .... ,:\ -4 61 .--?1,1 'Ai s "- \ `,..:\ .71% \\\: /, ' ' \ -"..." \ ,'';;; ;." ,ii•li t • - 0: ;\ ; Mt> •=';:--- - .'' 1.: , ' 5 ',, foi 7 " . .ti, ,. .. 1 >' Z1 • . --••''' • . - •'; 1' 0\ .,; - ..-1 / , •— • -- ,, , \, 0? „ 7- . .--1 :1 - • _ . "- . .. _ , , ( s,... .. 1!:‘,:A, __„..•.:,,v, -:.:1/.., ( A - • • , ‘ • A _ --.: -:,...,,- (11 - ,,. •-•\ , i ..,4 ,fr+ /./ G ,,, 49 , ,:,,,,., , n. . ., , ..."- • . r -_ -- .... . • \ ' -) , 1 ,t 4, \ N. , • t . r .•■,■ i f " \ .. ' - o -, .: A , -, - . 0 . " 1 •-:.' i.' . •rt. , ..-.:- .,•7": it .. ._ kt \ ''''' ./ ..•'„ i .. \ ts..1?.... s 1, ,,, g to 1 • - 4 i. . ... •/, ' , -, -' '---"■•• ' ' ,{ , A. ... •::.;■‘. / I. /; ■ It! ( A<> ..". ' / • * • I \ illb ...04 it •,. j . '., . ,- \ .1 : .,: ::■-: r:'")... , c ,, --,-4.. .. r ,,,:- : . ( A ; 1• - • - 'r. V =■V . I -: • ;,-;-•-___ -...' : s-z -_,--- _Nir.-. 4. _-.., - -^-, • •■••-.--- I .i v . - -.-'' " 7-‘...-" ..----- f -'-' tr- . • • Wit ,--,- .... -.N. =RI I ' ,. . .1 • 1 r 1 u 0 ri" . ;', . L' : "):1111:1:-C31'1111\1 .... .... ........• F ..., ...t • . 'y , 4 ).- - i • .. , , ,i: . . t c t. . . o \ . , ......),"- Ah \... Let \\\A : . fa ' ' , * N.,s.t.r\ - --> : ' • . cet 4 ; :iir; .' ; Z' , i 4 ! IR ) 0 .1• R Ir. '.4 44 n z $ 1,.:2...v. • • ... .. ... ---, , 1 . - 4. ydr• ') , P , e. cs —, ,,,,,..•• •i -..:--,. , • • . , . ›-;,---. -.,.. - -- -... --:_ ••.,* 4 A • ,, giA I N is , c g • ' - .--,......-.-.-.--..- —wow .., " Q, . - i 411 1 , 4" 1C1 k C ) ..: • -:,:j 'a h 4 i' it 'i.i "1„. • • , • c". ,_ ...... lit ..:: V - .■ ' ' At..) ; ' / - ), a) It...,...., ".--- :." -t : ,.._ •• • , , , c -,.., • . ,. / 0 - _ - • _-:*-!: - lb, __ — -- -2 - ‘,.. • 0 ' • • - / d b, " ,,, . „ we,_•,_ _-. _ . , .4 in - -- - 2 . r - : 1. • - - . 42 7 ' V .04 ° ti ] ... 9 F i 1 It 00 1_ ... 2 A- P g rn .-. g 11 ( 1 8 L in 0, tt 1 1 it z. r t: 13 6 `31 , fil ) 9 u CP 3 () U g 111 A r 4 7 C I 1111 : i Ni 1 RIO GRANDE PARK / .,..; r. - , i i I 1 THEATRE ASPEN 1 i 1 i ..ii r m,„ :, ...-_,... 1. i k , ii , • i i ii i I I 1 11 ill STORM WATER PLAN Aspon. Colorado . _. t.;F:; i....;;:,. .I. ■: 1r 4 :1 iii, 1, gassi ' J11111/ . ' . f • 1 • 4 , 4 .. . • • IF: .... • 4r - , .9p• a ., . • 104 ; y. 4. ,) - ° k billi ;" l ie ' 9., , t 4 A If N mot '... , ' A, , , - c NO J.-- ./ • . ,6 • ..- - ' ' - . • • . , •ru.i : , / ''. , 4 '' 4k . P L 1 , - . Pip I A , k It '"'"" 11 1, • .. 11'.. ■ I •A'' A 4 f s i y A 1 ...' '.• . , i -.. , . ir .. • e 1 „,,... ..... • . 4 , r.. ' 4 ' '' ''' 4,40.• . A . . - l lf ,..,,,, ...., t • ... .s .. ......LL,. ,.... _ ...),„„: r* :-...-': :: • ,... I • . N • ,-.* i lt •:. ... r , „ d gri ; • • ,:.' .." - ; • :' ,j;,. • ... . 'I ,-.1••... •• , A 14:4: ' 0, „l low iS X - - '.-. 44:6. • . .. ..............- ii 4 . 0 . ' '. . - ' . 'i.r 'Y '''': •+" .iN,„,% ' ,,;;'.' - , . • . t if 0 ' ' -::: - '' ' ' '' *.:: -,., - . • - : . . • . . . _ ' ... I . '.... ; ,' t '7 ",, . ' ,...... . I ' ,y i ,:•• ,: 9 ...,... ,... I - . .... ' .4 . . . w . ' s ... s • - • , ' ' • - . ; '''' - ' . • . I - -' .)r. • ._ ' • - ,...)... ... Olb A . .. ...,' .,- 1 , 111. , V77/01 ''i. III - " • '4' - • "IP" -•• & : 1/4 • . Iti ' 1 is 0 •...• . 4.... . 10 " , ..-s '. • r --. A' 1 • ,.. .... ....- - ••... , i • ..- . •••t_ •••: •••• •-•...111r."7" le • . 71 1i • . 4,i t . 4. ly-4 • • j ;,. : lis ,. ; or 41 Ilr A. ■ • ! , k " 1 ,' : • 4 1 11:1111 1. . 7,301 • .. gag• a ' . _ 1 ‘ , . • ..... ; II.. • . 4, . "... • .t• r ,,,_ .• ,, • •••••. • to - , • • t. I Li 10. ..- ' I , :' It '* 1 , A •-• --' . ,r • t -fr 6 -.• ' •'•• • '• - • ,-,r t L., 1' -'— 3 i . . '. - • ' 4,' ' "—At . - • .„.• 4, • . "it • l Iv , . lir '' . . • r • Ni 4. PI ..- '■.• * a f . ' ° '`.' .. : : •• , .. , • • , , .- .", " 42 a ' 4,er., • • 'r . - . . . i .., • • ., a.. Iiii t %I - o . I I ft a li . . lt w • • - . • i ' - '•' 4' t:' ' 10 . r le '1. . ■ - . . . . • ' . i • IV j& ... , i4 i „ -:..- - . 4. i • . ,.. .... • • ' ; ' , it". ••• ,• : _ ..•:: , . . So , I • i ' 11 -1 , ii r A i •T . 11/11.1. ...t, - 1,4 , ■ . A.? .• t ..k. ''''''). ; i• i...TV• t.. •:er:'i. _ • ;Pe:' t. • ,;• :i :..,,..,.'.-• • ,',; i 11....".t'. 44 4 ' 1 4 / '• fr, 4' 0 , . - ,.. ..V.• t 1 - ' .• 1 1 l ' - ''. ' % 4 ■.. . . 4 ■■• , . . • . • I.' . . ■ Inurr L. 3120 E. Washington Street Phoenix, AZ 85034 GL BA CLEARSPANS • October 26, 2011 To whom it may concem: I am the owner of Global Clearspans, Inc., a company that specializes in assembling and disassembling Losberger tents. I was contracted by Theatre Aspen to erect their new tent last May, with plans to disassemble it in September. However, as the summer progressed, we began to have serious concems about the disassembly. First, we were under the impression that we would have unobstructed access to the concrete pad as we did when the tent was erected, so that we would be able to drive a forklift around the interior of the tent. I understand for a variety of reasons that this is no longer the easiest route to take. The only other option is to have a crane onsite with a reach of 150 -200ft that would weigh approximately 60,000 pounds. From what I understand through conversations with Emily, getting a crane of this magnitude on site will be a real challenge, it it's possible at all. It would need to be positioned at the lobby end of the tent, so that the beams can be set in the larger area in the back as they come down. After the temporary construction access road is gone, I'm not aware of any way to access the site with this kind of heavy equipment. In addition, I have significant reservations about the working conditions that this would create for my crew. If we tried to disconnect the frame around the structure and bring it down with a crane, there are connections on top of the frame that would require manual attention, which means rigging and hamessing the crew to climb on the tent frame itself. Though this is possible, I have to strongly advise against it; it would be not only dangerous for us, but very costly for Theatre Aspen due to the time and care it would require. For these reasons, I recommend that you support Theatre Aspen in their attempt to leave the tent frame up year- round. While it might mean losing an annual contract for us, I believe it's in our and Theatre Aspen's best interests. Regards, D. Todd Barrett Vice President • Fz. LO , a I ER M Losberger US, LLC 200 Monroe Ave. Suite 2A Frederick, MD 21701 301/682-8000 www.losberoerus.com October 25, 2011 To Whom It May Concern, 1 had the pleasure of selling Theatre Aspen its new tent this year. As manufacturer of the tent, Losberger US, LLC worked closely with Emily Zeck and the Theatre Aspen team starting from the original design of their new tent venue all the way through to my attending the installation of the tent this spring on location in Aspen. 1 have now been asked to express an opinion on the viability of having it completely dismantled every autumn and re- installed each spring. All Losberger tent structures are designed to be portable, allowing them to be installed and dismantled fairly easily by a competent tent contractor. Most of Losberger's customers are rental companies that purchase this type of engineered tent structure for use at different locations for events, but Theatre Aspen is considered an end user because it uses the tent only at one location. The tent has design modifications to accommodate the theater's unique needs as a seasonal theater, including the use of larger beam profiles to handle hanging loads, side overhangs and unique lobby doors as examples of those. These modifications contribute toward making Theatre Aspen's tent structure more complicated to erect and dismantle. We are advised that now, crane access to the site is restricted which even further complicates erection and dismantling of the framing system. All of the challenges presented by the new tent were not possible to anticipate but Losberger understands that its tent allows Theatre Aspen to do things they have never done before. Site specific complications for removal and re- installation that have arisen subsequent to the initial installation are significant. Understanding them now, it would be prudent to avoid these lengthy, difficult, and potentially dangerous installation and dismantling operations twice every year if at all possible. I have also read the opinion letter from Todd Barrett of Global Clearspans on this subject. As Losberger's highly experienced and authorized tent contractor / dealer, he is very well qualified to render such an opinion about the installation and dismantling of this tent frame at Theatre Aspen. 1 strongly suggest that his well- considered opinion be followed. If 1 can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, David A. MacArthur (digitally signed) David A. MacArthur Losberger US National Sales Manager dmacarth urtallosbereerus.com Malik) M RESOLUTION NO. 20, (SERIES OF 2011) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) AMENDMENT, AND AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, FOR THEATRE ASPEN TO CONSTRUCT A PERMANENT LOBBY STRUCTURE AND TO ALLOW THEATRE ASPEN TO MAINTAIN THEIR TENT FRAME, STAGE, AND SEATING ON -SITE DURING THE WINTER AT RIO GRANDE PARK, 505 RIO GRANDE PLACE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: LOT 1 OF THE RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION. Parcel ID 2737 - 073-06 -851 WHEREAS, the Conununity Development Department received an application from Theatre Aspen, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, requesting approval of a Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment, and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review, to construct a permanent lobby structure and to permit the theatre tent framing, stage, and seating to remain on -site year round; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council for a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment, and Essential Public Facility Growth Lodge Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the property is located in the Rio Grande Park and is zoned Public (PUB) with an SPA Overlay; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the requirements of a Specially Planned Area (SPA); and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 1, 2011, Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 20, Series of 2011, by a four to zero (4 — 0) vote, recommending city Council approve an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA and an Essential Pubic Facilities Growth Management Review for Theatre Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission fords that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 1 of 5 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan and the Civic Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council approval of a Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment to the Rio Grande SPA, and an Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review. Prior to City Council review, the City of Aspen and the Applicant shall determine if 6` and / or 7 Penny funds were used to purchase the land on which Theatre Aspen resides. If either of these funds were used, the City Attorney will review whether a change in the theatre use to include the lobby structure complies with the ballot language approving those funds, and whether such change is in compliance with the City charter. These findings shall be presented to City Council during their review. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the approvals contained herein be contingent upon Theatre Aspen's continued location in Rio Grande Park. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommends that if Theatre Aspen leaves their current location, the approvals herein become void. Section 2: Design The permanent lobby structure shall comply with the plan shown at the November 1 2011 P &Z meeting, and attached as Exhibit A. The tent framing shall be covered with a roof, as weather allows, from April to October of each calendar year. From October to April of each calendar year, the tent framing shall not be covered with a roof. Temporary sides shall be installed to shield the stage and seating from view. The stage and seating shall be under protective cover and located on the existing concrete pad. This is attached as Exhibit B. Theatre Aspen shall provide a security check of the site at least three times per week to ensure the site remains safe and secure. Section 3: Signage Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 2 of 5 A revised signage plan reflecting changes discussed with staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be submitted to staff prior to City Council review. This shall include replacing a proposed marquee sign with a less imposing sign on a low -lying rock, as outlined in the P &Z meeting on November 1, 2011 and the staff memo for said meeting. Section 4: Temporary Fencing The temporary fencing shown in Exhibit C shall be temporary, and shall only be erected during the theatre season, but no longer than from mid -May to mid - September each year. Before City Council Review, the applicant shall determine the minimum dimensions required to comply with the Actors' Equity Association Small Professional Theatre Rulebook, Sec. 48.A.2 -4. The fencing shall be constructed in a manner that does not prevent or limit the use of the trash enclosure for trash storage. Section 5: Essential Public Facility Growth Management Review - Affordable Housing Mitigation Theatre Aspen shall conduct an employee audit one year after final City Council approval for the permanent lobby structure. Volunteer hours shall not be included in the audit. Any additional employees that are not a result of the Rio Grande improvements shall be indicated in the report. However, only those employees that are a result of the improvements shall be subject to future mitigation. The Housing Authority shall request the audit from Theatre Aspen. Failure to request the audit shall not render any of the approvals invalid. Theatre Aspen shall provide the Housing Authority and the Community Development Department with the audit report. The Housing Authority and Community Development shall forward the audit to the Housing Board, P &Z and/or City Council for review, as applicable. Section 6: Parks Theatre Aspen shall coordinate all improvements with the Parks Department to ensure they comply with the Parks Department's Master Plan for Rio Grande Park. The applicant shall ensure the site is clean and secure at all times. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to ensure compliance during the fall and winter months when the tent is taken down each year. Section 7: Environmental Health Theatre Aspen shall undertake a noise monitoring program for its productions to ensure compliance with the City's noise ordinance. The noise monitoring program shall verify compliance with the noise ordinance, by Theatre Aspen staff, before opening night of each production. It shall also include continued monitoring throughout the summer theatre season given background noise levels may vary. Noise level readings shall be taken at multiple locations along the property line of the Rio Grande Park. The noise monitoring program shall be filed with the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department, who may require it to be updated as needed. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 3 of 5 • Concessions at the tent historically have only been pre - packaged, non - potentially hazardous foods, and beverages without ice, due to the fact that Theatre Aspen does not hold a food service license nor have permanent plumbing. For special events serving food held at Theatre Aspen a temporary food permit must be submitted for approval to the Aspen Environmental Health Department prior to the event to ensure the protection of public health. Section 8: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan should be submitted as part of building permit. Section 9: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting. No lighting shall be permitted in the stream margin area (fifteen (15) foot setback area from top of slope) or in any area below the top of slope line (toward the river) unless it is in the exact location of the existing lighting and requires no additional disturbance to the stream margin area. Section 10: Theatre Aspen Lease Within 180 days of City Council approval, Theatre Aspen shall re- execute their long- term lease on the Rio Grande Park to reflect any changes that result from said approvals. Section 11: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 12: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 13: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 1st day of November, 2011. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 4 of 5 APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: mes 12. True, Special Counsel Stan Gibbs, Chair /1 7_ 1/ ATTEST: a ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Plans for the permanent lobby structure Exhibit B: Rendering of tent framing and screening Exhibit C: site plan indicating location of proposed actor's privacy fence. Resolution No 20, Series 2011 Page 5 of 5 i I wnam r¢rtr'w wmame� mivm.a WYtla103NEON !Ell I � y NI ,' 510311HO1N 3i lN 1INNf10 S3lH° N3dSV 3211V3H1 L ' - d L Q , g . r it Di 1 WO ii iii 1 1 Oil ill i ii iii tt 3, -3 �...� , =�_. ,, � 4 j ri. � :rie/ ' • /- " 'fit li, k \Cc , el:Ilikke i ' - - , I . : • i � I I II ' i� � e a / . c ..i.,.t ::::_-.7----_ ji ! 9 Iy r am ' 4 '' �' A� p e / � ✓ / � : ,`� .- , ,,1 it L • , jG . • -, Wild � . -- 4,1 (... "r - 'iv ‘‘ tore _......_ ),,t,,,,,, , ":„ ....:_:____ 1 i 7.--. A / /1 \ yAtICONt4 . iHnl'i __ A \ ..„ , . , , .. at , .. , . 4 +tit., ,,„ , , , , t, _ . . _ ,... . . 'N. . 1 1 * . 4 4 t , -- - r i l 4 Stl -: - ' t 4 .... : ... i ... 4 . , . .. :.... a, • 1 . ft , .. . a.. . We . ........ . __ ., - gliVii \\. till., ..- . . .., , 0.- ,- .. . ..., , . 4 1 1/2.4 4 •#. N.. ' . .. 1 \ .. , a A tr r 0 A ' i • hi: i o 1U 1 pir403itiEtn• [VI: Wg i 7 r, - r i . n, i ...1 k dtliKiIIIII ; I pp.:! ..,--,,;,:, L., i$1.., NVld 1:91.VM INUOIS • h NadSV ad.W ; II pl I Pr- 1 1111 i I t 1: c e:S 41 -I s 1 urt - , g 1 -- , „ 2 / NtlVd 3CINVHD 09:1 i I, . r, () V 3} IL ii 0 • • k ' n 6 s laillo flit b , C 1 an ti 6 /1 n 0 4 0 0 ..v. P• % V 05 P . . .., is' 2 • ---',--- e. -...*':-. -'s ---- - • : ' .4.. . .. ..„14-----Th.-‘,.. %'/, - i t, ' 4 , , . - ' .... --:” ., -""-i*--7-, ./ ;* fr C.7‘ 1. : -. 1 jEr •,,,,,ft„ „:21/4„:„....... „ .....„.--„,,..„. .. -xy.:-,-44,,If...- , 7 , ;, - „ ji' ' : , ..,,t.. .,k . ,4, - ,C./.\ ‘r...tttr■ " • ' C'' • 0‘ 1 Y . , ' r ' ' i0 ‘4c., ffs2, „,,, , - fs - P. ' r 'S - e.g.' ' -1"-t-e•--- ../ P ',. '. . .. "' . •I'' ' 1- ' . t ''''' ...k '' . . . ".? --- --, „.1.0.- "o ,...!'''''-•-_, 0 ,. S,; • • illkl,t41.- U ."••• , ::'‘7:'; '''''''te's _:;:./,...0;---- (r t": ' .„,--• - 4) ; , , . • ! , ty;;;,ti ' C. - ' . r ". ',.. ../7:4 -..„.1.;.? :4 ),,, ... ,, ./ . - . rac . 2 i , le.--_- ',.:;- tr, >tr) ' • / , • ''r -iriitir-, aw rf ri cr• ti.` '-, . ••,"" - ,C --', -,t, . is 4 . ft - • ir: ,i' 'iiti: l ,':: --". lt,„,_ - ‘,"!-""- . -619iik . :- ic., 0 , ' • t ,, -D i ii •'') . sit 4"--.-ti t..- - '--tit il.* 7 • > • , ." i „le .■:;tV405 '...- , -',..„. > 0. 1 `.." z . • “i". . .,..../ • ..,-....i I .,.,), „. '..-: p... w uE \Ere' tit,' . . 1 - -,m- #, • .- - s . ..tt-,-:v :•.. -`7„ r-- -- ' tiit .:- - 4■t I ' .?' , •, _ . .:Q .eir,k ..: • ..---,;„. , ,! . i .- , - ,, , e set , . . ....• ...,, 0 0C-2(1.U. ''• ....... ,-'. :01rn. .' ., I ,t • 0 .2 - , - .1 4 ,;::,_ • ,., •,. -,:- ...:•. ••,,.•.,•-,... : 1 • \ '.'' : 7- ' ii '' •••''',' ./ . '''' ' I- t 7:1/2i,t. ' ":".,2 ' ‘' 4 _,..H.,.) I ! - - ;- ---- --- -- 7•-•-: -- ' , . Zit, ' • ,t, , 1 ..• ‘ • '. ' . kly , ick _,.. ? . Aract.c -.. ..- 1 ... -, --) .', . — . , -4 • ... . • • ) , '' • ' . C Yil c' •'• t ...' ' '' : 4.) 4 ' ..it "it , s a 1/4- , . iii , , :, , -,‘: ,- , 21 0 - 1, 4 • ... - h .., , • • , .„.:,- . , ' : ; . r ,: , • . 4 t'•::.. ' t -.., .. ,,,,!...., . . . _vs., ,, ,.. ; 1, • •,, N, *h s::3 ik :\ , **,,Thic t • . '.. p :., , \ 1 / ir, ...,-.-- "il. .. :' . I . ' •,": ''‘ ' *4: \ ..,:.ite%4' f_ : j", t 1 ■ . .. L elir '-..,, ." rifr - '• P..- ' 7 . /1/ ' '. , ,N. .,,, '''■lairl.,tntt f, ?;;‘..\‘...; \ ::ifol‘...-r-71 \ `.. .,.,.1:• 5 • , .....-9,-,_ .,:. ,..,..... ,... . •,,,...\\\\,, c :,..,.., NH t. ,.... k _ , , , . . s ie •,\ ‘ %,, nv."---;-. $ • . ,. . , u) c R r. m w a. r e /1 a C3 g N City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 Theatre Aspen, Rio Grande Park — SPA Amendment 2 1 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 Stan Gibbs opened the regular meeting November 01, 2011 of the Planning & Zoning Commission in Sister Cities at 4:40. Commissioners present were: Cliff Weiss, LJ Erspamer, Jasmine Tygre and Stan Gibbs. Commissioners excused were Bert Myrin and Jim DeFrancia. Staff in attendance: Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Stephen Ellsperman, Parks; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. Comments: Jennifer Phelan noted there was a scheduled meeting for December 20 and asked the commission if they wanted to meet the Tuesday before the holiday. The commission wanted to cancel the meeting. Jessica Garrow said the other item was not on the schedule, next Tuesday November 8 at the Library for the AACP and are hoping to wrap up the AACP on the 15` Minutes: MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to approve the minutes from October 09, 2011; seconded by LJ Erspamer. All in favor APPROVED 4 -0. Conflicts of Interest: None stated. PUBLIC HEARING: Theatre Aspen, Rio Grande Park — SPA Amendment Stan Gibbs opened the public hearing for Theatre Aspen in the Park. Stan Gibbs asked if notice was provided. Jessica Garrow replied yes and she will give it to Jim True when he gets here. Jessica asked the applicants to come up to the table. Charles Cunniffe, Emily Zeck and Paige Price came to the table. Jessica Garrow stated there was an additional exhibit, a letter from Walt Madden, which will be Exhibit M.1. Jessica explained this was a hearing for Theatre Aspen requesting an SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Park as well as a Growth Management Review for Essential Public Facilities; the Rio Grande Park is owned by the City and Theatre Aspen has a long term lease with the City for the portion of the park that the Theatre resides in. Jessica provided a brief history that Theatre Aspen has operated in Rio Grande since 1989; in 1995 they received Council approval for a performance tent and ancillary structures; part of that approval was allowing the tent to be assembled in mid May and disassembled in mid September. In early 2011 there was a minor SPA Amendment to replace the existing tent, 2 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 because the tent had been there for 14 or 15 years and needed to be replaced. Jessica said essentially the entrance was flipped and to replace some of the ancillary structures on the site. In September of this year Council granted a temporary use approval to allow the tent frame, stage and seating to remain on site in the winter and this a test case for P &Z, staff, City Council and the public to see what it would look like if it were given a permanent approval was given through this SPA Amendment to allow for that tent framing to remain up. Jessica said today the Planning & Zoning Commission is reviewing an SPA Amendment and Growth Management Review for Essential Public Facilities for a new permanent lobby structure for approximately 1,947 square feet and 24 feet high; the ability to set the tent frame, stage and seating up on site essentially year round. Allowing the tent to be fully erected between April and October; allowing a new signage plan for that area and creating a temporary fence that is about 10 feet high and 25 feet in length to screen the actors in the back of house area and that is pursuant to the Nation Actors Association requirements that require separation between actors and the public. Jessica noted that P &Z is a recommending body to City Council on both of these reviews. There was a site visit today and LJ and Cliff from P &Z attended. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. The new permanent structure will create a clear presence in the Park for Theatre Aspen and will provide a better connection and visual cue to the John Denver Sanctuary; this proposal really ties into some of the master plan work that the Parks Department has been working on in terms of storm water improvements and improvements to the John Denver Sanctuary. Jessica said that staging the seating year round will decrease the wear and tear on the Park that is created under the current situation. The assembling and disassembling the structure creates about 48 truck trips which is significant on use on the park and leaving this tent frame up will significantly decrease the number of trips that are generated and decrease the wear and tear to the park. Staff believes this will create a low visual impact on the park and has suggested some design considerations for the applicant to explore and those are incorporated in the resolution. Staff has gone through this process with the applicant who has been very receptive to the suggestions. Jessica said the resolution asks the applicant to look at a different roof form for the permanent structure, just to give a little differentiation there; and looking at the height to create some differentiation between the mass that is the tent frame and the structure as well as different material usage for that structure. Staff is recommending the use of panel siding on the side of the tent frame to help screen the stage and seating and helps make the 3 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01. 2011 site look like it is not under construction year round; page 39 in your packet is what it could look like. Jessica said staff is supportive of the signage plan on page 34 of the packet and on page 49. Staff has asked the applicant to look at the fence in terms of height and length and staff would like to have the fence minimized as much as possible while still meeting the National Actors Association requirements. Jessica said that in terms of employee generation the housing authority has requested an audit be conducted after a year of operation to verify the number of FTEs generated through this proposal; Theatre Aspen said no employees will be generated from this and the audit would confirm that. Jessica said that it would come back to staff and go to the housing board and figure out the number of employees generated and likely go to City Council to determine the mitigation. Jessica said that staff learned yesterday that Theatre Aspen and the Parks Department are interested in exploring the possible use of the permit lobby structure for occasional special events, like weddings. Staff has made amendments to the Resolution and distributed a red -lined version; Section 2 added language to work with Parks to determine what that looks like and then it would be part of Council's review for the SPA Amendment. Jessica said that Jeff Woods, Parks Department Head, could not attend tonight but supported the applicant. Cliff Weiss asked what kind of Special Events; are you talking about in the summer when it is not used by the Theatre and how does the Theatre operation work with that. Jessica replied that she would give the applicant the opportunity to present the idea there. Cliff asked if special events were from the applicant and not parks. Jessica responded it was not from planning staff; the applicant and parks can comment on it. Charles Cunniffe stated that they were open to the idea but it was not generated by them; parks was the looking to possible extending the use down there but they do not want that to encumber their application. Charles said they were strictly here in the interest of Theatre Aspen and its own use. Stephen Ellsperman said that as they were talking about the opportunities might be since the facility and the cover will be on during times when the theatre is not operating for productions; they were wondering what opportunities might be to use those areas. Jessica said this language was really to allow for that exploration. LJ Erspamer asked Mr. True if this portion should have been noticed if they want to do special events. Charles responded again that was not their intent. Jessica stated that they noticed for the specific land use reviews and this would fall in the purview of the 2 land use reviews that were noticed. Jim True agreed with that. 4 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01,2011 Stephen said he didn't know how this got into the format of this discussion; this is something that would take some time to review. Charles said they were not trying to add it into our review application and do not want it to be the subject tonight. Jasmine Tygre said that if the public knew that special events might be part of this land use application there might be more people present. LJ asked how long the lease with the city was. Emily Zeck replied 10 years signed last January. LJ asked when the theatre was started did they mitigate for employees. Jessica responded when they got the approval in 1995 they were reviewed as an essential public facility and mitigation appears to have been waived at that time. Jasmine asked if the land on which this structure sits was acquired with 6 or 7 penny tax money or not. Stephen said he wasn't exactly positive but he believed some of that section of Rio Grande Park was purchased with transportation funds but he would have to do some more research to answer the question directly. Jasmine said that in the Rio Grande master plan there was a map showing how the different lands were acquired because we cannot change the use of land the were acquired with the 6 and 7tn penny taxes to anything other than those uses because that was the ballot question. Jasmine said it was important to know whether in fact there could be this use on a permanent basis. Charles said it was approved by Ordinance in 1999 that Theatre Aspen would be here. Jessica said as part of the Civic Master Plan it was approved with a continued presence in the park. Jim True said Jasmine had a point but he did not know the answer to it from the time of the vote if it was acquired with or through that process or through another process he didn't know. Jim said if it was acquired and dedicated and used as open space and that use is being changed now, then there would be issues. Jasmine said that there was a transportation plan in the original Rio Grande Master Plan still envisioned the train and right and around that area was going to be the transit station. Jim said that she was raising good points but he didn't have the answer and we need to make sure that we are careful about it; if this is going to proceed on we will have to have an answer for it before the final approvals are done. Stan Gibbs asked if the insubstantial was incorrect and should it be major on page 2. Jessica replied that Stan was correct that it was major and they received an insubstantial SPA Amendment earlier this year. Charles Cunniffe distributed 2 photos showing the tent to the tent frame and if you went to any shows this past summer you experience more of a circus tent covering over the concession area and lobby, which is a temporary covering. Charles said the application was to make that portion of this facility permanent, which would allow them to house a lot of the stuff that is used on site and to remain on site and 5 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 not have to truck it back and forth. Charles said the request to keep the tent frame up is one that it is a substantial amount of money to take it down and the impacts on the park are tremendous and Parks is interested in not having those impacts. Charles said on top of the trucks is a crane requirement because it would have to be a rather large crane to reach over and bring those tent members up because there would be no place to bring a crane in with the bridge and the path. Emily Zeck said they anticipate using the lobby for storage in the off seasons so they are cutting down on trips to Basalt where the storage is located. Paige Price said that this plan would house storage in a much more clean and graceful perspective. Jessica entered into the record the Charles Cunniffee photo boards as Applicant Exhibit 1. Cliff wanted to talk about the deconstruction and 48 truck trips and asked if that was cut in half. Charles said probably far less because the trucks are largely for all the parts that make the tent and if the tent structure doesn't have to leave then those trucks don't have to come and go. Emily said that there was also a safety issue with taking down and putting up the tent. LJ said the lease for 10 years so the approval was for 10 years. Jessica replied that it would be an amendment to the SPA; the resolution talks about amending the lease to incorporate any design changes and in the end we want the lease and the SPA talking the same language. LJ asked what happens if they don't renew the lease. Jessica said it would be up to the City as the land owner to decide what to do with that site. LJ asked the fence height. Jessica replied typically the highest fence is 6 foot but this is a unique situation which is why it is being wrapped in as part of the SPA approval and that is why the resolution asks the applicant to go back and see what the minimum height and length can be. Jasmine asked currently how many employees were there in Theatre Aspen. Emily responded 5 full time year round employees and seasonally between 40 and 70 depending on the programming and the size of the cast; some of that are volunteers and part time. Stan asked if employee mitigation was based on permanent employees. Jessica answered it was based on hours worked; page 30 of the packet was the estimation put together for the housing board and the estimate for 2012. Stan asked about the temporary walls. Charles responded that would be a panel that would go up or we could leave the tent siding panels up and they are white so they would fit into the winter camouflage. 6 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 Cliff asked what winter uses goes on once the snow has fallen. Stephen replied there were a lot of uses that go on in different ways; the winter use is more contemplative, more foot traffic and a lot of dog use in the winter; there are some special events. Public Comments: 1. Lisa Baker said that she was the Theatre Aspen Board Secretary and clearly she was very much in favor of this proposal. The theatre has made great strides in production and this venue will enhance the theatre goers and provide a huge amenity to the community. 2. David Leddingham supports the Theatre and get this theatre going and advancing what they have done. 3. Nancy Mayer said that she was the publisher of Aspen Sojourner Magazine and have been very thrilled to have Theatre Aspen and what they are doing. Nancy supported Theatre Aspen very much. Stan Gibbs closed the public comment section of the hearing. LJ said he liked it and it was an essential public facility and it was important how we frame this resolution. LJ said he had an issue with the fence and he thought there could be a less impactful fence. Cliff said that section 2 of the resolution with the idea of this being used for something else and he would prefer to drop that for now. Cliff suggested a 7 foot fence and it is removed at the end of the season. Paige pointed to the tent area proper and there were temporary trailers that house the actors when they are dressing and changing to get into their costume and it is shielded from the tent. Emily said it was sketched out on Exhibit K. Jasmine said that Theatre Aspen has grown and developed and become a valuable community asset and it is important for them as well as the community to have something that is not taken up and put down and temporary. Jasmine said that is why she has the conflict with this land is appropriate for doing this and until we know this we are leading the applicant down the path of spending a lot of money if this use is for something else. LJ asked what if we make it contingent on that being used for the 6 and 7' penny. Jasmine said how do we know that this will not fall through the cracks and she was worried that it was not fair to the applicant. Stan said he didn't understand how this particular proposal was enough of a change in use that hasn't already been approved. Jasmine replied because it is permanent. Charles said it was not permanent; it was still a 10 year lease and on City property, 7 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 they do not own the property. Jasmine said then it becomes a permanent part of the SPA. Jessica stated they could write in language that says anytime that the Theatre leaves Rio Grande Park the approvals are no longer valid and any structure has to be removed. Jessica said that they could incorporate that into the resolution; it could simply be stated that this issue needs to be resolved before review at City Council and express concern that it is an issue. Jasmine stated that she did not want to see the applicants then suddenly find out that they can't do this. Charles said they were comfortable with what they have at the moment; you would like that City Council would have vetted that when they passed the Ordinance making this the proper use for this property. Stan said there were some other ancillary structures that sit there all year round so you are suggesting that those structure are illegal as well because there are permanent structures sitting on that site. Stan said that from their perspective they can't answer that question tonight and the applicant seems to want to go forward and he asked if we could have that simply stated in our resolution that we think this is a question that needs to be answered in the affirmative before this application goes forward. Jasmine said yes particularly with the statements that Jessica stated earlier becoming a permanent part of the SPA and if this issues can be incorporated in the resolution that would certainly satisfy a lot of her concerns and she agreed with Cliff that the Special Events should be stricken from the resolution at this point because it was a whole separate issue that needs a different kind of public input. Emily stated that was a good idea and they were in full support of striking that at this point. Cliff asked about gaining access to the site say to bring in chairs. Stephen replied that this was a master plan of the whole area and part of that plan removes what is the existing Rio Grande trail and created a new road which is closer to the park edge and access for emergency services as well as service back into the tent. Stephen said what can come over the bridge are things like an ambulance, bicycle or a car if needed but not a crane; so there is still access to the front it is just not that kind of access. MOTION: LJErspamer moved to pass Resolution #20, deleting the last 2 sentences of Section 2: Desig; with the numbers corrected and prior to City Council review the City Attorney and the Applicant will determine if 6th and or 7 penny funds were used to purchase the land on which Theatre Aspen resides with the requirements stated in the ballot language and City Charter and whether this is a change in use; this approval shall be contingent uponTheatre Aspen's continued location in Rio Grande Park. P &Z recommends that if Theatre Aspen leaves their current location, the approval shall herein become void; seconded by Cliff Weiss. 8 City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes November 01, 2011 Roll Call vote: Jasmine Tygre, yes; Cliff Weiss, yes; LJErspamer, yes and Stan Gibbs, yes. Discussion prior to the vote on the resolution: Jasmine said the approval is specifically contingent on a determination that the land under which Theatre Aspen currently sits was not purchased with 6 or 7 penny sales tax money and the acknowledgment that any of it was that this matter has to be referred to the voters as provided in the original ballot language. LJ supported that. Stephen said he understood where you were going with that but he didn't think that it should say if it was acquired with 6 or 7' penny it was not an appropriate use. Jasmine said that they were talking about 2 different things; the ballot language is very specific because it was a tax measure that says this land can be used for only for these particular things without going back to the voters. Jasmine said City Council cannot make a determination. Stephen responded that was what they needed to determine the specific uses as it relates to this application. Jim True said the ballot language might be broad enough to allow this use; if you question the language you can review it again but he suspected that it has been done. Jim said that there was nothing wrong with reviewing it again. Stan asked if having the City Attorney review this was acceptable. Jasmine replied no. LJ said it was acceptable to him. Jasmine asked for some language about the permanent change to the SPA. Jessica said they could add some language that says P &Z recommends the approvals herein be contingent uponTheatre Aspen's continued location in Rio Grande Park. P &Z recommends that if Theatre Aspen leaves their current location, the approval herein become void. Jessica added P &Z recommends compliance with the Theatre use with any requirements from the funds used to purchase the property shall be presented to City Council. Jasmine said that if this property was not purchased with 6 and 7 penny tax then it is irrelevant but she wanted a contingency based on that determination. Jessica said prior to City Council review the City Attorney and the Applicant will determine if 6` and or 7 penny funds were used to purchase the land on which Theatre Aspen resides with the requirements stated in the ballot language and City Charter. Adjourned 6:30 pm. . Se ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 9 VtlIa. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Ed Van Walraven Executive Officer /Fire Marshal DATE OF MEMO: December 5, 2011 MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 RE: Second Reading of Ordinance #37, Series of 2011 Fire Code and Fire Regulation Amendments: Title 8, Aspen Municipal Code. REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Aspen Fire Protection District requests Council adopt the 2009 International Fire Code (IFC) with typical amendments as required to administer and enforce a body of fire code regulations. SUMMARY: By adopting this Ordinance, the City of Aspen joins other jurisdictions in the Roaring Fork Valley, the Western Slope, Colorado and the nation moving forward with uniform fire code administration using the 2009 IFC. Aspen traditionally adopts new codes every six years. We currently administer the 2003 codes edition. BACKGROUND: Local architects, contractors and developers in the area have become aware and are familiar with the 2009 IFC as more jurisdictions adopt or accept buildings designed to this code edition. The new edition is ready for adoption. The body of Title 11 essentially mirrors the existing elements but with one addition. The 2009 IFC language is refined to closely reflect current construction practice to safeguard public health and safety and provide protection to fire fighters and emergency responders. The building programming, allows for efficient design, advanced materials and integrated building systems. This code supports our community culture and makes a step forward to simplify regulation with streamlined policies and efficient building code administration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Ordinance #37 2011 on second reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 37 (Series of 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING SECTIONS 11.04.020 AND 11.04.030 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, 2009 EDITION, AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF SAID CODE, AND REPEALING SECTIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCONSISTENT THEREWITH. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt, for the benefit of the City of Aspen, the 2010 edition of the International Fire Code, to repeal existing fire code provisions, and implement recommended changes to the 2090 edition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 That Section 11.04.020 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows: 11.04.020 Adoption of the International Fire Code. Pursuant to the power and authority conferred by the laws of the State of Colorado and the Charter of the City of Aspen, Colorado, it is hereby adopted as the fire code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, by reference thereto, the International Fire Code, 2009 edition, including the appendix, except Sections A, E, F and G of said appendix of such code published by the International Code Council Inc. 4051 West Flossmoor Road, Country Club Hills, Illinois, 60478 -5795 all to have the same force and effect as though set forth herein in every particular. Section 2 That Section 11.04.030 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows: Sec.11.04.030 Amendments. The International Fire Code herein adopted shall be amended as follows: Sec.. 101.1 Title. These regulations shall be known as the Fire Code of the Aspen Fire Protection District, hereinafter referred to as "this code." Sec. 102.8 Subjects not regulated by this code. Where no applicable standards or requirements are set forth in this code, or are contained within other laws, codes, regulations, ordinances or bylaws adopted by the jurisdiction, compliance with the most current applicable standards of the National Fire Protection Association or other nationally recognized fire safety standards, as approved, shall be deemed as prima facie evidence of compliance with the intent of this code. Nothing herein shall derogate from the authority of the fire code official to determine compliance with codes or standards for those activities or installations within the fire code official's jurisdiction or responsibility. Exception: When that current cycle is less than a year from the previous cycle, the previous cycle may be used with the approval of the fire code official. Sec.102.9 Matters not provided for. Requirements that are essential for the public safety of an existing or proposed activity, building or structure, or for the safety of the occupants thereof, which are not specifically provided for by this code shall be determined by the fire code official. The most current NFPA code cycle or other nationally recognized fire safety standards, as approved shall be utilized. Exception: When that current cycle is less than a year from the previous cycle, the previous cycle may be used with the approval of the fire code official. Sec. 103.2 Appointment. The fire code official shall be appointed by the chief appointing authority of the jurisdiction; and the fire code official shall not be removed from office except for cause and after full opportunity to be heard on specific and relevant charges by and before the appointing authority. For the purposes of this code the term fire code official there may be inserted fire marshal. Sec. 104.6.3 Fire records. The fire department shall keep a record of fires occurring within its jurisdiction and of facts concerning the same, including statistics as to the extent of such fires and the damage caused thereby, together with other information as required by the fire code official. Copies of all such records shall be forwarded to the office of the fire marshal. Sec. 104.10 Fire investigations. The fire code official, the fire chief or other responsible authority shall have the authority to investigate the cause, origin and circumstances of any fire, explosion or other hazardous condition. Information that could be related to trade secrets or processes shall not be made part of the public record except as directed by a court of law. Sec.108.1 Board of appeals. Appeals shall be in accordance with Section 8.08 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen or Section Title 11 sec 04.040.112.1 of the Pitkin County Code. 2 Sec. 109.2.2 Compliance with orders and notices. A notice of violation issued or served as provided by this code shall be complied with by the owner, operator, occupant or other person responsible for the condition or violation to which the notice of violation pertains. (1) If the building or other premises is owned by one person and occupied by another, under lease or otherwise, and the notice of violation requires additions to or changes in the building or premises such as would be considered real estate and become the property of the owner, said notice and order shall be directed to such owner of the building or premises. (2) Every notice of violation pursuant to this chapter shall set forth a time by which compliance with the notice violation is required. The time specified shall be reasonable according to the circumstances of the particular hazards or condition to which the notice and order pertains. Immediate compliance may be required in any case which represents extreme or imminent danger to persons or property. (3) Except for cases where immediate compliance is required, violations pursuant to this chapter may be appealed as set forth in Section 108.1. (4) In cases where immediate compliance is required, the notice of violation so stating shall be final and conclusive. (Sec. 202 General Definitions. "Guest" shall mean any person hiring or occupying a room or bed for living or sleeping purposes. Section 202 General Definitions. "Street" shall mean any thoroughfare, alley or public space not less than sixteen (16) feet in width which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public use. Sec. 307.1.1 Prohibited open burning. Open buming that is offensive or objectionable because of smoke emissions or when atmospheric conditions or local circumstances make such fires hazardous shall be prohibited. from May 31 to October 1. Exception: Open burning may be permitted or prohibited at any time when in the opinion of the fire code official the atmospheric conditions are conducive for safe burning. Sec. 308.3 Group A occupancies. Open -flame devices shall not be used in a Group A occupancy. Exceptions: 1. Open -flame devices are allowed to be used in the following situations, provided approved precautions are taken to prevent ignition of a combustible material or injury to occupants: 1.1. Where necessary for ceremonial or religious purposes in accordance with Section 308.1.7. 1.2. On stages and platforms as a necessary part of a performance in accordance with Section 308.3.2. 3 1.3. Where candles on tables are securely supported on substantial noncombustible bases and the candle flames are protected. 2. Heat - producing equipment complying with Chapter 6 and the International Mechanical Code. 3. Gas lights are allowed to be used provided adequate precautions satisfactory to the fire code official are taken to prevent ignition of combustible materials. 4. The use of indoor pyrotechnic displays in a Group A occupancy shall be prohibited. Exceptions: Indoor pyrotechnics shall be permitted if all the following conditions are met: (1) A permit shall be issued for each display. (2) The building is fully equipped with an approved fire sprinkler system. (3) The building is fully equipped with an approved and monitored fire alarm system. (4) The display is handled and performed by a certified pyrotechnician, possessing a valid certificate issued by the State of Colorado. (5) There are at least two standby personnel equipped with the appropriate fire extinguisher and familiar in the use of that fire extinguisher. (6) A safety plan is filed and approved by the Fire Marshal's office. (7) In accordance with NFPA 160 and NFPA 1 126 Sec. 308.3.2 Theatrical performances. Where approved, openflame devices and pyrotechnic devices used in conjunction with theatrical performances are allowed to be used when the following conditions are met: (1) A permit shall be issued for each display. (2) The building is fully equipped with an approved fire sprinkler system (3) The building is fully equipped with an approved and monitored fire alarm system (4) The display is handled and performed by a certified pyrotechnician, possessing a valid certificate issued by the State of Colorado (5) There are at least two standby personnel equipped with the appropriate fire extinguishers and familiar in the use of that fire extinguisher. (6) A safety plan is filed and approved by the Fire Marshal: s office. (7) In accordance with NFPA 160 and NFPA 1126 Sec. 310.9 Hotels, motels, rooming or lodging houses. It shall be unlawful for any person to cause a fire through the use or misuse of tobacco in any form or of matches or lighters used in connection therewith, in any hotel, motel, rooming or lodging house. All managers or operators of hotels, motels, rooming or lodging houses shall post in a conspicuous place within such hotel, motel, rooming or lodging house a copy of Section 310.9 along with the penalty imposed for such violation. Any person violating said 4 section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Such posting shall be done at no expense to the City. Sec. 507.5.4.1 Snow removal. Snow removal operations shall not prevent fire hydrants from being immediately discernible or hinder gaining immediate access. Sec. 903.2 Where required. Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.14. Exception: Spaces or areas in telecommunications buildings used exclusively for telecommunications equipment, associated electrical power distribution equipment, batteries and standby engines, provided those spaces or areas are equipped throughout with an automatic smoke detection system in accordance with Section 907.2 and are separated from the remainder of the building by not less than 1 -hour fire barriers constructed in accordance with Section 707 of the International Building Code or not less than 2 -hour horizontal assemblies constructed in accordance with Section 712 of the International Building Code, or both. Sec. 903.2.13 R -1, R -2. Every apartment house, town house, lodging house, dormitory, convent, monastery, rooming house, condominium or hotel two stories or more in height and containing four or more dwelling units shall have installed therein an approved automatic sprinkler system throughout the premises. Fire separations shall not constitute separate buildings for this purpose. This includes all R -3 occupancies. Sec. 903.2.14 One and two family dwellings and auxiliary buildings. Any residential occupancy or auxiliary building, including attached garages, in excess of 5,000 square feet or in a location that is difficult to access as determined by the fire code official, shall be equipped with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system including the installation of a fire department connection. For residential automatic fire sprinkler systems a minimum of a three sprinkler head hydraulic calculation shall be submitted for approval, a larger number of sprinkler head calculation may be required depending on the structural design. Fire separations shall not constitute separate buildings for this purpose. This is includes all R -3 occupancies Sec. 903.4 Sprinkler system supervision and alarms. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems, pumps, tanks, water levels and temperatures, critical air pressures and water -flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically supervised by a listed fire alarm control unit. Automatic sprinkler systems protecting one, two or multiple family dwellings that are not monitored shall operate in the following manner: (1) All water flow activations shall be capable of sounding an interior audible alarm notifying all occupants simultaneously. 5 (2) All water flow activations shall be capable of activating an exterior audible /visual alarm. This alarm shall be located so as to be visible from the nearest fire department access road. A second visual device may be required to delineate the fire department connection. (3) The activation of any water control device shall be capable of activating the light portion only of the exterior audible /visual signal. Exceptions: 1. Limited area systems serving fewer than 20 sprinklers. 3. Jockey pump control valves that are sealed or locked in the open position. 3. Control valves to commercial kitchen hoods, paint spray booths or dip tanks that are sealed or locked in the open position. 4. Valves controlling the fuel supply to fire pump engines that are sealed or locked in the open position. 5. Trim valves to pressure switches in dry, pre- action and deluge sprinkler systems that are sealed or locked in the open position. Sec. 903.4.2 Alarms. Approved audible devices shall be connected to every automatic sprinkler system. Such sprinkler water -flow alarm devices shall be activated by water flow equivalent to the flow of a single sprinkler of the smallest orifice size installed in the system. Alarm devices shall be provided on the exterior of the building in an approved location. Where a fire alarm system is installed, actuation of the automatic sprinkler system shall actuate the building fire alarm system. For one and two family dwelling and R -3 occupancies: Interior audible water flow signals capable of notifying all occupants simultaneously shall be provided. A visual and audible water flow alarm shall be installed on the exterior of the building. This alarm shall be located so as to be visible from the nearest fire department access road. A second visual device may be required to delineate the fire department connection. Where the R -3 occupancy is a duplex, triplex or greater, audible alarms shall notify all of the occupants simultaneously upon a water flow activation. Exterior visual and audible alarms shall activate on the unit of origin only. Sec. 906.1 Where required. Portable fire extinguishers shall be installed in the following locations. 1. In new and existing Group A, B, E, F, l-, 1 , M, R -1, R -2, R -4 and S occupancies. 2. Within 30 feet (9144 mm) of commercial cooking equipment. 3. In areas where flammable or combustible liquids are stored, used or dispensed. 4. On each floor of structures under construction, except Group R -3 occupancies, in accordance with Section 1415.1. 5. Where required by the sections indicated in Table 906.1. 6. Special - hazard areas, including but not limited to laboratories, computer rooms and generator rooms, where required by the fire code official. Sec. 907.1.4 Designer requirements. All plans for fire alarm systems submitted for approval shall have affixed the signature of a NICET Level 3 or higher in the field of fire alarm design. Exception: Where the fire alarm system designer has the equivalent of NICET Level 3 training, all certificates and documentation shall be presented for compliance. Sec. 907.1.5 Installer requirements. 6 All fire alarm system installations shall be supervised by a person having a NICET Level 2 or higher in the field of fire alarm installation. Exception: Where the fire alarm system installer has the equivalent of NICET Level 2 training, all certificates and documentation shall be presented for compliance. Sec. 907.1.6 Required types of systems. All fire alarm systems required by this code shall be addressable, analog systems. Exception: With the approval of the Fire Marshal a conventional system may be used if that system is used only to monitor a fire sprinkler system. Sec. 907.2.1 Group A. A manual and automatic fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in Group A occupancies having an occupant load of 100 or more. Portions of Group E occupancies occupied for assembly purposes shall be provided with a fire alarm system as required for the Group E occupancy Sec. 907.2.2 Group B. A manual and automatic fire alarm system shall be installed in Group B occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The combined Group B occupant load of all floors is 100 or more. 2. The Group B occupant load is more than 50 persons above or below the lowest level of exit discharge. 3. The Group B fire area contains a Group B ambulatory health care facility Sec. 907.2.3 Group E. A manual and automatic fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in Group E occupancies. When automatic sprinkler systems or smoke detectors are installed, such systems or detectors shall be connected to the building fire alarm system. Exceptions: 1. A manual fire alarm system is not required in Group E occupancies with an occupant load of less than 50. 2. Manual fire alarm boxes are not required in Group E occupancies where all of the following apply: 2.1. Interior corridors are protected by smoke detectors. 2.2. Auditoriums, cafeterias, gymnasiums and similar areas are protected by heat detectors or other approved detection devices. 2.3. Shops and laboratories involving dusts or vapors are protected by heat detectors or other approved detection devices. 2.4. The capability to activate the evacuation signal from a central point is provided. 2.5. In buildings where normally occupied spaces are provided with a two -way communication system between such spaces and a constantly attended receiving station 7 from where a general evacuation alarm can be sounded, except in locations specifically designated by the fire code official. 2.6 Where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system and the alarm notification devices will activate upon sprinkler water flow. Where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system and the alarm notification devices will activate upon sprinkler water flow and manual activation is provided from a normally occupied location. Sec. 907.2.7 Group M. A manual and automatic fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in Group M occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The combined Group M occupant load of all floors is 500 or more persons. 2. The Group M occupant load is more than 100 persons above or below the lowest level of exit discharge. Exceptions: 1. A manual fire alarm system is not required in covered mall buildings complying with Section 402 of the International Building Code Sec. 907.2.8.1 Manual fire alarm system. A manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in Group R -1 occupancies. Sec. 907.2.8.2 Automatic smoke detection system. An automatic smoke detection system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed throughout all interior corridors serving sleeping units.and in all common areas, laundry rooms, and mechanical rooms. Sec. 907.2.9 Where required. Every apartment house, town house, lodging house, dormitory, convent, monastery, rooming house, condominium or hotel two stories or more in height and containing four or more dwelling units shall have installed therein an approved automatic and manually operated fire alarm system so designed that all occupants of the building may be warned simultaneously. Fire alarm systems shall be installed in accordance with I.F.C. Section 907.2 and nationally recognized standards. Fire separations shall not constitute separate buildings for this purpose. This includes all R -3 occupancies other than single family dwellings. Sec. 907.2.9.1 Manual fire alarm system. A manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in Group R - occupancies where they are two stories or more in height and containing four or more dwelling units 8 Sec. 907.6.2.2.5 Interior alarms. An inside audible alarm is to be installed whenever an alarm is required by Chapter 9 of the International Fire Code and Chapter 9 of the International Building Codes. In the case of public assembly areas with an occupant load of one hundred (100) or more persons or where, in the opinion of the Building Official or the Fire Marshal, the installation of an inside alarm may result in creating panic, the alarm signal shall be installed in an attended area (e.g. projection booth, manager's office) from where there can be effectuated an orderly evacuation of the assembly area pursuant to the system approved by the Building Official or Fire Marshal. Sec. 907.6.2.3.1.2 Exterior visual requirements. The exterior visual signals shall meet the following requirements: (1) The light used shall be of the strobe type producing at least one million candle power, or incandescent flashing type which can be plainly seen for at least 1,500 feet in all directions of approach. (2) Lights are to be red in color for systems equipped with a fire department connection and yellow in color for systems not having a fire department connection. (3) In systems with fire department connections the light is to be located at least 12ft. above and as directly vertical to the fire department connection as possible. In systems without fire department connections the light is to be located so as to be visible from the nearest street. (4) A sign with the words "Fire, Call Fire Department" (black on a white background and large enough to be visible from the center of the adjacent street) shall be mounted directly above the light. (5) The light shall not replace the audible alarms but is to be used in conjunction with it. (6) The visual and audio signal shall be together on a circuit separate from all others except exit signs. Sec. 913.4 Valve supervision. Where provided, the fire pump suction, discharge and bypass valves, and the isolation valves on the backflow prevention device or assembly shall be supervised open by one of the following methods: 1. Central- station, proprietary or remote - station signaling service. 2. Local signaling service that will cause the sounding of an audible signal at a constantly attended location. 3. Sealing of valves and approved weekly recorded inspection where valves are located within fenced enclosures under the control of the owner. Sec. 1008.1.9.10 Stairway doors. Interior stairway means of egress doors shall be openable from both sides without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort. Exceptions: 1. Stairway discharge doors shall be openable from the egress side and shall only be locked from the opposite side. 2. This section shall not apply to doors arranged in accordance with Section 403.5.3 of the International Building Code. 3.In stairways serving not more than two stories, doors are permitted to be locked from the side opposite the egress side, provided they are openable from the egress side and capable of being unlocked simultaneously without unlatching upon a signal from the fire command 9 center, if present, or a signal by emergency personnel from a single location inside the main entrance to the building. Sec. 1028.12 Seat stability. In places of assembly, the seats shall be securely fastened to the floor. Exceptions: 1. In places of assembly or portions thereof without ramped or tiered floors for seating and with 75 or fewer seats, the seats shall not be required to be fastened to the floor. 2. In places of assembly or portions thereof with seating at tables and without ramped or tiered floors for seating, the seats shall not be required to be fastened to the floor. 3. In places of assembly or portions thereof without ramped or tiered floors for seating and with greater than 75 seats, the seats shall be fastened together in groups of not less than three or the seats shall be securely fastened to the floor. 4. In places of assembly where flexibility of the seating arrangement is an integral part of the design and function of the space and seating is on tiered levels, a maximum of 75 seats shall not be required to be fastened to the floor. Plans showing seating, tiers and aisles shall be submitted for approval. 5. Groups of seats within a place of assembly separated from other seating by railings, guards, partial height walls or similar barriers with level floors and having no more than 14 seats per group shall not be required to be fastened to the floor. 6. Seats intended for musicians or other performers and separated by railings, guards, partial height walls or similar barriers shall not be required to be fastened to the floor. Sec. 2204.3 Unattended self - service motor fuel- dispensing facilities. Unattended self - service motor fuel- dispensing facilities shall comply with Sections 2204.3.1 through 2204.3.7. A safety plan and safety equipment technical data shall be submitted for review prior to approval. Unsupervised private dispensing shall be by permit only. Sec. 3301.1.3 Fireworks. The possession, manufacture, storage, sale, handling and use of fireworks are prohibited. Exceptions: 1. Storage and handling of fireworks as allowed in Section 3304. 2. Manufacture, assembly and testing of fireworks as allowed in Section 3305. 3. The use of fireworks for fireworks displays as allowed in Section 3308. 4. The possession, storage, sale, handling and use of specific types of Division 1.4G fireworks where allowed by applicable laws, ordinances and regulations, provided such fireworks comply with CPSC 16 CFR, Parts 1500 and 1507, and DOTn 49 CFR, Parts 100 -185, for consumer fireworks. 5. The storage, sale, use and handling of toy caps, sparklers and smoke snakes shall be permitted. Sec. 3301.2.4 Financial responsibility. Before a permit is issued, as required by Section 3301.2, the applicant shall file with the City of Aspen or Pitkin County a corporate surety bond in a principal sum equal to the amount required by the Colorado state statutes, Pitkin County, or the City of Aspen, of persons engaging 10 in similar activities, or a public liability insurance policy for the same amount, for the purpose of the payment of all damages to persons or property which arise from, or are caused by, the conduct of any act authorized by the permit upon which any legal judgment results. The fire code official may specify a greater or lesser amount when, in his opinion, conditions at the location of use indicate a greater or lesser amount is required. Public agencies shall be exempt from this bond requirement Sec. 3301.4 Qualifications. Persons in charge of magazines, blasting, fireworks display or pyrotechnic special effect operations shall not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs which impair sensory or motor skills, shall be at least 21 years of age and shall demonstrate knowledge of all safety precautions related to the storage, handling or use of explosives, explosive materials or fireworks. The handling and firing of explosives shall only be performed by the person possessing a valid explosives certificate issued by the State of Colorado. Sec. 3304.10.8 Storage exceeding 501bs. Storage of explosives in quantities exceeding fifty (50) pounds shall be in a Type I magazine, except that a Type 3 magazine may be used for temporary storage of a larger quantity of explosives at the site of blasting operations where such amount constitutes not more than one day's supply for use in current operations. At the end of the day's operations any remaining explosives shall be safely destroyed or returned to a Type 1 magazine. Sec. 3304.10.9 Storage less than 50 lbs. Storage of explosives in quantities of fifty (50) pounds or less shall be in Type I or Type II magazine, except that explosives in any quantity when stored in remote locations shall be in Type I, bullet resistant magazines. Sec. 3308.1.2 Indoor pyrotechnic displays The use of indoor pyrotechnic displays shall be prohibited. Exception: Indoor pyrotechnics shall be permitted if all the following conditions are met: (1) A permit shall be issued for each display. (2) The building is fully equipped with an approved fire sprinkler system (3) The building is fully equipped with an approved and monitored fire alarm system (4) The display is handled and performed by a certified pyrotechnician and possessing a valid certificate issued by the State of Colorado (5) There are at least two standby personnel equipped with the appropriate fire extinguisher and familiar in the use of that fire extinguisher. (6) A safety plan is filed and approved by the Fire Marshal's office (7) In accordance with NFPA 160 and NFPA 1126. 11 Sec. 3404.2.13.2.4 Above - ground tanks. Hereafter no tank for the storage of flammable fluid in excess of ten (10) gallons shall be erected, repaired, renewed or replaced either wholly or partially above ground. Where in the opinion of the fire code official an existing tank constitutes a fire hazard through neglect or disrepair, he shall order such tank removed; however, tanks or other facilities for the storage of Class 6 fuel oil may be installed above ground if approved by the fire code official and in accordance with existing codes and regulations pertaining to above ground storage. Sec. 3406.2.4 Capacity limits. The capacity of permanent above - ground tanks containing Class 1 or 11 liquids shall not exceed 1,100 gallons (4164 L). The capacity of temporary above -tanks containing Class 1 or 11 liquids shall not exceed 500 gallons (1892 L). Tanks shall be of the single - compartment design. A permit shall be obtained from the Fire Marshal for the storage or keeping of volatile inflammable fluids in excess of five (5) gallons in any building and of ten (10) gallons on any premises. The Fire Marshal is further authorized to issue temporary permits for the above ground storage of such fluids in tanks which shall not exceed a five hundred (500) gallon capacity for the purpose of providing fuel for heavy equipment used in building construction, earth moving, earth grading or similar operations and such permits may be issued only for sites where there are not close hazards. Such temporary permits shall be issued with the time limits set which shall conform to the reasonably necessary time for completion of the individual job for which the permit is issued. Sec. 3406.6.1.12 Delivery hose length. The maximum length of the delivery hose used to connect the tank vehicles being filled shall not exceed twenty (20) feet. Sec. 3406.6.1.13Delivery vehicle capacity. Tank delivery vehicles used for the delivery of flammable liquids as defined in this article, having an aggregate capacity in excess of one thousand five hundred (1,500) gallons shall be equipped with a single cargo tank mounted thereon, self - propelled and of the diesel powered type. Sec. 3406.6.1.14 Delivery vehicle single compartment capacities. It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle having a tank capacity in excess of five thousand (5,000) gallons aggregate, or with any one compartment thereof in excess of two thousand five hundred (2,500) gallon individual capacity, to deliver flammable liquids to any place of storage within the corporate limits of the city. Sec. 3406.6.1.15 Delivery periods. It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle transporting flammable liquids in excess of five thousand (5,000) gallons, or any motor vehicle transporting LP gas in excess of two thousand five hundred (2,500) gallons liquid, or any vehicle transporting explosives and other 12 dangerous articles, to remain within the city for a period exceeding one hour, unless as provided herein. Sec. 3406.6.1.16 Noncompliant motor vehicles. It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle other than a tank delivery vehicle as defined herein to deliver flammable liquids, LP gas, or other dangerous articles to any place of storage within the corporate limits of the city Sec. 3803.4 Multiple LP -gas container installations. Multiple LP -gas container installations with a total water storage capacity of more than 180,000 gallons (681 300 L) [150,000- gallon (567 750 L) LP -gas capacity] shall be subdivided into groups containing not more than 180,000 gallons (681 300 L) in each group. Such groups shall be separated by a distance of not less than 50 feet (15 240 mm), unless the containers are protected in accordance with one of the following: 1. Mounded in an approved manner. 2. Protected with approved insulation on areas that are subject to impingement of ignited gas from pipelines or other leakage. 3. Protected by firewalls of approved construction. 4. Protected by an approved system for application of water as specified in Table 6.4.2 of NFPA 58. 5. Protected by other approved means. Where one of these forms of protection is provided, the separation shall not be less than 25 feet (7620 mm) between LP - gas container groups It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle having a tank capacity in excess of two thousand five hundred (2,500) gallons liquid capacity to deliver LP gas to any place of storage within the corporate limits of the city. Sec. 3803.5 Noncompliant vehicles. It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle other than a tank delivery vehicle as defined herein to deliver flammable liquids, LP gas, or other dangerous articles to any place of storage within the corporate limits of the city. Sec. 4603.6 Fire alarm systems. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed in existing buildings and structures in accordance with Sections 4603.6.1 through 4603.6.7 and provide occupant notification in accordance with Section 907.6 unless other requirements are provided by other sections of this code. All fire alarm systems shall be installed and in operation within one year of notification by the fire prevention bureau. Sec. 4603.6.5.1 Group R -1 hotel and motel manual fire alarm system. A manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in existing Group R -1 hotels and motels two stories or more in height and with four or more dwelling units. Sec. 4603.6.5.1.1 Group R -1 hotel and motel automatic smoke detection system. 13 An automatic smoke detection system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in existing Group R -1 hotels and motels throughout all interior corridors serving sleeping rooms. 4603.6.6 Group R -2. An automatic and manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system in accordance with Section 907.6 shall be installed in existing Group R -2 a occupancies two stories or more in height and containing four or more dwelling or sleeping units. Fire alarm systems shall be installed in accordance with I.F.C. Section 907.2 and nationally recognized standards. Fire separations shall not constitute separate buildings for this purpose. Sec. 4604.5 Illumination emergency power. The power supply for means of egress illumination shall normally be provided by the premises' electrical supply. In the event of power supply failure, illumination shall be automatically provided from an emergency system for the following occupancies where such occupancies require two or more means of egress: 1. Group A having 50 or more occupants. Exception: Assembly occupancies used exclusively as a place of worship and having an occupant load of less than 300. 2. Group B occupancies with 100 or more total occupants. For high -rise buildings and smoke proof enclosures, see the Building Code. Emergency systems shall be supplied from storage batteries or an on -site generator set and the system shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Electrical Code 3. Group E in interior stairs, corridors, windowless areas with student occupancy, shops and laboratories. 4. Group F having more than 100 occupants. Exception: Buildings used only during daylight hours which are provided with windows for natural light in accordance with the International Building Code. 5. Group I. 6. Group M. Exception: Buildings less than 3,000 square feet (2791m) in gross sales area on one story only, excluding mezzanines. 7. Group R -I. Exception: Where each sleeping unit has direct access to the outside of the building at grade. 8. Group R -2. Exception: Where each dwelling unit or sleeping unit has direct access to the outside of the building at grade. 9. Group R -4. Exception: Where each sleeping unit has direct access to the outside of the building at ground level. 14 Section 3 That the International Fire Code, 2009 edition, hereinabove adopted by reference is to govern the maintenance of buildings and premises; to safeguard life, health, property and public welfare by regulating the storage, use and handling of dangerous and hazardous materials, substances and processes and by regulating the maintenance of adequate egress facilities. Section 4 That three copies of the primary code and secondary code being considered for adoption by this ordinance, all certified to be true copies by the Mayor and City Council, shall be on file with the City Clerk and shall be open for public inspection in her office at the Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, any weekday between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., at least fifteen days preceding the public hearing on this ordinance. Section 5 That on passage of this ordinance and adoption of this code by reference, one copy of the Code may be kept in the office of the chief enforcement officer instead of in the office of the City Clerk. Following the adoption of this code, the City Clerk shall at all times maintain a reasonable supply of copies of the code available for purchase by the public. Section 6 Existing ordinances or parts of ordinances covering the same matters as embraced in this ordinance are hereby repealed and all ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed, except that this repeal shall not affect or prevent the prosecution or punishment of any person for any act done or committed in violation of any ordinance hereby repealed prior to the taking effect of this ordinance. Section 7 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 8 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 12 day of December, 2011, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 31- 12 -403, C.R.S., as amended, notice of the hearing shall be published at least twice, once at least eight (8) days preceding the hearing and once at least fifteen (15) days preceding it. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 28 day of November 2011 Mick Ireland, Mayor A TTEST :• Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2011. Mick Ireland, Mayor A TTEST :• 15 Vilib MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director tlig FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Plannerljic/jj — RE: Vacation Rentals Code Amendment Second Reading, Ordinance No. 34 Series of 2011. MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 SUMMARY: The code amendment before Council proposes to allow vacation rentals in all zone districts through an annual permit system. The purpose of this meeting is to step back and review the background that lead up to the proposed amendment. Staff has conducted a lot of research to date and needs direction from Council before proceeding with more targeted research. There were some questions raised during first reading about the technical aspects of the amendment. Staff will answer these questions, and any additional questions, in February during the continued public hearing. After the comments during first reading and subsequent emails, it is apparent that more attention needs to be given to defining the problem and discussing possible solutions. There are many different solutions to address vacation rentals. Staff proposes vacation rentals in all zone districts that allow residential uses through a revocable rental permit process that is reviewed with a business license. This mimics our current "system" and seems to be a successful method that other communities have used to provide accountability, clarity, a means of enforcement and to mitigate impacts on neighborhood character. The larger question seems to be where rentals should be allowed and whether the number of rentals per year should be limited. Following are three major questions that need to be addressed: • Amend the code or enforce the current regulations? Currently the Code allows 2 short term rentals per year, that are less than 6 months each in duration, for all areas outside of the lodging zone districts (which are generally located at the base of Ajax.) Areas within the lodging zone district are not restricted by the number of rentals per year. The current Code regulations do not include specific review standards or an annual rental permitting process (with the exception of a business license.) Council is asked to provide direction as to whether Staff enforce the current regulations or amend the Code. Should Council choose to amend the Code, the following two questions provide direction to Staff to draft new language. Second Reading Staff Memo Vacation Rentals Code Amendment 11/14/2011 Page 1 of 5 • Restrict rentals to specific zone districts? The current Code allows unlimited rentals in the lodging zone districts and restricts the number of rentals in other districts as described above. Restricting rentals to specific zone districts focuses rental activity on specific areas of town. Currently, rentals are found throughout the city limits. Staff used information on www.vrbo.com to create a general map of the number of rentals listed in each neighborhood, attached as Exhibit F. • Limit the number of rentals allowed in a calendar year? The current Code allows 2 rentals that are less than 6 months per calendar year. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council provide direction and continue the public hearing to February 13, 2012. QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING: Provide background on how we got here. What department brought up this issue? CAST (Colorado Association of Ski Towns) began discussing this issue in 2009. Tim Gagen, the Manager for Breckenridge, raised the issue of potential lost revenue from short term rentals that were not remitting taxes. In 2010, CAST formed a subcommittee to research the topic and determined that the problem was growing through the prevalence of online rental sites. The popularity of online rental sites is evident after a quick online search. For example HomeAway, the company responsible for www.vrbo.com which lists about 300 properties in Aspen, posted a total revenue increase of 36.9% for the third quarter of 2011 to $61.1 million from $44.6 million in the third quarter of 2010. In their research CAST quickly learned that most online sites do not list addresses or property owners, which creates a time consuming research project for enforcement. In response to the difficultly in tracking online rentals, CAST has most recently been focused on developing software with a company called VR Compliance that will help communities identify rental addresses and property owners for tax collection and zoning enforcement. After CAST brought the issue to the forefront, many mountain communities began to consider enforcement of current regulations or code amendments. Both the Aspen Finance Department and Community Development Department raised the question of vacation rentals but for different reasons: Finance is concerned with tax collection and Community Development is focused on zoning compliance. When Finance first started looking into whether vacation rentals had Aspen business licenses in June of 2009, there were 14 licenses issued for individual vacation rentals. Today there are about 53 licenses. This number does not include property management companies that operate and remit taxes under the management company's license. Finance started actively following up with properties listed online to require a business license and tax remittance. However, when the property owners apply for the business license they run into a roadblock with zoning compliance. Zoning complaints over the years, albeit there were five since 2008 formally submitted, continued to bring the issue to the surface. These complaints focused generally on the fact that an illegal rental was operating, . but the complaint typically stemmed from a nuisance issue such Second Reading Staff Memo Vacation Rentals Code Amendment 11/14/2011 Page 2 of 5 as parking or trash compliance. The current process is to contact the property owner, notify them of the violation, and keep an open relationship with the complainant to see if the violation continues. If the offender is caught violating the Code again, they are likely cited into Municipal Court. Trying to figure out if a property exceeded the allowed two rentals was somewhat impossible because in most cases Staff had to rely on the owner to provide the rental information. Community Development began doing online searches for vacation rentals to determine what type of market was in Aspen and the magnitude of the issue. The search results were astounding. The prolific rental market in Aspen was undeniable with some properties renting for up to 6 figures. In addition to the numerous pages of websites, there were even companies founded solely on marketing vacation rentals in Aspen. Community Development decided that the issue needed to be addressed with Council. Action needed to be taken. An initial worksession in June of 2010 introduced the topic to Council at which time Community Development presented other communities' approaches and requested direction for a possible code amendment or enforcement of the existing code. Council gave direction to Staff to continue researching other communities and to propose a code amendment for a rental license process with review standards that mirrored the current situation. Over the past year, Staff has contacted Aspen Lodging Association, Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, Aspen Board of Realtors, StayAspenSnowmass, Aspen Ski Company, and some lodging community members to discuss short term rentals. Staff set up an email distribution list for citizens that have expressed interest in the vacation rental issue. Email • updates are sent to the group. In addition Staff contacted other communities to see how they handle vacation rentals focusing mainly on mountain towns in Colorado but also researching beach resort communities in California such as Cannel-by-the-Sea and Santa Barbara. Staff conducted a survey of CAST communities which revealed that each community has a different approach to rental duration, frequency limitation, geographic limitations and review standards. What are other communities doing? We put together a short survey to see how other CAST communities handle vacation rentals. The survey is attached as Exhibit E. Basically, every community has a different approach to rentals. Below are two highlighted resort towns that are similar to Aspen: Telluride: Vacation rental restrictions only apply to residential zone districts, they do not apply to the commercial or accommodation zone districts. Vacation rentals are allowed 3 times a calendar year for 29 cumulative days or fewer. Rentals that are more than 29 consecutive days are allowed 3 times a year. Telluride has specific review standards, similar to the standards Staff proposed in the draft ordinance. A rental permit is not required in Telluride. Instead a business license is required prior to advertising the rental, and an affidavit is required at the end of the year to confirm compliance with duration and frequency of rentals in the previous year. Telluride adopted these code amendments in 2010, so the success of the changes and the required affidavit has not been tested yet. The Clerk's office issues the license and conducts online research to determine compliance. Second Reading Staff Memo Vacation Rentals Code Amendment 11/14/2011 Page 3 of 5 Breckenridge: Breckenridge allows unlimited short term rentals', defined as 30 days or less, in all zone districts. The current program has been in place since 2002. A rental license is required with specific standards that address trash, parking, and noise. The Police Department reviews the rental license for compliance, does enforcement and follow up. Technical questions from First Reading that will be answered on February 13, 2011: 1. Walk through the proposed process with a few examples. 2. Explain the proposed annual renewal permit process. How can we ensure full compliance with the standards? 3. Why is there a noticing exemption proposed for multi family buildings? 4. Are affordable housing units excluded from obtaining a vacation rental permit? 5. What do the neighborhoods say about whether they want rentals? 6. Provide more specific information on the total cost of the program. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: Pursuant to Land Use Code §26.210.020.B.19, Jurisdiction, Authority and Duties, the Community Development Director has initiated an amendment to the Land Use Code. As described in §26.310.020.B.2 Procedure for amendment, City Council is asked to determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to Land Use Code text. City Council is the final review authority. P & Z RECOMMENDATION:' The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the proposed code amendment at length and ultimately decided that the current regulation is sufficient and should be enforced. The Commission struggled with the impacts of short term rentals on residential neighborhood character and on year round residents. Minutes from the meetings were attached as Exhibit D and the resolution was attached as Exhibit C, both were provided during First Reading. Please contact Staff if you need additional copies. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to continue the public hearing of Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2011 to February 13, 2012." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Breckenridge has separate regulations for a "Chalet House" which is defined as a single family or duplex home that is specifically rented to a tour operator and requires a separate review process and specific requirements, for example ground transportation must be provided. Staff has not included this separate type of review because the Chalet House concept does not seem particularly relevant to Aspen. Second Reading Staff Memo Vacation Rentals Code Amendment 11/14/2011 Page 4 of 5 EXHIBIT A — Marked up version of draft Ordinance [provided during first reading] EXHIBIT B - Review Criteria [ provided during first reading] EXHIBIT C- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution number 15, Series of 2011 [provided during first reading] EXHIBIT D — Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes (dated August 16, 2011, August 23, 2011 and September 6, 2011) [provided during first reading] EXHIBIT E — CAST survey EXHIBIT F — Rental map based on www.vrbo.com information from February 2011. EXHIBIT G — letters from Steve Falender dated November 12, 2011 and November 29, 2011. Second Reading Staff Memo Vacation Rentals Code Amendment 11/14/2011 Page 5 of 5 J ^ y • il ...... ,., ,.. 0 ,0 0 !�[ ti�+ • c....) U, —�- .1 -0 ++ O ► , • �i J as // V� s � L u Ik / O + ell CrN } , • *- • s � , ,.....„,......4„..,, ss, i' 1 `a O _ Jr-, � r ,L,! 1 �„ 0 ct ,4 ,:.. ,: .._ _ , . _4.....,..„ ‘,.......„ , ... ;,_ ,„....,::::.„...„,— 0 _ --1,,. . ,..44,...ti.. , y , R.) y e p O. t a..,r t -yt N .� , 1 ,_ 'j i. M N J '' 1 i 'i 4 �7 At ' 0 3b '� � ' . •--------• L ` ty . • . C t ' ' ''" 11°'A :" '.. • l.. , i.; i ''" Ig .- .. ill I I ,. - Vi S .rte i /i �, r J ") •!' Y O h km{ 64 Sara Adams From: Steve Falender [falender @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 11:13 AM To: Adam Frisch; Derek Johnson; Mick Ireland; Steve Skadron; Torre Cc: Sara Adams; Steve Falender Subject: Vacation rentals code amendment Dear Council, The Vacation Rental Code Amendment is a bad idea. The Community Development staff would propose allowing unlimited short term lodging in residential neighborhoods, in order to make it easier for the Finance department to issue business licenses and collect tax dollars. Our residential neighborhoods should be a places where people live, and should not be changed into commercial lodging zones. Our zoning codes state that the purpose of our residential districts is "to provide areas for long term residential purposes ". This proposed code amendment would add to that purpose the polar opposite use: short term vacation rentals, aka commercial lodging. This land use amendment is an overly broad reaction to a narrow problem of tax collection and licensing, and inconsistent with very important purposes established in our land use code. In Exhibit B of the Staff report, Paragraph I, the staff states: "The proposed amendment recognizes the current situation and legalizes it, which allows the rentals to apply for a business license and remit lodging and sales taxes." Aspen Code Section 23.50.010 of the Visitor Benefit Tax (aka Lodging Tax), titled "Legislative Intent" states "It is the intent of the City Council to impose a tax upon the leasing or renting of rooms in commercial lodging accommodations by transient persons." (bold added). This is what the community development staff is proposing to allow next door to our homes, unlimited short term commercial lodging which will operate as businesses! As the staff says, vacation rentals are happening in our neighborhoods now, . There is no evidence, however, that a significant number of homes are rented in violation of the liberal existing zoning rules. Currently in our neighborhood, the West End, zoned R -6, every home is allowed to be rented two times a year for periods of less than 6 months. Therefore if we want to travel or earn extra money, we could, as example, rent any two of the following: winter season; summer season; Christmas vacation; Presidents week; Food and Wine. We can also rent for 6 months or longer in addition to those times. The staff in Exhibit B, section B, says allowing unlimited rentals will provide some financial relief to long time residents and return more money to the local economy. I maintain that someone who short term rents their home many times throughout the year is most likely to be a 2 homeowner who lives out of state. A true local, intent on calling Aspen home, has plenty of options under our current codes to rent. Staff says a new permit process will protect us. The fact is that we currently have trash and parking regulations that can be enforced without any code amendment. The staff says that it is difficult to enforce our fairly simple current rental rules. How much increased staff and legal fees will be required to enforce this much more complicated new code? After we call the proposed "local representative" at tam to discuss the tourists partying in the hot tub 10 feet from our bedroom, and he says "sorry, they are paying a lot of rent ", can we really expect the city staff to take action? The late - night, hot - tubbing tourists probably are not violating any laws but they are demonstrating the difference between being on vacation and being at home. Staff seems to believe that most owners are unaware of the existing rental limitations, and the solution to that lack of knowledge is to simply remove the restrictions. I disagree and believe that all knowledgeable brokers are aware of the rental restrictions and have passed on their knowledge to buyers indicating a desire to own rental property. I believe plenty of owners bought away from the core, like we did, to be in a neighborhood of residents and long term second homeowners. We are attracted to the high level of maintenance and pride of ownership that exists in primarily owner occupied neighborhoods. Staff also has stated that the impact of a code change will be insignificant because owners who are inclined to rent are already renting. I don't believe there is any basis for that conclusion. I believe many people are aware of the current limitations and follow them. If unlimited rentals are allowed as staff proposes, all of us will 1 receive multiple mailings from property managers touting the financial benefits of renting our home. It is impossible to predict how many owners will turn their homes into rental lodges. The staff presents no compelling need for all of our neighborhoods to effectively permit unlimited transient lodging. They say this code amendment will add diversity to our lodging. That diversity exists today, but the limitations we currently have protect the intent of our zone requirements to provide neighborhoods for people making a long term commitment to Aspen. The staff jumps to the conclusion that if some rental is happening now in the neighborhoods, unlimited rental is better. This makes no sense. Staff says that unlimited tourist rentals are compatible with those of us who live in residential neighborhoods full time; this is naive at best. Of course the property managers and our central reservations will always want every home in town to be placed in the rental pool, but that doesn't mean that's good for our residents. We should not risk damaging the livability of our neighborhoods by removing the existing and reasonable rental rules. If tax collection and licensing is an issue, there surely must be less drastic ways to address it. In addition, if this code amendment passes, and problems do occur in the neighborhoods, I think it will be extremely difficult to go back to our current rental rules which have worked well. Email secured by Check Point 2 Sara Adams From: Steve Falender [falender @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 11:30 AM To: Adam Frisch; Derek Johnson; Mick Ireland; Steve Skadron; Torre Cc: Sara Adams; Steve Falender Subject: Vacation Rental code amendment Sorry, I forgot to include a signature at the bottom of the letter (email) I just sent to you. The letter is from: Steve and Debbi Falender 603 W. Gillespie Aspen 970 - 920 -1816 Email secured by Check Point t To: Aspen City Council November 29, 2011 From: Steve and Debbi Falender We have several questions and concerns about the proposed Vacation Rental Code Amendment. In our block in the West End, our neighbors are either full -time residents or second homeowners who use their houses themselves and with their families. Thus, our neighborhood experience is quite different from what the staff is describing. We believe it is important to identify very specifically the problem or problems that this code amendment is intended to solve, with hard facts and numbers whenever possible, because the staff's recommended change is such an extreme change to the current rules regarding rentals in Aspen residential neighborhoods. Current rules in residential neighborhoods allow long -term rentals (greater than 6 months), plus the possibility of two short -term rentals each year, (each one for any amount of time less than 6 months). Staff's proposed amendment would allow an unlimited number of short -term rentals — one night, two nights, one week, two weeks — in each and every Aspen residential house in each and every residential neighborhood (except as restricted by neighborhood covenants and rules, such as in affordable housing areas). The possibility that vacationers could be renting the house next door to us, or all the houses on our block — moving in and out nightly or weekly, hot - tubbing late into the night, hanging out with friends and family on the patios late into the night, playing music, talking and laughing over one more beer at 2 a.m. — not just for two rental periods per year, but every single day or week each year — is an extreme change to the current rules that govern our residential neighborhoods. In our view, this change could well make our neighborhoods much less desirable as residential areas. In fact, we think this proposed amendment effectively changes our residential neighborhoods to lodging zones. We have several questions about the current situation, about what exactly is the problem that this amendment is intended to solve, about how this amendment would actually work, and most importantly to us, about whether this is good land use policy. A change that is this significant should have hard facts to justify it, and it should be clear that there is no narrower, less drastic way to solve the problems that have been identified. 1. What is the rental situation in the West End? a. How many business licenses have been issued to owners of West End properties for the purpose of renting their homes? b. How many West End owners have paid lodging tax and/ or sales tax on rentals? c. For those who have paid tax, how many have paid tax in multiple months during the year? Falender, Vacation Rental Code Amendment Comments and Questions November 29, 2011, page 1 of 4 d. Sarah Adams stated in the Council meeting that Staff had to tell a guest who was in town to rent a house that they could not rent because the owner had exceeded the limitation of two short -term rentals in the year. How did Staff determine that the violation(s) had occurred? e. How many times have homes in the West End been rented short-term in excess of the two times allowed? f. We looked at the VRBO listings on November 16, 2011 for Aspen, West End, and the list totaled 30 properties. What percentage of houses in the West End does this represent? How many listings result in actual rentals? 2. What are the administration and enforcement problems with the current rules? a. Staff says that it is awkward to administer the current license program because of the rental limitations. We would ask: What is awkward or confusing about issuing a license that refers to and conditions the permit on complying with the land use code and tax codes? (E.g., the license could say: "The zoning of your home permits you to lease your home for a rental term of less than 6 months a maximum of two times a year. In addition, you are permitted to lease your home for one term of 6 months or greater. Rental terms of 30 days or less require the payment of sales tax. ") b. How many and what types of complaints have been reported each year to Community Development alleging rentals in the West End in excess of the two times per year allowable short term rentals? c. Sales tax, lodging tax, and licenses are required today. What is the being done now to enforce compliance, and how successful is it? d. The code amendment also requires sales tax, lodging tax, and licenses. Why will enforcement be more effective or easier? 3. Torre asked how the proposed system will work. Our question is: Why will the new code amendment be better than the current one? a. What process is and will be involved in collecting and paying the required sales tax? b. How will Staff police compliance with the new regulations? Will someone knock on doors to see who is in a house? c. How will Staff and the license process deal with complaints that affect the quality of life of neighbors, such as persistent late night noise or constant evening parties and lots of cars, day or night — nuisances but probably not code violations? d. Will there be a process, to protect the neighborhoods, for revocation of a license in the event of neighbor complaints? How many complaints and what type of complaints could and should result in revocation of a license? When could and should such a revoked license be reinstated, and on what terms? Falender, Vacation Rental Code Amendment Comments and Questions November 29, 2011, page 2 of 4 4. Torre asked what rules other communities have concerning short term rentals. When we look at other communities, we need to look at similar communities. We need to identify how these communities compare in character to Aspen. Do they have a rich history of community? Are they places where families like ours, who have lived here 16 years, are still considered newcomers? 5. What is good land use policy? Our current land use code differentiates residential zones from commercial core and lodge zones by limiting short term rentals. Why was this limitation good land use policy when adopted? Why would it be good land use policy to allow unlimited lodging to encroach into what are now zone districts designated for long -term occupancy? 6. Is this code amendment consistent with the AACP? In Exhibit B of your 11/14 packet regarding this amendment, Staff addresses the question "Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan" (bold added) as follows: a. "Staff Response: Staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the AACP, specifically the Economic Sustainability chapter..." and notes that, among other economic benefits, the amendment "will result in lodging and sales tax remittance" and will "provide visitors with more lodging options ". Our questions: i. Are we currently achieving lodging and sales tax remittance from short - term rentals that owe the tax? ii. Will the code amendment result in an improved rate of remittance, and how? iii. Does Aspen need more lodging options of the types offered in our residential neighborhoods? We would think that many or most rentals in the West End would be in the "luxury" or "expensive" category of rentals, yet when Council and Staff talk about lodging needs, the words "moderate" and "affordable" are used. "Diversity" is also a term used when Council and Staff talk of lodging needs; since every home in Aspen residential neighborhoods can currently be rented for two short -term periods, how will the code amendment add to diversity? b. Since the question refers to all elements of the AACP, why has Staff looked only at the Economic Sustainability chapter? c. We strongly believe that Staff has taken a very limited look at the AACP. As you all know, one important reason the new AACP has taken so long is the difficulty Fa lender, Vacation Rental Code Amendment Comments and Questions November 29, 2011, page 3 of 4 in balancing "Aspen the Resort" with "Aspen the Town ". While we realize that the new AACP has not passed, we would ask you to look at page 8 of the 8/15/11 draft "themes of the 2011 AACP ". Some quotes follow: "Taken as a whole the main theme of the 2011 AACP is to preserve and improve the elements of the Aspen Area that make it such an attractive place to live and a compelling place to visit ".... "The following are some of the central themes of this plan Maintain our community character and quality of Iife...Reevaluate the impacts of development on community character and quality of life... Explore zoning solutions that reaffirm our small town heritage..." i. Does the code amendment "preserve and improve the elements of the Aspen Area that make it such an attractive place to live....? We think the answer is a resounding "No ". ii. Does the code amendment "Maintain our community character ?" "No ". iii. Does the code amendment offer a "zoning solution that reaffirms our small town heritage "? "No ". 7. Staff says this code amendment would benefit long -time locals financially. Would you look at the amendment differently if it primarily benefitted second homeowners? Does the overall cost of the benefit matter? Is the goal to maximize rental income in residential neighborhoods or to maximize the positive living experience for our full -time residents? Isn't there adequate rental opportunity under the current code for owners wanting rental income, by, for example, renting for the full winter season and the full summer season? Aren't short -term rentals more appropriate in lodging districts, and long -term rentals more appropriate in our residential neighborhoods? The proposed code amendment would allow our next door neighbors to operate a year -round commercial lodge. This is a fundamental change in purpose and allowable use from our current zoning code. We ask that you accumulate the relevant facts to accurately evaluate the conditions that exist today, then look at this proposal to see if it is the narrowest solution to whatever problems are identified, and to see what can go wrong. Please ensure that the benefits of economic sustainability and benefits to our visitors do not come at the expense of our neighborhood character and the quality of life for our full -time residents. Thank you. Steve and Debbi Falender 603 W. Gillespie St. 970- 920 -1816 Falender, Vacation Rental Code Amendment Comments and Questions November 29, 2011, page 4 of 4 V11 f a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Nugget Gallery Temporary Use Permit — Public Hearing Resolution No. $2,, Series of 2011. DATE: December 12, 2011 LAND USE REQUEST: APPLICANT: The Applicant is requesting an F &M Ventures, LLC; Ernie Fyrwald, principal. extension to an existing Temporary Use Horseshoe Holdings, LLC; Bruce Carlson and Permit for the Nugget Gallery located Greg Jurgenson, principals. in a common area of a commercial 4 building at 415 East Hyman Avenue. REPRESENTATIVE: Ross Kribbs, Nugget Gallery STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with conditions. „ .''z Lu LOCATION: ' ( 415 East Hyman Avenue (on the Hyman Mall). .: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: e '; Condominium Units 1 -16, Roaring ; Fork Condominiums, according to the" ,t4 Map thereof filed for record January 31, Page 4 1973 i Plat Book 4 at Pa e 355. SUMMARY: Ross Kribbs is applying to extend the temporary use permit to continue operating the Nugget Gallery in the lobby space of a downtown commercial building. The building is 415 East Hyman Avenue, on the mall, and houses Morris and Fyrwald Real Estate and several other offices upstairs. The creation of new commercial space in the City requires provision of housing and other mitigations, which can be cost - prohibitive. The mitigation is based on "net leasable area" 4 and does not count common hallways, lobbies, and similar common areas of commercial buildings that are not typically rented to an individual business. The lobby space of this building is not considered net leaseable area. Merely hanging the pictures with information about the artists does not render the hallway a commercial space. The active operation of the space requires the space be approved as net leasable area. Approving this Temporary Use permit will enable this business to continue operation without providing the mitigations. The Nugget Gallery has complied with last year's approval and Mr. Kribbs has been diligent about obtaining signage approvals. Staff did receive some unofficial opinions from local business owners related to mitigation waivers. Staff did not receive any complaints or criticism about the gallery itself or the operation. Staff does agree with the applicant that the gallery has improved what was previously a stagnant space. Businesses that rely on this lobby have provided their support to the application. City Council approved this last year with an understanding that this was an experiment of sorts that may lead to relaxed code requirements for these types of spaces. Council also was clear with the applicant that subsequent temporary use approvals may not be granted. There was some debate last year about the gallery's use of a sandwich board as the sign code was in flux. The gallery was not granted a year -round sandwich board but was allowed to obtain the one -week permits like any other retail establishment. The applicant is requesting the use of a sandwich board year- round. The request appears to meet the standards although Council can establish any limitation or allowance considered appropriate through the temporary use permit. This item will need some discussion. Mr. Kribbs has also represented that the artwork will be primarily the work of local artists. This was an important element of the proposal last year and staff has included this representation in the draft resolution. Staff believes all criteria are met. Direction on the use of a sandwich board is needed. Staff recommends the Temporary Use Permit be granted. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval, with conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ga., Series of 2011, approving a temporary use permit for the Nugget Gallery." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. , Series 2011. A — Application RESOLUTION NO. 62—) (Series of 2011) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT EXTENSION TO OPERATE "THE NUGGET GALLERY," AN ART GALLERY LOCATED WITHIN A COMMON LOBBY OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 415 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737 - 182 -16 -801 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant, The Nugget Gallery, represented by Ross Kribbs, has submitted an application for a Temporary Use Permit extension to continue operating an art gallery in the lobby of a commercial building located at 415 East Hyman Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the property is known as the Roaring Fork Condominiums and is owned by F &M Ventures, LLC; Ernie Fyrwald, principal, and Horseshoe Holdings, LLC; Bruce Carlson and Greg Jurgenson, principals. WHEREAS, the City did not receive complaints about the business or operation in the prior temporary permit period; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has reviewed the temporary use application and recommends that the City Council approve the temporary use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the temporary use request under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the proposed temporary use is consistent with the character and existing land uses of the surrounding parcels and neighborhood and that granting the temporary use permit will not adversely impact the community or the neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the temporary use request meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Temporary Use In accordance with Section 26.450.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant the Nugget Gallery a temporary use permit to operate Resolution No. _, Series 2011. Page 1 an art gallery in the lobby of' 415 East Hyman Avenue, the Roaring Fork Condominiums, from the passage of this resolution through January 2013, subject to the conditions listed herein. Subsequent operation shall require an additional temporary use permit or compliance with the Land Use Code. Section 2: Approval Conditions 1. As represented by the applicant, the artwork shall be predominantly the work of local artists. 2. All signage shall comply with the City of Aspen sign code regulations. Use of a sandwich board sign is permitted year- round. or 2. All signage shall comply with the City of Aspen sign code regulations. Use of a sandwich board sign is permitted for up to 8 one -week periods. or 2. All signage shall comply with the City of Aspen sign code regulations. Use of a sandwich board sign is not permitted. Section 3: Severability This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, Adopted, Passed, and Approved on this 6` day of December, 2010, at a duly noticed public hearing before City Council. APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: John Worcester, City Attorney Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Resolution No. _ , Series 2011. Page 2 NUGGET GALLERY A proposal for use of the 415 East Hyman Atrium Applicant Ross Kribbs Proposal in brief This is a proposal by Aspen resident Ross Kribbs to renew a temporary use permit for a small photography gallery, created from scratch from a previously under - utilized corridor /atrium space in the Roaring Fork Building on the Hyman Avenue mall. The creation of the gallery, promoted as "Nugget Gallery", involved no structural changes to the space, and the building's owners continue to be fully supportive of the project. Since Council granted a temporary use permit in December of 2010, the gallery has housed work by the applicant, Ross Kribbs, and a handful of other local artists. It also hosted, in conjunction with the Aspen Writers Foundation, a special exhibit of images from Afghanistan. The gallery and its shows have been well received by artists and gallery owners, and residents and visitors alike. RECEIVED OCT 182011 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT :s. ., NTS. . • F I I , rk Of. • . 1 � �. • .a. y . 'fib .46. ,� + -.- Proposed location of Nugget Gallery • ' 1 ,�;,� -. o- '= . !_ J �� • g O - L .:. - 1 — oil, , t . � rer .. -_ , .. • 1 114f1 .4 H4 • I A 4e4 r ----* . ''' IiiiL r 4E t _ - / The Space The Roaring Fork Building is located at 415 Hyman Avenue, on the Hyman Avenue mall. Its basement is home to the soon -to -be Finnbarrs, and the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd floors are occupied primarily by Morris & Fyrwald /Sotheby's International Realty. The top floor is a private residence owned by Dr. Bruce Carlson. This building includes an odd 1st -floor atrium that runs from the front of the building to the rear alley, with tall ceilings, skylights, exposed brick beams, and wood trusses. Until May of 2010, the space served as a catch -all for discarded furniture and old rugs, and had been unused and overlooked for at least the last 8 years prior. The space is a vital circulation corridor, albeit a very wide one: almost 9 feet across. It accesses the building's only elevator, and is the only access to the first floor restrooms in the rear of the building. The useable square footage is approximately 300 sq. ft.. In May of 2010, I contacted the building owners about my idea. With their permissions, I repainted the space and installed track lighting at my expense. My business license, however, was denied, and it took seven months to establish a temporary use permit for the space, ultimately granted in December of 2010. Since Janurary of 2011, Nugget Gallery has functioned as a viable gallery space. Even given its many limitations (did I mention the unlocked door and lack of heat ?), the response to the new space has been incredible. Quite literally EVERYONE who works in the building and passes through the space has commented on the great new look, and is excited to see the project continue. That previously neglected portion of the building is now an active and lively spot, with the potential for a little city revenue, too. I'm doing my best to keep it viable. Removed: 2 worn rugs, 4 large chairs, 2 fake trees, 1 large couch, 1 cocktail table, 1 large coffee table, 1 aging fluorescent light fixture Improved: egress, brightness & natural light, tenant mood, community spirit Before • _ F ._.�.:.. �..T. / l l ' N �� t 1 . . ____, _.. ..._______ y .. . - .,),,,,,. i i ii .._.. 4 -le.. • Tii ! ,.• i i After f: e € . w s x i t 11' r ,, , • • C I 1 The Business Plan In it's first year, Nugget Gallery functioned successfully Of not so profitably) as a retail space. Changing ownership and new construction on the building's facade have proved challenging, but we've slowly put our hidden location on the map. Business hours remain a work in progress, but will generally be 5 -days a week during high seasons, and weekends only during the off- seasons. All supporting work -- framing, printing, etcetera — has been completed at my residence in Hunter Creek Condominiums. There is no secure storage or back -of -house space associated with the property, but good will and good kharma have sufficed. The gallery has shown my own work, as well as that of other local artists, primarily photographers. A locals -only show featuring 11 photographers from the valley is scheduled for November 11th. The only non -local show this year was a collaboration with the Aspen Writers' Foundation with a show of images from Afghanistan. The response was very enthusiastic, and we hope to continue to work together with other local organizations to display powerful and challenging work when the opportunity arises. (These exhibits aren't exactly money- makers.) Signage There was some confusion regarding signage in last years' application. In the seven months that it took to arrange for the gallery's temporary permit to be approved, the sign code was completely re- written, and a fundamental component to my viability as a business was then missing. In this application, assuming the code remains unchanged, I am requesting the use of an A -frame sign, consistent with the sign code section 26.510.130.d : Locations [for A -frame signs] were selected using the following criteria: a Business has no portion of a storefront that is parallel to the public right of way b Business is provided access through a common entryway that is not exclusively used for the said business OR c Business has a storefront that is obscured by another building or portion thereof on the same lot i.e. interior courtyard Nugget Gallery appears to qualify under both B & C. I'm more than happy to discuss combining signage with my neighbors, and have suggested this during discussions with city officials. I'm committed to not - too -messy vitality, but the difference in traffic with and without a sign on the mall is very significant, and has a fundamental impact on the viability of this business. Precedent The Aspen City Council often discusses downtown vitality, the need for a wide variety of retail options, and the desire to promote the creative use of existing spaces without promoting new construction. This proposal fits those criteria like a glove, and seems very consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Under current city code and current interpretation of that code, the creation of new retail space requires affordable housing mitigation payments to be made by the building's owners. This is a reasonable request when such spaces are versatile, lockable, and secure. This property is not. It has severe limitations - pedestrian corridor, non - secure, limited square footage - and requiring mitigation payments from the building's owners would render this project unfeasible. If required to make mitigation payments, the owners would most likely construct enclosed spaces, and then rent to businesses or brokers that could afford the high cost. The gallery options precludes that outcome and also eliminates the need for construction. City Council has set a precedent of exempting mitigation payments based either on the location of the space (retail shops facing the alley) or by the type of use (food vendors in interior atriums.) Indeed, under the recently - enacted Ordinance 9b, the 415 East Hyman Atrium could be used to sell hot dogs, lanes, and pancakes with no mitigation required. I'm a decent cook, but I'd rather make a living selling my art. I hope we can work together to keep this gallery open, locally- focused, lively, and viable. Thanks! 4 A-ji7 Current Work by Ross Kribbs 11 440. 1 miri y .. � +al. MEMORANDUM ti 1 A TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Directo FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner 01q(/1 RE: Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road: Subdivision, Rezoning, Consolidated PUD Review, Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011. Continued from November 28, 2011. MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 APPLICANT /OWNER: — City of Aspen. REPRESENTATIVE: Dave Hornbacher, Director of Utilities, City of Aspen LOCATION: a: • �r, r Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space, along Power Plant Road beneath ab the Castle Creek bridge. - CURRENT ZONING: 1 ' _ R -30, Low Density Residential with a PUD overlay. °. 'i SUMMARY: Aerial view of the proposed site. Arrow The Applicant requests approval to construct a indicates proposed location of the new hydroelectric plant, aka the Castle Creek Energy building. Center, on Power Plant Road adjacent to the City Shop building. The application includes the STAFF RECOMMENDATION: following reviews: subdivision to create a new Staff recommends that City Council grant lot and to remove the area from the open space approval for Subdivision, Rezoning, PUD inventory, rezoning from R -30 to the Public and Growth Management for an Essential Zone, consolidated PUD review to determine Public Facility for the Castle Creek Energy dimensional requirements, Growth Management Center with conditions. Review for an Essential Public. The project is exempt from Stream Margin Review because it is a utility and is essential for public health and safety. Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 1 of 7 12.12.11 LAND USE REOUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council to construct the hydroelectric plant: • Subdivision approval to remove part of Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Subdivision and create the Castle Creek Energy Center lot, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.480, Subdivision (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); • Rezoning to the Public Zone District pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); • Consolidated PUD approval for the construction of the hydroelectric plant pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445, Planned Unit Development. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility (Chapter 26.470.090.4) to approve employee mitigation requirements for the Essential Public Facility. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission.) • Five Year Vested Rights Period (Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights). City Council is the final review authority. BACKGROUND: City Council first reviewed this project for land use on July 12, 2010 for first reading of Ordinance 15, Series of 2010. Public hearings were held on August 9, 2010, September 13, 2010, October 12, 2010, November 8, 2010, January 24, 2011, and February 28, 2011. The public hearing was continued to July 11, 2011; however the applicant decided to discontinue the public hearing. As such, a new ordinance (Ordinance 30 of 2011) is proposed; new public noticing is required for the project. Second reading of Ordinance 30 was continued on November 28, 2011 to provide the applicant with more time to address Council's questions at First Reading. Since September 13, 2010, the applicant has participated in a community mediation session, public forums and continued to refine the proposal. QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING: Five Year Vesting: The applicant requests a five year vesting period for the project to allow adequate time to obtain the required FERC licensing. State Statute requires three years of vesting. Vesting provides an Applicant a timeframe in which the applicant can rely on the approvals granted in a site specific development plan. It allows the applicant to undertake and complete the development and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan. Once vested, a development plan shall not be required to be amended Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 2 of 7 12.12.11 as a result of "any zoning or land use action by the city or by an initiated measure" during the vesting period. If the vested rights expire, the project will be subject to any new regulations that may impact the approval granted. Exemption from Stream Margin Review: Councilman Frisch asked for more information about why the project was exempt from Stream Margin Review. The proposed site is located within 100 feet of Castle Creek and requires Stream Margin Review to ensure that the development is sensitive to existing watercourses and natural vegetation. The hydroelectric plant proposal is exempt from Stream Margin Review pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2 of the Land Use Code which exempts the following types of development: "construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the no development area prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, utilities, provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards." Staff found that, while the project is exempt from Stream Margin Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, it was important to discuss the review criteria with the Commission to bring all of the issues to the forefront and maintain a transparent public process. Staff presented Stream Margin review to the Planning and Zoning Commission during the public hearing. Staff finds that the criteria for Stream Margin Review, attached as Exhibit 17, are met to the extent practical with the condition that the applicant meets the requirements of the Colorado Department of Wildlife and comply with the adopted Memorandum of Understanding and Stream Health Monitoring Plan. CHANGES TO THE PROJECT SINCE FEB. 28, 2011: Generally the project is consistent with the original application. The applicant proposes a few changes to the previous land use application. Changes to the building: The visitor center room has been removed from the project which reduces the size of the building by about 168 square feet. The proposed architectural materials — brick, metal panels and metal roofing remains unchanged. Solar panels are no longer envisioned for the roof. Changes to the site plan: The landscape plan has been updated to reflect the change in building size /shape. The existing shed located in the southern corner of the lot is no longer proposed to be demolished. The shed is used for all weather storage. The previous iteration included removal of the shed and re- vegetation of the area. Parking spaces: Five parking spaces are still proposed for the project- mainly to provide organized parking for the City of Aspen Streets Department equipment. The parking spaces are no longer proposed to be covered. These spaces are located on the CDOT right of way. The Engineering Department is finalizing a 100 year lease for parking, access and utilities in the CDOT right of way. PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed hydroelectric plant is a one story 1,761 gross square foot Essential Public Facility that includes four rooms: Turbine Room (approx. 1,046 sq. ft.), Shop and Staging Room (approx. 355 sq. ft.), and Control Room (approx. 359 sq. ft.) A 414 gross Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 3 of 7 12.12.11 square foot storage shed exists on the property and is proposed to be maintained. Five parking spaces are proposed to be located on CDOT property directly adjacent to the subject lot. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS: The Public Zone District requires adoption of a PUD to establish dimensional requirements. The applicant requests a rezoning from the R- 30/PUD Zone District, which does not permit a hydroelectric plant, to the Public Zone District. Dimensional Proposed Dimensional Staff Notes Requirement Requirements Minimum Lot Size 27,000 sq. ft. Proposed AEC parcel is 27,005 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per n/a No residential component. dwelling unit Maximum Allowable n/a No residential component. Density Minimum Lot Width As per PUD plat - Minimum Front Yard Setback measured from As per PUD plat New building is 49 ft. from east property line (front) property line Minimum Side Yard New building is 11 ft. north side Setback, measured As per PUD plat yard; and 185 ft. on south side yard from property line New building is 50 ft. from west Minimum Rear Yard (rear) property line. Staff proposes Setback, measured As per PUD plat that retaining walls and the site wall from property line located in the setbacks be approved as part of the PUD plat. Maximum Height 27 ft. Measured pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.020.B Minimum Distance As per PUD plat Between Buildings Applicant proposes no open space Minimum % Open No requirement requirement due to the 3:1 open Space space exchange and the surrounding open space.* Applicant does not anticipate that the Trash Access Area No requirement plant will regularly generate trash. The loading dock area is proposed for trash storage as needed. 1,761 gross square feet for the new Allowable Gross hydroplant building and 414 square Square Footage Total of 2,175 gross sq. ft. feet for the existing storage shed. Any future additions requires a PUD amendment. Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page4of7 12.12.11 Dimensional Proposed Dimensional Staff Notes Requirement Requirements The applicant proposes 5 parking spaces on the adjacent CDOT right Minimum Off Street of to be used for the CCEC. The Parking 0 spaces Code does not permit off -street parking to be located on an adjacent lot that is in different ownership than the subject parcel. *Please reference Exhibit 1, Subdivision for a detailed explanation about the land trade. STAFF COMMENTS: ECOLOGICAL BILL OF RIGHTS: The Ecological Bill of Rights, attached as Exhibit 5, were adopted as a guiding document via City Council Resolution Number 42, Series of 2000. A Whereas clause in the adopted Resolution states that Council `wishes to use this Ecological Bill of Rights as a set of goals and as guiding principles for it and city staff to use in their work, in concert with the Aspen Area Community Plan..." Staff finds that the overall policy expressed in the Bill of Rights is met in the proposal: specifically the commitment to a Stream Health Monitoring program to protect and preserve wetlands and stream health (Bill of rights numbers 2, 3, 13) and the development of renewable use energy (number 9). SUBDIVISION: The proposed location of the Energy Center is adjacent to Castle Creek along Power Plant Road on land that is currently part of Marolt Open Space. The voters approved removal of a small section of open space for this project in exchange for newly designated open space along lower Aspen Mountain (Millionaire Claim) and trail easements around the Water Plant that add up to about three times the size of the Castle Creek Energy Center proposed lot for a 3:1 land exchange: Subdivision of the proposed lot from the Marolt Open Space is required for the hydroplant project. Staff finds that the AACP is met with the proposed application and recommends approval. CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The Community Development Department determined that a consolidated PUD review for the approximately 2,175 square feet building is appropriate. The proposed building is one story and includes a large room for the turbine and generator, a workshop and staging room, and a small control room. The proposed gross floor area accounts only for the proposed building and the existing shed — any additions to the building require an amendment to the PUD. Staff recommends approving only the specific project included in the application rather than forecasting a future potential addition that will require a Land Use review to amend the PUD. There is no open space requirement provided in the application. With the exception of the existing storage shed, the proposed setbacks will contain any development to the area on the The City Charter requires a 1:1 open space land exchange. Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 5 of 7 12.12.11 north side of Power Plant Road. Staff recommends that the area around the shed is incorporated into the landscape plan and is appropriately revegetated. Energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and water efficient landscaping contribute to the City's environmental stewardship goals. Staff finds that the review criteria are met and recommends City Council approve the consolidated PUD plan. REZONING: Rezoning from the R -30, Low Residential Zone District, with a PUD overlay to the Public Zone District with a PUD overlay is required to permit the operation of a hydroelectric plant. The Public Zone District permits "essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops)," and requires a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to establish dimensional requirements. The adjacent City Shop property is zoned Public with a PUD overlay Staff finds that the criteria to rezone the parcel to the Public Zone District is met and recommends approval. GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY: The proposed project qualifies as an Essential Public Facility as it is "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community," and as such requires approval for employee generation and requires employee mitigation through Growth Management Review. The Water Department plans to utilize existing employees to monitor the hydroelectric equipment remotely from the Water Department offices located on Doolittle Drive with daily visits to the actual Energy Center site. Currently, hydroelectric specialists conduct daily readings and maintenance of existing City facilities including the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant and the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek headgates. The Castle Creek Energy Center will be added to the scheduled monitoring of these properties on an as needed basis. The Housing Board recommends that an audit of Water Department employees is conducted 2 years after the Certificate of Occupancy to confirm that no increase of employees resulted from the project. The Planning and Zoning Commission established an employee generation rate of 0 employees for the Energy Center. Staff finds that the criteria are met and recommends that City Council grant Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility with the condition that an employee audit specific to the hydroelectric plant is conducted, upon request by APCHA, 2 years after the Certificate of Occupancy is granted. VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS: The Applicant is requesting a vested property right for the proposed development plan for a period of five (5) years rather than the standard three (3) year period. The Applicant is requesting the longer vesting period to allow adequate time to obtain a FERC license. Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 6 of 7 12.12.11 The Land Use Code provides for a three year vesting period and a variation from that period is at the sole discretion of the City Council. The City has a process for extending or reinstating vested rights (Section 26308.101 C., Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights). The Applicant prefers to request five years of vesting now, rather than request an extension or reinstatement in the future. Staff recommends that the five year vesting period be granted at this time due to the length of time required for the FERC permitting and licensing process. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is consistent with the goals of the AACP as well as the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff finds that this project will further the community goal to reduce Aspen's carbon footprint. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, approving with conditions Subdivision, Rezoning to the Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD approval, Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility and 5 -year vesting on second reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria EXHIBIT 2 — PUD Review Criteria EXHIBIT 3 — Rezone Review Criteria EXHIBIT 4 - GMQS for an Essential Public Facility EXHIBIT 5 — Ecological Bill of Rights EXHIBIT 6 - Report of Community Mediation Session, May 25, 2011 EXHIBIT 7 - Public Forum on hydropower in Aspen, June 16, 2011 EXHIBIT 8 - Application, dated October 4, 2011, submitted by David Hornbacher EXHIBIT 9 — Grading and drainage design report, Sopris Engineering, dated May 6, 2011 EXHIBIT 10 — Updated architectural drawings, August Reno Architects, received October 12, 2011 EXHIBIT 11— Supplemental Application Information dated October 17, 20011 submitted by David Hornbacher EXHIBIT 12— Updated information from city website EXHIBIT 13 — Public comments on the draft FERC application from January 25, 2011 EXHIBIT 14 — Letter to the Editor written by Mick Ireland published in the Aspen Daily News on October 7, 2011 Exhibit 15 — Excel spreadsheet provided by applicant regarding the budget, presented during the public hearing on October 24, 2011. EXHIBIT 16 — Proof of public notice EXHIBIT 17 — Stream Margin Review criteria EXHIBIT 18 — Supplemental Application Information dated December 12, 2011. Castle Creek Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No.30, Series of 2011 Page 7 of 7 12.12.11 Ordinance No. 30 (SERIES OF 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS SUBDIVISION, REZONING TO PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT, CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY FOR LOT 3 AND LOT 2A OF THE MAROLT RANCH OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION, AKA THE CASTLE CREEK ENERGY CENTER AND HYDROELECTRIC PLANT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2735- 123 -63 -852 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval to construct the Castle Creek Energy Center and Hydroelectric Plant, which included requests for Subdivision, Amendment to the Zone District Map, Planned Unit Development plan, and Growth Management allotments for an Essential Public Facility; and, WHEREAS, the proposed Castle Creek Energy Center will serve an essential public purpose by providing clean renewable hydroelectric power to City facilities thus serving the general public and Aspen community and complying with the voters' directive to reduce carbon emissions, and therefore is categorized as an Essential Public Facility, pursuant to Section 26.104.100; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that the proposed development is exempt from Stream Margin Review, pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2, in that the proposed facility complies to the extent practical with the Stream Margin Review Standards, and concluded that it was appropriate to discuss the stream margin review criteria with the Planning and Zoning Commission in order to identify and address issues associated with the development and Stream Margin area; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is currently zoned R -30 Low Density Residential with a PUD overlay and is part of the dedicated Marolt Ranch Open Space; and, WHEREAS, the electorate voted in 2007 to remove the subject parcel from the Marolt Open Space as stated in City Council Resolution No. 70 Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the proposed land use requests with conditions; and, WHEREAS, following a duly noticed public hearing on April 20, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted Resolution No. 9, Series of 2010, recommending approval for Subdivision, Rezoning from R -30 to Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD plan, and Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility for a Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 1 of 11 2,025 gross square foot hydroelectric plant located on the property at Lot 3 and Lot 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on July 12, 2010 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 15, Series 2010, on First Reading, approving with conditions Subdivision, Rezoning from R -30 to Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD plan, and Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility for the property located at Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the public hearing was duly noticed on August 9, 2010, and was continued to September 13, 2010, October 12, 2010, November 8, 2010, January 24, 2011, February 28, 2011 and July 11,2011; and, WHEREAS, prior to the July 11, 2011 public hearing the hearing was postponed; at the request of the applicant and, WHEREAS, on October 3, 2011, the applicant submitted an updated application that included decreasing the size of the proposed building, removing the carports, and maintaining the existing shed among other changes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with the conditions set forth herein, is consistent with the goals of the Ecological Bill of Rights and is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves a Subdivision, a Consolidated Planned Unit Development, Rezoning, and Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 2 of 11 Facility for the development of a hydroelectric plant subject to the conditions described herein. Section 2: Subdivision: Lot 3 and part of Lot 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space are hereby removed from the Open Space inventory. The newly created lot, named the Castle Creek Energy Center, is 23,689 square feet as depicted on the survey. The Applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code within 180 days of approval. The 180 days shall commence upon the granting of Final PUD approval by City Council. Additionally, a final Subdivision/PUD plat shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the final PUD approval and shall include the following: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, parking, and dimensional requirements as approved. c. A detailed landscaping plan. d. A drawing representing the project's architectural character, including building elevations. e. A final grading and drainage plan meeting all requirements of the City Engineer. The Applicant shall receive Engineering Department approval for their drainage plan prior to Engineering Department sign -off on the Final Plat. f. A final utility and public facilities plan. The final plat shall depict the newly created Castle Creek Energy Center, Lot 1. A Memorandum of Agreement approving the removal of the subject lot and the approved Open Space land exchange shall be recorded simultaneously with the recordation of the Subdivision/Planned Unit Development plat and agreement. Concurrent with the recordation of the Castle Creek Energy Center Subdivision/PUD plat and agreement, the Marolt Ranch Open Space Subdivision/PUD agreement shall be amended and recorded to reflect removal of Lot 3 and Part of Lot 2A, as described herein. The aforementioned recordation shall be made with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder prior to submitting an application for a Building Permit. Section 3: Amendment to the Zone District Map Upon the recordation of the Subdivision/PUD plat and agreement the Community Development Director shall amend the City's official Zone District map, rezoning the subject lot from R -30 Low Density Residential Zone District with a PUD overlay to the Public Zone District with a PUD overlay. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 3 of 11 Section 4: Dimensional Standards The approved dimensional requirements are as follows in Table 1: Table 1: Approved Dimensional Standards: Dimensional Requirement Proposed Dimensional Requirements Minimum Lot Size 27,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per dwelling n/a unit Maximum Allowable Density n/a Minimum Lot Width 220 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback As per PUD plat, see Exhibit A measured from property line Minimum Side Yard Setback As per PUD plat, see Exhibit A measured from property line Minimum Rear Yard Setback As per PUD plat, see Exhibit A measured from property line Maximum Height 27 ft. Minimum Distance Between Buildings n/a Minimum % Open Space No requirement. Trash Access Area No requirement. 2,175 gross sq. ft. total Allowable Gross Square Footage (1,761 sq. ft. for the hydroplant and 414 sq. ft. for the existing storage shed), as depicted in Exhibit A to the Ordinance Minimum Off - Street Parking 0 spaces Section 5: Parking Parking is not required on site. If a Lease Agreement is entered between the City and CDOT to use the Right of Way for 5 parking spaces, as generally depicted on the site plan, then the parking may be used for the Castle Creek Energy Center and the Streets Department. No other parking is allowed. Section 6: Environmental Assessment The City shall operate the Castle Creek Energy Center in accordance with the terms of a license which is issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ( "FERC ") and is accepted by the City. The City, in collaboration with the Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife ( "CDOW "), has developed a Castle Creek and Maroon Creek Monitoring Program to monitor the fisheries and stream habitat in both creeks before and during operation of the Castle Creek Energy Center. ( "The Monitoring Program ") and a Memorandum of Understanding ( "MOU ") regarding implementation of the Monitoring Program, which includes metrics for evaluating data obtained. The MOU, including the Monitoring Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 4 of 11 Program and the metrics as described in the addendum, have been approved and executed by CDOW, and the City. The MOU shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder with the PUD agreement before Aspen submits its application for building permit. However, because the Monitoring Program may require revision as it is implemented, the entire Monitoring Program will not be recorded. Rather, the City will record a memorandum of the Monitoring Program with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, describing the Monitoring Program, and stating that a full and complete copy of the Monitoring Program, together with all exhibits, revisions and additions, as well as data collection forms and reports as required by the Monitoring Program, will be maintained at the office of the Aspen Water Department, and will be available for review during the Water Department's normal business hours. The Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall include the following: A. In addition to executing the MOU and implementing the Monitoring Program, and subject to the last paragraph of this Section 6, the City, with input from qualified scientists retained by Pitkin County, shall develop an Operating Procedures (also referred to as a Diversion Protocol) for the Castle Creek Energy Center using a "slow start" approach to commencement of hydroelectric operations at the Castle Creek Energy Center with incremental increases in operation. The general principles of the Operating Procedures shall be as follows: 1) As provided in the MOU, baseline stream data on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek will be collected over a three -year period before operations commence, and will include data obtained by Miller Ecological Consultants during 2010, 2011, as well as data to be collected in 2012. 2) Hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center will be related to the stream hydrographs so that deliveries of water from Castle Creek and Maroon Creek for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek plant will be made at times and in amounts that reflect the general shape and conditions of the historic stream hydrographs on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek, recognizing that some deviation from the historic hydrographs is expected during times when deliveries of water are made for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek plant. 3) During first three years of operation of the Castle Creek Energy Center: a) From spring through late summer (approximately mid -May through the end of July), water will be delivered for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center only after Aspen has bypassed instream flows at its diversions (13.3 cfs on Castle Creek and 14 cfs on Maroon Creek.) b) From late summer until spring (approximately August through mid -May), water will be delivered for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center in amounts reasonably determined and specified in the Operating Procedures, based on the historic flows in each creek. c) Impact of hydroelectric operations on fisheries and stream habitat will be assessed based on data collected and evaluated pursuant to the Monitoring Program. 4) If no adverse impacts to the fisheries and stream habitat are identified from Castle Creek Energy Center operations during the first three years, then for the next three years: Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 5 of 11 a) Water delivered for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center will increase in amounts as set forth in the Operating Procedures, but the instream flow bypass will always be made. b) Fisheries and stream habitat data will continue to be collected and evaluated as provided in the Monitoring Program. 5) If no adverse impacts to the fisheries and stream habitat are identified from Castle Creek Energy Center operations during the second three years, water delivered for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center will increase to the full production rates, provided, however, that an instream flow of 14 cfs will be bypassed at the Maroon Creek diversion and an instream flow of 13.3 cfs will be bypassed at the Castle Creek diversion when diversions are made for hydroelectric uses as the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. 6) If, during the period of the "slow start" to full production, adverse impacts to the fisheries and stream habitat, caused by operation of the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant, are identified based on the studies and evaluation metrics set forth in the Monitoring Program, diversions for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek Energy Center will be reduced as set forth in the Operating Procedures. That rate of diversion shall continue for another period, which may be up to three years, and if no adverse impacts to the fisheries and stream habitat are identified from Castle Creek Energy Center hydroelectric plant operations during such period, diversions for hydroelectric plant operations at the Castle Creek Energy Center will increase as set forth in the Operating Procedures. B. The City anticipates that it will enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with Pitkin County that will more fully set forth the above- described incremental approach, and provide for the City's participation in a Board of Experts that will review data obtained from the Monitoring Program, and will oversee the incremental diversion approach described above. The Board of Experts will include three qualified scientific experts, one of whom is designated by the City, one by Pitkin County, and one by CDOW (provided that Pitkin County and CDOW agree to provide qualified experts to participate in such board). The Board of Experts will act by unanimous consensus and will: 1) Give public notice of its meetings, hold open meetings, and post baseline and monitoring data from the Monitoring Program on a website; 2) Oversee the initial "slow start" of hydropower diversions in accordance with the Operating Procedures set forth in the anticipated Intergovernmental Agreement with Pitkin County ( "IGA "), described below, and review and oversee the Monitoring Program in the manner described in the IGA The City and Pitkin County shall within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the effective date of this Ordinance, execute a mutually - acceptable Intergovernmental Agreement regarding the Operating Procedures, the Board of Experts, and other matters relevant to implementation of the "slow start" approach and resolution of Aspen's pending water court proceedings involving Maroon Creek. Provided such an IGA is executed as provided herein, the City will present it to FERC as the City's plan for operation of the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant and will request that the FERC license for the Castle Creek Energy Center Project so provide. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 6 of 11 If in the event an IGA is not executed between the City and the County, notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 6, the City shall nevertheless finalize a "slow start" approach with the assistance of its independent fisheries and stream habitat consultant, and shall implement the "slow start" approach consistent with the adaptive management provisions of the MOU, under the supervision of a Board of Experts selected by the City. The Board of Experts selected by the City shall include at least one independent consultant, which may include a member of the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife, with experience in the measurement and analysis of the effect of water withdrawals on fisheries and on stream habitat, as well as experience in biology, fisheries, and ecology that is applicable to the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek ecosystem, as demonstrated by the consultant's academic credentials and local experience and expertise. Because the City cannot control the outcome of the FERC licensing process, the requirements of this Section 6 and the requirements of any IGA that may be entered into between the City and Pitkin County or any independent slow start implemented by the City in the absence of an IGA, shall be subject to, and will be deemed amended or superseded by, any terms, conditions or requirements of the City's FERC license that are inconsistent with this Section 6 or any provisions of the contemplated IGA between the City and Pitkin County. Furthermore, the provisions of the IGA as finally executed by the parties will control over this ordinance in the event of any inconsistency or ambiguity. Section 7: Noise Assessment The Castle Creek Energy Center shall comply with the City of Aspen noise ordinance, Title 18 of the Aspen Municipal Code. The City shall conduct a noise analysis upon completion of the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant to confirm compliance with City noise standards. The City shall submit a baseline sound level report to the Environmental Health Department at the time of building permit application in order to compare with the sound impact of the hydroelectric plant after it is operating. Within 1 week of the building initially being operational, the Environmental Health Department shall take sound readings during the daytime and the nighttime to confirm compliance with City standards. Section 8: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and P &Z Resolution. b. A copy of the recorded PUD plat and agreement. c. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. d. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. e. Improvements to the right of way shall include new grass, irrigation, and possibly the replacement of street trees, and shall be approved prior to building permit submittal. f. An excavation - stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), and drainage and soils report pursuant to the Building and Engineering Department's Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 7 of 11 requirements. The CMP shall include an identification of construction hauling routes, construction phasing, and construction traffic and parking plan for review and approval by the City Engineer and Streets Department Superintendent. Staging areas will be identified in the plan. No stabilization will be permitted in the City right of way. Stormwater run -off and management must meet the requirements of the Urban Runoff Management Plan. g. A complete geotechnical report and geotechnical design. h. An approved landscape plan. i. An approved lighting plan. j. If applicable, a copy of the lease with CDOT for use of the right of way. Section 9: Financial Assurances The applicant agrees that before any Building Permit (including demolition, access - infrastructure, and /or site preparation permits) is issued for the project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall provide to the City Building Department and the City Attorney for review and approval a copy of a Performance Bond issued or committed to be issued to the Applicant's General Contractor by an institutional surety company pursuant to which the surety agrees to provide the funds necessary to complete the construction of the improvements covered by the Building Permit, and all public improvements required under the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Section 10: Engineering Department Requirements The City shall comply with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, including but not limited to Title 21 Streets, Sidewalks and other Public Places, Title 8.50 Flood Damage Prevention and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A final grading and drainage plan meeting all requirements of the City Engineer shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering Department prior to Engineering Department sign -off on the Final Plat. Section 11: Affordable Housing A generation rate of 0 employees is approved for the Castle Creek Energy Center. The Water Department shall provide Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) with the current employees that will be associated with the hydroelectric plant, prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy. Two years after the Certificate of Occupancy is granted, APCHA shall request that the Water Department provide APCHA with the current number of employees associated with the hydroelectric plant. New Employees generated specific to the hydroelectric plant require a new Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility. Section 12: Parks Landscaping in the public right of way (ROW) shall be subject to landscaping in the ROW requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City ROW must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. An approved tree removal permit shall be required before any Building Permit (including demolition, access /infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued. Mitigation for removals shall be paid cash in lieu or on site. The Building Permit shall be compliant with Aspen Municipal Code Section 13.20. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 8 of 11 Section 13: Landscape Plan The conceptual landscape plan as represented in the application and attached as Exhibit C to the Ordinance is hereby approved. A landscape plan for the area around the existing storage shed that depicts re- vegetation of the area must be approved by the Parks Department and the Engineering Department prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the hydroplant building. Landscape plans are required to meet the adopted Urban Runoff Management Plan. Section 14: Water Department Requirements The City shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Section 15: Sanitation District Requirements a. Service is contingent upon compliance with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the ACSD office, and shall obtain ACSD approval of the City- approved drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. b. On -site utility plans require approval by ACSD. c. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public rights of way, ACSD easements, or easements that will be dedicated to ACSD in connection with this project. d. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. e. The glycol heating and snow melt system for the Castle Creek Energy Center project must be designed to prohibit the discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. f Soil Nails are not allowed in the public right of way above ACSD main sewer lines. g. The City's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations. Section 16: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code for nonresidential lighting pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. A lighting plan shall be approved by the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the hydroplant facility. Section 17: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site- specific development plan and a vested property right attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 9 of 11 property rights shall be for five (5) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site - specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to Section 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lot 3 and Lot 2A of the Marolt Open Space Subdivision, by Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 18: All material representations and commitments made by the City pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 19: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of any ordinances repealed or Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page l0 of 11 amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 20: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 21: A public hearing on this ordinance will be held the 28 day of November 2011 at 5:00 p.m. in City Council chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 24 day of October, 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Exhibit A: approved site plan Exhibit B: approved elevations Exhibit C: approved conceptual landscape plan Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2011 Page 11 of 11 • EXHIBIT 1 SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The AACP stresses environmental stewardship and economic sustainability by encouraging new developments to meet different community goals. Staff finds that the proposed hydroelectric plant is consistent with the applicable sections of the AACP. After receiving a federal license, the hydroelectric plant will replace some of the coal -fired energy that is purchased from Nebraska which will reduce the City's carbon footprint. The Energy Center will be a hydroelectric facility, renewable energy model and education center, producing approximately 8.5% of the annual energy for Aspen's electric customers and reducing CO2 emissions by about 5,000 tons. Energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and water efficient landscaping contribute to the City's environmental stewardship goals. Parks, Open Space & the Environment "No open space or trail interest acquired with Open Space/Trails Funds should be sold or conveyed, nor should any interest be converted unless such open space or trail interest is replaced with another open space or trail interest of equivalent value. Such sale or conversion should be approved by a majority of the electorate at a general or special elevation for this purpose." In 2007, 77 % of the electorate voted in favor of removing the subject lot from the Marolt Open Space to construct the proposed hydroelectric plant in exchange for the Millionaire Claim located along lower Aspen Mountain and trail easements around the Water Treatment plant off of Doolittle Drive. The exchange amounts to a 3:1 replacement of open space. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. "Recognize the important natural features that define the character of Aspen. Such features... include the preservation of and access to the river corridor..." and "Elected and appointed Boards and Commissions should consider environmental and wildlife issues in all land use deliberations, discussions and decisions." The applicant worked with CDOW and private consultants to study the aquatic habitat and stream flows of Castle and Maroon Creeks to ensure preservation of wildlife and river habitats. There are specific state and federal regulations that dictate the amount of water or cfs (cubic feet per square inch) required to remain in each Creek; therefore only a specific amount of water may be diverted during certain seasons. State and federal regulations take natural wildlife habitat and natural vegetative niches into consideration. In addition to a stream flow analysis conducted by Grand River Consulting Corporation, the Colorado Department of Wildlife requested supplementary studies on flow levels necessary to support healthy aquatic environment. Miller Ecological Consultants was hired by the City to conduct extensive stream, fish and boreal toad studies. Stream monitoring and sampling was conducted in October 2010 and Exhibit 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 1 of 5 will occur again in October 2011. It is unknown as to whether there already is a fisherman's easement for access to Castle Creek. The applicant intends to add an easement to the recorded plat if one does not already exist. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. Economic Sustainability "Encourage resource efficiency, environmental responsibility, and cultural and community sensitivity in local organizations and in construction." The proposed hydroelectric plant is projected to save the City over $300,000 annually (based on 2007 numbers.) In addition to actual fiscal benefits, the plant will reduce the City's carbon footprint. Staff finds that the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. Design Quality "Make every public project a model of good development, on all levels, from quality design to positive contributions to the community fabric." The applicant projects that the proposed building will be carbon neutral. The proposed design references the National Register listed historic City Shop building located adjacent, but is clearly a product of its own time with contemporary fenestration and materials. Energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and water efficient landscaping are proposed. Noise mitigation and insulation to reduce the sound impacts of the turbine on the neighborhood and environment was an important factor driving the material choices, and the required hydroelectric equipment dictated the overall form and height of the building. Staff finds that the proposed design fits into the context of the subject area. Staff finds that the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. Transportation "Require all employment, school, social, recreation or other activities that generate demand for travel to mitigate traffic impacts through support of alternative transportation modes in proportion to trips generated." The number of trips generated by the proposed project is below the city threshold used to determine impact on PM -10 levels. The traffic from this facility is expected to have an insignificant effect on PM -10 levels. The applicant is not proposing any measures to encourage employee or visitor travel by alternative methods, but the trip generation rate is so small that the impact on PM -10 levels would be insignificant. Currently two hydrologist specialists travel in one work truck to perform daily readings of similar Water Department facilities. The hydroelectric plant will be added to the list of facilities if approved. The location of the facilities deems it unreasonable for the employees to use alternate modes of transportation. Staff finds that this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding The proposed subdivision is located adjacent to the City Shop facility that houses the City Streets Department and is Aspen's original hydroelectric plant. The proposed location for the building is currently a high impacted dirt area where pieces of equipment are randomly parked and stored. Residences are located along Castle Creek across from the proposed hydroelectric plant. Staff finds that the proposed subdivision will Exhibit 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 2 of 5 clean up the existing condition of the subject area and is consistent with the existing land uses in the area, specifically the adjacent City Shop building. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding: The proposed subdivision will not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff finds that the proposed subdivision does not create any physical, legal or other impediments to the development of surrounding lands. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed subdivision is in compliance with the applicable requirements of Title 26. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: The proposed subdivision will not support any residential units. The applicant assessed the topography of the land for the development of a hydroelectric plant and is working closely with the Engineering Department to create an appropriate drainage plan and soil retention plan for the site. The proposed new lot is largely flat, however there are very steep slopes located to the west. The hydroelectric plant is required to meet federal and state standards before the facility can receive a license and operate. The standards assess streamflow, natural habitats and aquatic life and vegetation before granting a license. Noise pollution is being addressed largely with the construction materials of the building. A sound engineering firm has been hired to analyze a similar plant and to provide noise reading projections for the proposed hydroelectric plant. The decibel levels are required to meet city standards, which are 50 decibels at night and 55 decibels at day. According to the application, the highest decibel will be emitted from the roof: it will be equivalent to a person screaming on one side of a wall that you can barely understand on the other side of the wall. Sound readings are taken from the property line, and distance from the building will decrease the level of sound. A sound reading will be taken prior to the operation of the hydroelectric plant to confirm conformance with city standards. Periodic sound readings, as requested by the Environmental Health Department, shall occur after the Certificate of Occupancy. Staff finds that this criterion is met. Exhibit 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 3 of 5 b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: The proposed subdivision will not create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. The proposed hydroelectric plant will increase energy efficiency. In addition to actual fiscal benefits, the plant will reduce the City's carbon footprint. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: The applicant represents that no design standard variations are necessary for the proposed subdivision. The subdivision includes creating one lot for an Essential Public Facility, which will be processed as a PUD. Staff finds that this criterion is met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: The proposed subdivision does not include any residential dwellings and it is projected to not generate any new employees. The application is required to comply with Growth Management review for an Essential Public Facility. Please refer to Exhibit 4 for a comprehensive analysis. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: Not applicable because there are no residential units proposed. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Exhibit 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 4 of 5 Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH -PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord No. 44 -2001, § 2) Staff Finding: The project is required to receive Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility, as explained in Exhibit 4. Staff finds that this criterion is met. Exhibit 1 — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT 2 Planned Unit Development Consolidated Review Criteria Chapter 26.445.050 Review Standards: Consolidated PUD A development application for Consolidated PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Findings: As stated in Exhibit 1, Subdivision Review Criteria, Staff finds that the proposed Castle Creek Energy Center meets the criteria listed above. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements velo ment plans shall establish the dimensional he final PUD d requirements for all p p 9 properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. Staff Finding: There is no underlying zone district to compare to the proposed dimensional requirements. The approved PUD requirements for the adjacent City Shop building are provided for general guidance. The Public Zone District requires the adoption of a PUD to establish these requirements. The chart below represents the proposal: Proposed Dimensional Staff Notes Dimensional Requirement Requirements Minimum Lot Size 27,000 sq. ft. Proposed CCEC parcel is 27,005 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per n/a No residential component. dwelling unit Maximum Allowable Density n/a No residential component. Minimum Lot Width as per PUD plat - Minimum Front Yard Setback as per PUD plat - Minimum Side Yard Setback as per PUD plat - Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 1 of 10 Dimensional Requirement Proposed Dimensional Staff Notes Requirements Staff proposes that retaining Minimum Rear Yard Setback as per PUD plat walls located in the setbacks be approved as part of the PUD plat. Measured pursuant to Land Maximum Height 27 ft. Use Code Section 26.575.020.B One new building proposed. Minimum Distance Between The existing shed is proposed Buildings as per PUD plat to remain in its current location. Applicant proposes no open Minimum % Open Space No requirement space requirement due to the 3:1 open space exchange and the surrounding open space. Applicant does not anticipate that the plant will regularly Trash Access Area No requirement generate trash. The loading dock area is proposed for trash storage as needed. 1,761 gross square feet for the new hydroplant building and Allowable Gross Square 414 square feet for the existing Footage 2175 gross sq. ft. a g shed. Any future additions will require a PUD amendment. The applicant proposes 5 parking spaces on the adjacent CDOT right of way. The Code Minimum Off - Street Parking 0 spaces does not permit off-street parking to be located on an adjacent lot that is in different ownership than the subject parcel. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a. The character of and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b. Natural or man -made hazards. c. Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 2 of 10 it Existing and proposed man -made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Findings: Staff finds that the proposed dimensional requirements, listed in the Staff memo, are appropriate for the intended and future use of the parcel. Any changes to the approved PUD plan will require an amendment. Steep slopes and waterways are prevalent in the subject area, but do not directly affect the development of the subject lot. Retaining walls, an extensive drainage plan, landscaping and preservation of existing vegetation in the area are incorporated into the proposal to protect the natural characteristics of the property. The proposed project will clean up and organize the existing condition of the area, further enhancing the adjacent historic resource. It is important to note that paving on the adjacent lot is included in the landscape plan; however City Shop will require separate PUD and HPC reviews to add paving in that area. Noise generated from the turbine will be largely absorbed by the building as represented by the Noise Assessment Analysis included in the application. The applicant commits to meeting City decibel standards. Staff finds that the criteria listed above are met. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Findings: The proposed dimensional requirements, specifically the proposed setbacks for the new building, centralizes development in the northern section of the property which provides an ample south yard abutting the Marolt Open Space and locates the proposed building adjacent to existing development. Staff finds that concentrating development to the northern section of the already disturbed lot is appropriate and minimizes impacts to the character of the area. 3. The appropriate number of off - street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a. The probably number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non - residential land uses. b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c. The availability of public Transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 3 of 10 Staff Findings: The application proposes 5 off -street parking spaces; however the spaces are located on CDOT property that the City intends to lease. These spaces do not count as off - street parking spaces according to Land Use Code Section 26.515.020.B. The plant will be remotely operated from the Water Department. The parking spaces will be used when an employee needs to do maintenance or take readings. The Streets Department currently parks trucks in the area proposed for the hydroplant building. Streets intends to use some of the parking spaces for trucks, which will provide a more organized and orderly parking situation. Staff finds that the proposed spaces satisfy the criteria. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if. a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if. a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. 6. The maximum allowable density with in a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the sites' physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased it: a. The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b. The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c. The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 4 of 10 Staff Findings: Criteria 4, 5 and 6 above are not applicable as the project does not propose any allowable density in the PUD. The Essential Public Facility includes only a turbine room, control room and workshop. No residential component is proposed. C. Site Design 1. Existing natural or man -made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding: The adjacent parcel contains the National Register listed City Shop building. The proposed design of the building reflects the architecture of the landmark and meets Historic Preservation Design Guidelines by architecturally representing a product of its own time with the use of metal siding and modern window shapes on the front facade. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding: There is only one structure proposed for the project and it is clustered with other similar use buildings on the adjacent lot. All of the development is proposed for the north side of Power Plant Road, an area that is already heavily disturbed. An existing shed building located to the south of Power Plant Road is proposed to be retained for all weather storage. The applicant proposes asphalt for the parking area beneath Highway 82. It is important to note that asphalt is also proposed for the adjacent City Shop property, which will require an HPC approval and an amendment to the approved PUD. Improvements to the City Shop property are not included for review in this application. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban. or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding: The proposed structure is oriented to Power Plant Road. A landscape plan, walkways and surface parking are incorporated into the proposal to provide visual interest and reduce adverse visual impacts to neighbors. The design of the building references the adjacent historic City Shop, but has contemporary elements (fenestration and metal details) that distinguish the building as new. Staff finds that the building and the site plan contribute to the context of the site and meet the criterion above. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding: Emergency and service vehicle access is accommodated on this property via Power Plant Road. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access if provided. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 5 of 10 Staff Finding: The walkways meet accessibility requirements. An ADA accessible parking space is included on the site plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding: A conceptual drainage plan is included in the application. The drainage plan indicates the construction of an underground detention facility located on the City Shop property that will collect all storm water from the hydroelectric plant site in order to meet City requirements. The applicant commits to meeting City drainage requirements prior to recordation of the PUD plat. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. For non - residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding: There is about 151 feet between the hydroplant and the existing storage shed. The two building serve separate purposes and are appropriately spaced. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed landscape plan, designed by the Parks Department, is sensitive to the context of the site. A bench is proposed along the east elevation which provides a little outdoor area to rest and enjoy the creek. Native vegetation, including service berry bushes, wildflowers, native Chokecherries and Aspen trees to name a few, is proposed. Re- vegetation of any disturbed areas south of Power Plant Road is proposed. Staff finds this criteria is met. 2. Significant existing natural and man -made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding: The applicant represents that existing natural site features (this is applicable to the south of Power Plant Road) will either be retained or re- vegetated where necessary. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 6 of 10 Staff Finding: Due to the topography of the area, there are extensive retaining walls along the western portion of Power Plant Road, many of which are not located on the subject lot. A "site wall" is indicated on the site plan for soil retention. Staff finds this criterion is met. E. Architectural Character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less- intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding: The proposed building is one story and includes a large room for the turbine and generator, a workshop and staging room, and a small control room. Essentially, it was designed from the inside out to accommodate the turbine and associated hydroelectric equipment. The proposed `, design references the historic City Shop c; (lefthand building in photograph) and appropriately incorporates contemporary fenestration and materials to distinguish the new building from the historic w_.__ building. The small scale and gable roof form respect the scale of the historic resource and surrounding residences. Energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and water efficient landscaping contribute to the City's environmental stewardship goals. Staff finds that this criterion is met. F. Lighting. 1. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Findings: The draft Ordinance includes a condition that onsite lighting is required to meet Land Use Code standards for nonresidential lighting. The lighting plan and fixtures shall be Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 7 of 10 reviewed and approved by the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Findings: The review criteria are not applicable to the proposed hydroelectric plant as no park, common or recreation space is proposed. The subject lot requests removal from the Marolt Open Space as explained in the subdivision review, Exhibit 1. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Findings: The proposed project is an Essential Public Facility that will contribute to existing public utilities if approved. Staff finds that the criteria above are met. L Access and Circulation. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 8 of 10 The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding: The proposed lot has access from Power Plant Road. Only one lot comprises the proposed PUD. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding: The proposed development will only have one point of access off of Power Plant Road. The existing curb cut already accesses the gas pumps on the City Shop property. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. Staff Finding: This criterion is not really applicable, but the proposed development does not propose any dedicated trail easements on the subject property. However, as part of the open space exchange, the Water Department is creating trail easements around their facility. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding: It is unknown as to whether there already is a fisherman's easement for access to Castle Creek. The applicant intends to add an easement to the recorded plat if one does not already exist. Staff finds this criterion to be met. S. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. Staff Finding: No new streets are proposed in the PUD. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 9 of 10 Staff Finding: Not applicable. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criterion is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. Staff Finding: Not applicable: phasing is not proposed. Exhibit 2 — PUD Review Criteria Page 10 of 10 EXHIBIT 3 Amendments to the Official Zone District Map Chapter 26.310.040 Standards of Review In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with applicable portions of the Land Use Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: As outlined in Exhibit 1, Staff finds that the proposed hydroelectric project and rezoning meets the goals of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The existing zone district for the subject parcel is R- 30/PUD, Low Density Residential; however the parcel is f� incorporated in the Marolt Open Space. The applicant proposes to rezone the = parcel to the Public Zone District, which permits a hydroelectric plant pursuant to the adoption of a Planned Unit t Development plan. The existing land use r and neighborhood characteristics are ` mixed. The map to the right illustrates the , different zone districts; the yellow star indicates the proposed project. Directly . adjacent to the proposed parcel is the ` Streets Department which is zoned Public t (highlighted with green shading). Across j . Castle Creek (running north/south through . the center) are two residential zone l - a districts, R -30 and R -15A. The Marolt r - Open Space, from which the subject parcel requests subdivision, is zoned R- ` - � ' 30/PUD. Staff finds that the proposed Public Zone is appropriate for the intended use of the parcel as "an essential governmental and public utility use, facility, service and building," Exhibit 3 — Rezoning Review Criteria Page 1 of 3 and is congruent with the zoning for the adjacent City Shop building that houses the Streets Department. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The proposed rezoning does not project to have an adverse impact on traffic generation and road safety. The applicant represents that the hydroelectric plant will generate a negligible number of trips. Road safety will be increased with the hydroelectric plant in that the current haphazard entrance and exit of trucks in this area will be organized. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment will not increase demands on public facilities. The hydroelectric plant intends to decrease demands on public facilities. A comprehensive drainage plan is required to be approved by the Engineering Department during the building permit process to mitigate new drainage issues resulting from the new building and proposed hardscape. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: According to scientific analysis provided by Miller Consulting Group, the proposed hydroelectric plant will not have significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. The hydroelectric plant is required to meet federal and state standards before the facility can receive a license and operate. The standards assess streamflow, natural habitats and aquatic life and vegetation before granting a license. The applicant is working with CDOW and hired a private consultant to analyze aquatic habitats and stream flows to ensure that the hydroplant supports a healthy natural environment. A commitment to reassess the stream health agreement represented in consultant Dr. Miller's report 5 years after operations begin is under discussion with CDOW and US Forest Service. It is important to note that hydropower will have a positive impact on the overall natural environment by replacing coal- burning energy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed Public Zone is consistent and compatible with the community character in Aspen: the adjacent parcel is zoned Public and supports a similar utility facility. Staff finds this criterion to be met. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Exhibit 3 — Rezoning Review Criteria Page 2 of 3 Staff Finding: The subject parcel is currently part of the Marolt Open Space; however the state of the parcel does not represent itself as open space. The dirt covered area is used as storage for equipment and a parking area for large trucks. The voters elected to remove the lot from the Open Space inventory in exchange for more appropriate land at the base of Aspen Mountain. In addition to the parcel being part of the Open Space land, it is zoned R- 30 which supports low density residential uses. Staff finds that the current condition and use of the parcel support the rezoning to Public and the requisite adoption of a Planned Unit Development plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed amendment is aligned to the public direction provided in the 2007 election for the City to pursue a hydroelectric facility and renewable energy. The proposed amendment is in agreement with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code as outlined in the Staff memo and exhibits. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit 3 — Rezoning Review Criteria Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT 4 GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW STANDARDS 26.470.090.4 Essential Public Facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Staff Finding: An Essential Public Facility is defined as "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community." As such, it is determined that the proposed hydroelectric plant is an Essential Public Facility. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generated rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Staff Finding: The employee generation rate table for Public Uses establishes that 3.9 employees are generated for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable space. This number is based on an analysis of office -type public uses. The proposed hydroelectric plant includes four areas: a turbine room, workshop and staging room, and a control room. There is no office proposed in the building and there will not be any permanent employees at the site. The plant will be remotely operated from the Water Department headquarters on Doolittle Drive. Hydroelectric specialists that already monitor other similar facilities will perform daily readings, which typically take about 15 minutes. The new hydroelectric plant is proposed to be added to their daily agenda. The applicant proposes that the hydroelectric plant generates no new employees. The Housing Board reviewed the application on February 17, 2010 and recommends that an employee audit be conducted two years after the certificate of occupancy is granted to confirm that no new employees were added to the Department. The Planning and Zoning Commission determined an employee generation rate of 0 employees for the new hydroelectric plant with the condition that an audit be conducted two years after the certificate of occupancy and that the audit concentrate only on employees associated with the hydroelectric plant and not the entire Water Department. The determination by the Planning and Zoning Commission that 0 employees are generated renders a mitigation requirement by City Council fruitless. Staff recommends that City Council approve growth management for affordable housing with the condition that an employee audit is conducted by the Housing Authority 2 years after certificate of Exhibit 4 — GMQS Review Criteria Page 1 of 2 occupancy to confirm that no new employees are generated. Any new employees will be required to be approved through Growth Management review. Exhibit 4 — GMQS Review Criteria Page 2 of 2 fidov;wit RESOLUTION No. 42 w L yo l l (Series of 2000) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ADOPTING AN AMENDED AND UPDATED ECOLOGICAL BILL OF RIGHTS WHEREAS, the preservation of the environmental quality of the City of Aspen is of primary concern to the government and citizens of the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, protection of the environment is necessary to ensure the health of residents and visitors in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the preservation and improvement of environmental quality are essential to our Local economy and thus allow the City to continue to protect environmental quality in Aspen; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council adopted an Ecological Bill of Rights in 1989, which now needs to be revised and updated; and WHEREAS, a group of local citizens concerned about environmental issues has worked to develop a revised and updated. Ecological Bill of Rights; and WHEREAS, several local environmental groups have supported and endorsed the concept of this Ecological Bill of Rights; and WHEREAS, the updated Ecological Bill of Rights is consistent with and a part of the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan update and will help to achieve the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen realizes that difficult choices must be - made in balancing various City goals, but wishes to use this Ecological Bill of Rights as a set of goals and as guiding principles for it and city staff to use in their work, in concert with the Aspen Area Community Plan as adopted on February 28, 2000 including support for designated affordable housing sites. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT Section 1. It does hereby adopt an Ecological Bill of Rights, a copy of which is appended hereto as Exhibit "A Section 2. Within the scope of existing laws, regulations, guidelines and codes, and in consideration of the City Council's obligation to make appropriate legislative, regulatory and policy decisions based on individual circumstances and judgements, the principles and intent of these Rights shall be incorporated as city policy whenever reasonablynecessary, and the City Manager is hereby directed to publish and distribute the Ecological Bill of rights to all City personnel: INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the a day of Apt2.Q.—, , 2000. Rachel . Richards, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. ' ch, City Clerk • ECOLOGICAL BILL OF RIGHTS As residents of the City of Aspen and of Piticin County, and stewards of our natural heritage and: resources, we see the integrity of our valley ecosystem increasingly challenged and violated by human activity. Population growth and the accompanying sprawl are seriously damaging and threatening to destroy the • ecological carrying capacity (environmental sustainability) of this valley. 1) The right to breathe clean air and enjoy cleat vistas. 2) The right to the preservation of remaining natural riparian areas and wetlands. 3) The right to permanently protected minimum stream flows in rivers and creeks. 4) The right to the preservation and restoration of native wildlife and plant diversity by preservation of sufficienthabitat. 5) The right to protection of designated wilderness through management of adjoining land in a way that preserves the integrity of the wilderness areas. 6) The right to a landscape kept free of noxious and invasive weeds. 7) The right of appropriate access to public lands on roads and trails historically open to the public consistent with the nature and designation of the public lands. 8) The right to dedicated open space protected from urbanization and development. 9) The right to the efficient and renewable use of energy. • • 10) The right to be free from excessive noise. 11) The right to see the night sky without the interference of unnecessary artificial light from growth, urbanization and highway development. 12) The right to the absolute minimum involuntary exposure to toxic chemicals, radioactive substances and energy forms that are hazardous to health. 13) The right to maintain and not exceed the carrying capacity (sustainability) of the land and water, and including protecting water quality. 14) The right to expect from our government legislation and active enforcement of land use and development regulations consistent with this Ecological Bill of Rights. • C:\home \word \ebor rights.doc EXHIBIT 17 STREAM MARGIN REVIEW 26.435.040.B Stream Margin Review Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: 1. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. The Community Development Director determined that the proposed hydroelectric facility meets the Stream Margin Review Standards to the extent practical, and as a public utility essential for public health and safety the proposed improvements are exempt from Stream Margin Review pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2 above. Staff found that, while the project is exempt from Stream Margin Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, it was important to discuss the review criteria with the Commission to bring all of the issues to the forefront and maintain a transparent public process. The review criteria are addressed below. r. 26.435.040.0 Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a - determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements si e set forth below: -' 1. It can be demonstrated that any , proposed development which is in - • the Special Flood Hazard Area will ' not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering # study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State which shows that the base flood elevation Exhibit 17- Stream Margin Review Criteria 12/12/11 Page 1 of 5 will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and Staff Finding: The proposed development is not located in the Special Flood Hazard Area. The red line on the previous page depicts the 100 year flood plain which is located on the opposite site of Power Plant Road from the proposed building. The Castle Creek flood plain is shown on the site improvement survey in the application. 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation /Open Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement:" and Staff Finding: The application meets the recommendations in the AACP regarding Parks and Open Space. It is unknown as to whether there already is a fisherman's easement for access to Castle Creek. The applicant intends to add an easement to the recorded plat if one does not already exist. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Subsection 26.435.040.F.7; and Staff Finding: No significant changes will be made to the existing vegetation. The slope on the western portion of the property (closest to Cemetery Lane) will be changed to accommodate sediment control with the construction of a retaining wall. As stated in Dr. Miller's report "no long -term, adverse impacts to geology, topography and soils are anticipated from the construction of the Aspen Energy Center. Construction of the tailrace will include some removal of vegetation located adjacent to the bridge near the proposed hydroplant. The Miller Consulting Group report outlines that the total loss of riparian area due to construction of the tailrace is about 80 square meters. The applicant proposes to retain the existing shed located on the south side of Power Plant Road. Staff recommends that a portion of the area around the shed is re- vegetated. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on -site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and Exhibit 17- Stream Margin Review Criteria 12/12/11 Page 2 of 5 Staff Finding: The City Code requires stream protection during construction. The stream bank will be protected during construction with approved fencing. A drainage plan is included in the application and will be required at building permit submittal. The drainage plan focuses on the project site, but it also incorporates City Shop and Power Plant Road for a comprehensive plan. Additionally, the hydroelectric plant is required to meet federal and state standards before the facility can receive a license and operate. The standards assess streamflow, natural habitats and aquatic life and vegetation before granting a license. Miller Consulting Group was hired by the City to prepare an environmental report that analyzed these aspects of the stream, the impact of the proposed Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant on Castle and Maroon Creeks, and ultimately recommended a minimum stream flow to maintain a healthy stream. The report has been submitted to the CDOW and presented to steakholders and interested public in the valley. The CDOW in concert with City departments has developed a stream health monitoring plan to ensure that Castle and Maroon Creeks, and the aquatic life and vegetation that they support, remain healthy. Noise pollution is being addressed largely with the construction materials of the building. A sound engineering firm has been hired to analyze a similar plant and to provide noise reading projections for the proposed hydroelectric plant. The decibel levels are required to meet city standards, which are 50 decibels at night and 55 decibels at day. According to the application, the highest decibel will be emitted from the roof: it will be equivalent to a person screaming on one side of a wall that you can barely understand on the other side of the wall. Sound readings are taken from the property line, and distance from the building will decrease the level of sound. A sound reading will be taken within 30 days after the hydroelectric plant begins operations to confirm conformance with city standards. Periodic sound readings, as requested by the Environmental Health Department, may occur after the Certificate of Occupancy. The hydroplant is required to meet city standards and will be required to take corrective measures, such as adding more interior insulation, should the building be found out of compliance. Staff finds this criterion is met to the extent practical in that the proposed hydroplant is required to meet state and federal standards that evaluate impacts on streamflow, natural habitat, aquatic life and vegetation. Furthermore, the City is voluntarily committing to a stream health monitoring plan as an added layer to streamlife protection. There are no proposed reroutes to the water course. 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and Staff Finding: The applicant commits to meeting this criterion. 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and Exhibit 17- Stream Margin Review Criteria 12/12/11 Page 3 of 5 Staff Finding: The Land Use Code defines a watercourse as "a river, stream or water irrigation ditch." The actual route and direction of Castle Creek is not proposed to be altered or relocated as part of this development. The Applicant confirms that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the 100 year food plain; and Staff Findinz: No development is proposed within the 100 year flood plain with the exception of the tailrace that takes the water from the hydroplant and puts it back into the creek. The applicant is required to obtain a federal and state permit for this work. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department; and Staff Finding: The Top of Slop/ Stream Margin Map does not delinate a top of slope for Castle Creek, a tributary of the Roaring Fork River. The assumed top of slope for this project is at the edge of Power Plant Road, closest to Castle Creek, at the top of the creek bank or the high water line. The building is located outside of the 15 feet setback from the top of slope (see Exhibit M for illustration). A tailrace that puts the water back into Castle Creek after it runs through the hydroplant will be located within the setback area. Due to the nature of the facility, the pipe cannot be relocated to comply with this standard. A landscape plan is included in the application and has been reviewed by the Parks Department. Staff finds that this criterion is met to the best extent practical. 9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty -five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020 as shown in Figure "A "; and Exhibit 17- Stream Margin Review Criteria 12/12/11 Page 4 of 5 u a.�.. pryynnl.. 'p i aki / TW N •■* / I 1 � ° ...r. L L.IMG Figura "N• Staff Finding: The applicant represents in the section below that the proposed building will not infringe into the 45 degree progressive height limit. Staff finds that this criterion is met. SSW IC GROSE MREPWIETOPCK .te a.=.= awunew GUM* CREEK VOW EOM WAD CAMS Oak 1001171M0 ORME `= 10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with Section 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications; and Staff Finding: The proposed light fixtures and lighting plan comply with this criterion. 11. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. Staff Finding: According to the Miller report, page 17, there are no wetland zones or riparian zones located in the area of the proposed building. Staff finds that this criterion is met. Exhibit 17- Stream Margin Review Criteria 12/12/11 Page 5 of 5 November 29, 2011 City of Aspen Community Development 130 South.Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Attention —Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: Application for the Land Planning Review of the Castle Creek Energy Center Response to City Council Comments, October 24, 2011 Sara, The following information is in response to the questions raised by City Council at the October 24, 2011 1 reading for the Castle Creek Energy Center (CCEC) land planning review. The 2 reading and public hearing is scheduled for the December 12, 2011 City Council meeting. Further, beginning at 1:00 that afternoon, City staff scheduled a work session with City Council to discuss information and issues that are not specific to the separate Land Planning application review by Council. Questions and Responses: 1) Question: Why is the visitor's room removed? Answer: The purpose of the visitor room including renewable energy educational forums can be more fully realized using other existing City facilities. For example, adjacent to the CCEC is the Street Maintenance facility which has a meeting room where educational discussions could occur prior to visiting the CCEC. Located at the City's water plant site is a large photovoltaic installation and meeting area which can be used to educate the public. Additionally, hydroelectric plant tours are conducted by staff at both the Maroon Creek and Ruedi Reservoir City owned hydroelectric facilities. The visitor center is not essential for operation of the CCEC. Eliminating the visitor center reduced the overall building square footage on the site, and reduces the overall construction cost. 2) Question: Are there specialist designing components of the project, including sound engineers to dampen the potential sound of the hydro facility? Answer: The Castle Creek Energy Center design team consists of professionals in several areas that include: Planning — Mitch Haas; Architecture — Auge Reno Architects; Energy Efficiency — Schmueser, Gordon, Meyer Engineers; Engineering — Sopris Engineering; Noise — Engineering Dynamics; Electric Distribution and Generation — Exponential Engineering and Canyon Industries; Emergency Drain line and Tail Race - McLaughlin Water Engineers. Regarding noise and vibration, Engineering Dynamics conducted field measurements at several facilities the results of which were used in their recommendation for design and material specifications that address both sound and vibration. 3) Question: Can FERC mandate conditions different in the license agreement? What does FERC look at? Will it potentially cost more if FERC requires changes? Answer: The licensing process allows the Applicant, Interested Parties and FERC to come to agreement on the conditions stated in final license. FERC in its authority can mandate conditions that are different from or in addition to the Applicant proposed conditions, or those suggested by any other party. Some of FERC review considerations include, but are not limited to environmental impact including fish and wildlife, engineering design, and ownership and control of project facilities. Decisions by FERC can impact project cost. 4) Question: Can the City revise the monitoring program in the future? Answer: The monitoring plan was thoroughly crafted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) collaboratively with the City and with input from the US Forest Service to ensure a scientifically based, comprehensive program for monitoring the stream. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the CDOW contemplated and does provide for program revision from time to time in order to better achieve the purposes of the program. The MOU plan is integral in affirming the stream health monitoring program, provides for adaptive management of operations protecting stream health, and does not preclude the proposed "slow start" and incremental increase in operations or the role of the board of experts. 5) Question: Regarding the Ordinance, Section 6: Environmental Assessment, subsection 3a and 3B, does the time period need to be clarified? Answer —The general principles for operation of the Castle Creek Energy Center are presented in the Ordinance for reference. The details are defined in the Operating Procedures manual for the CCEC which specifies the time period as May 16 through July 31, and August 1 through May 15 6) Question: Are additional employee(s) required to operate the Castle Creek Energy Center? Answer: Plant operations are automated, electronically and scada controlled limiting the need for staff time. City staff responsible for operating the existing 2 hydroelectric plants has the necessary technical skills sets and will incorporate the routine inspection /maintenance requirements of the CCEC into their daily routine. No additional employees are required. 7) Question: Is snowmelt still needed? Answer: The roof design includes snow cleats to contain the snow for natural melting, and to protect the building surface from falling snow. Additionally, the brick surfaces on the building sides are resilient to the effect of freezing /thawing. To further ensure longevity of the building, it is anticipated that a snow melt system would be installed and used on an as needed basis. 8) Question: Given the revisions in the proposed operations of the project, will the 8.5% renewable energy be achieved? Answer: The slow start and incremental increase in production based on stream monitoring is a pathway to full production (providing approximately 8% of the overall City's electric system customer energy needs) while ensuring the health of the stream. Environmental studies completed to date validated a full production operational level does not negatively impact the stream. The stream monitoring program is an extension of these studies. Should these studies conclude an operational level below full production capacity, the overall renewable energy produced would be reduced accordingly. Ordinance: Updates to the proposed Ordinance include: 1) Vesting Period — revised from 3 years to 5 years 2) Section 6 Environmental Assessment o Further clarification of the role of the 3 person "Board of Experts" o Updated to the Operational Guide which will be referred henceforth to as Operating Procedures. Respectfully, David Hornbacher Director of Utilities and Renewable Energy City of Aspen MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Hornbacher, Director of Utilities and Environmental Initiatives THROUGH: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: December 5, 2011 MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011 RE: Castle Creek Energy Center — 2 " Reading Additional Information for Land Planning Application 2" READING Following is an overview of the revisions from 1 Reading and update for the 2' Reading of the Land Planning Application for the Castle Creek Energy Center: 1. Castle Creek Energy Center Work session — On December 12, 2012 beginning at 1:00 PM, Staff has arranged a separate work session to review with City Council in detail project operation, financial, and other relevant information. The work session will facilitate dialog of these complex issues covering the topics of: a. Slow Start and Incremental changes of CCEC Operations b. Financial and Economic Review c. Additional Renewable Energy Potential 2. Ordinance - The ordinance for the Castle Creek Energy Center has been refined including the following sections: a. Section 5 Parking — wording clarification b. Section 6 Environmental Assessment — refinements to clarify the role of the Board of Experts, Operational Procedures, and proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Pitkin County. c. Section 13 Landscape Plan — landscaping improvements to include the area on south side of Power Plant Road. d. Section 17 Vested Rights — change from 3 years to 5 years Following is the overview from the Information from ls1 Reading Memo, Oct 17, 2011 Page 1 of 2 For Reference: 1st READING The project has continued to evolve from ongoing input from the community, project evaluation, and staff recommendations. Highlighted in the Utility's Staff Application for the Land Planning Review of the Castle Creek Energy Center, are the details of these revisions including: • A reduction in the Castle Creek Energy Center building square footage • Building exterior retains the historic facade and key design features as originally proposed • Deletion of the visitor center room • Removal of the electric switchgear and sand bin cover • Removal of the parking cover for visitors Further, in March 2011, members of City Staff were invited to and participated in an independent Community Mediation Session. The results released to the Public on May 25, 2011 through the session Mediator, Owen Olpin, included recommended guiding principles for City decision - making. The concepts of these principles are embraced in staff's information before Council and include: • FERC Licensing Process for a Minor Water Power Project (recommendation by separate Council memo) • Castle and Maroon Creek Monitoring Program — this comprehensive program developed collaboratively with the Colorado Division of Wildlife establishes monitoring details and evaluation protocol that protect stream health. Prior to the proposed operation of the CCEC, three years of annual data will have been collected and analyzed using science based methodology. Further program provides for adaptive management and adjustment of hydroelectric operations ensuring the health of the stream. • Slow and Incremental Start — the general principles of this proposed cautionary start to operations is contained in the draft in the Ordinance, Section 6. These will be refined for 2 "" reading. An updated Castle Creek Energy Center Economic analysis will be provided to Council that evaluates the effect from the proposed slow and incremental start to hydroelectric operations. The Internal Rate of Return is positive in all scenarios. 2" READING — Additional information for 2 " Reading: Staff will prepare and present at 2 "" reading information including: • Project Cost and Budget Update — including value engineering results and project cost estimates • Economic Analysis — further refinement of October 2011 update. • Operational Guide Draft — these principles will be further refined and an operational guide drafted. The City will solicit further input from the County in developing the details of the Operational Guide , • Discussion of potential additional Renewable Energy sources Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Information Item — International Code Council letters re: Stephen Kanipe and Mike Metheny DATE: December 12, 2011 City Council: Shaunna Mozingo, the President of the Colorado Chapter of the International Code Council, forwarded two letters regarding Stephen Kanipe's and Mike Metheny's participation in Chapter affairs. I've talked with both Stephen and Mike about their behavior. They understand that I cannot ignore this type of feedback and they are aware of the consequences. They both understand that Council must be advised of what has transpired and that these letters must be included in the City's personnel records. . INTERNATIONAL Colorado Chapter, Inc. of the .coin International Code Council Post Office Box 961, Arvada Colorado 80001 ` - www.coloradoch aotericc. orq COLORAE CHATTER Chris Bendon City of Aspen 130 S Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 December 1, 2011 OFFICERS President Dear Mr. Bendon, SHAUNNA MOZINGO Cherry Hills Village As President of the Colorado Chapter of ICC I wanted to take a moment to say thank tst Vice President you for allowing Stephen Kanipe to serve these past years on our Board of Directors GIL ROSSMILLER including his service as President of our chapter for 2 years. Stephen served this Town of Parker past year as our Immediate Past President and I can't even imagine what the board 2 Vice President of directors will be like without Stephen's presence next year. One thing I am sure of ANDY BLAKE though is that just because he will no longer be on the board, Stephen will still be Morgan County very much involved in our chapter as one of our highly esteemed "Past Presidents ". Secretary JANINE SNYDER Mr Kanipe has made such huge contributions to our chapter and to code officials Town of Frisco P 9 P across the nation and now he can add Puerto Rico to his list. He rises to the Treasurer challenges and needs of our profession and our chapter with such professionalism DAN WEED Town of Castle Rock and enthusiasm that it is hard to follow in his footsteps. DIRECTORS The City of Aspen is recognized as a leader in the building code arena and for its MATT ARCHER willingness to support its staff to be involved. I attribute that not only to Stephen Douglas County Kanipe's commitment to excellence and dedication to his jurisdiction as well as to the MARK GURULE codes, but I know as well as anyone that no matter how willing an employee is to go Pueblo Regional that extra mile, there has to be someone behind them allowing them to push that MIKE JONES envelope. Town of Louisville Thank you for allowing Stephen to step out and be Stephen. He truly is unmatched MIKE METHANY in our Building and Energy Code arena. His experience and knowledge span many City of Aspen different areas from energy to alternate designs and materials; from code KIRK NAGLE enforcement to department management; from building structures to building City of Arvada performance and so much more. The membership is lucky to have such a wealth of knowledge to draw from when we need assistance in doing our day to day job. PAST PRESIDENT STEPHEN KANIPE Thank you for your commitment to excellence, it shows in your willingness to allow City of Aspen your employees to expand their horizons and be a part of the solutions out there. Stephen could not do any of this without the support of wonderful people like you. With Gratitude and Respect, Shaunna Mozingo President, Colorado Chapter of ICC, Inc. The Colorado Chapter of the International Code Council is dedicated to the improvement of building safety, by promoting and improving the International Codes, educating the building industry, public and our membership, and providing mutual aid to building professionals. INTERNATIONAL Colorado Chapter, Inc. of the CODE COUNCIL UCC International Code Council Post Office Box 961, Arvada Colorado 80001 ^,. www.coloradochaotericc.orq • COLORADOCHAPTER Stephen Kanipe Building Official City of Aspen 130 S Galena Street OFFICERS Aspen, CO 81611 President SHAUNNA MOZINGO Cherry Hills Village December 1, 2011 • 1st Vice President GIL ROSSMILLER Town of Parker Dear Mr. Kanipe, 2 Vice President ANDY BLAKE As President of the Colorado Chapter of ICC I wanted to take a moment to say thank Morgan County you for allowing Mike Metheny to serve on our Board of Directors for the past few Secretary years. Mike has made outstanding contributions to the Chapter and I can't thank you JANINE SNYDER encouraging enough for him to be involved. Town of Frisco g g g Treasurer Mr. Metheny takes on projects and committees with a commitment for success. His DAN WEED past involvement on our Program Committee ensured that the always Chapter would alwa Town of Castle Rock P 9 P Y have outstanding venues and educational programs. His current service as DIRECTORS Chairman of the Membership Committee has taken our membership benefits to a MATT ARCHER new level. Mike is quick to pass on anything to our membership that he feels might Douglas County benefit even one person. He is coordinating an effort to get memberships processed MARK GURULE online, which will be another huge benefit to people. Pueblo Regional The City of Aspen is recognized as a leader in the building code world and for its MIKE JONES willingness to support its staff to get involved. I attribute that not only to Mike Town of Louisville 9 PP 9 Y Metheny's commitment to excellence and dedication to his jurisdiction as well as to MIKE METHANY the codes, but I know as well as anyone that no matter how willing an employee is to City of Aspen go that extra mile, there has to be someone behind them allowing them to push that KIRK NAGLE envelope. City of Arvada Thank you for allowing Mike to be Mike; for letting him take those steps outside the PAST PRESIDENT box and expand his knowledge and skills to the point where he takes those skills and STEPHEN KANIPE shares them with all of us. If he knows there is something out there that will benefit City of Aspen someone else in their job, he shares it and is not afraid to speak up to be heard. This has been a great asset to our chapter. There are bosses who don't encourage much personal development for fear that the employee will learn a lot then become unfulfilled at their current position and move on. But then there are bosses who recognize that everyone benefits from their employees advances in personal and professional growth. I look at Mike and think how lucky that Aspen is to have that commitment and knowledge because he's so The Colorado Chapter of the International Code Council is dedicated to the improvement of building safety, by promoting and improving the International Codes, educating the building industry, public and our membership, and providing mutual aid to building professionals. willing to share it with the residents, contractors, other staff and designers. I think how lucky the Colorado Chapter of ICC is for having a resource like Mr. Metheny to turn to. It was important to me to say thank you. Mike is in line to be the Chapter's next Second Vice President for 2012 and there just isn't a better person for that job. I know that the Colorado Chapter of ICC will be in excellent hands with its new executive board and I know that the City of Aspen is in good hands as well. Thank you for your commitment to excellence, it shows in your willingness to allow your employees to expand their horizons and be a part of the solutions out there. Mike could not do any of this without the support of wonderful people like you. With Gratitude and Respect, Shaunna Mozingo President Colorado Chapter of ICC, Inc. The Colorado Chapter of the International Code Council is dedicated to the improvement of building safety, by promoting and improving the International Codes, educating the building industry, public and our membership, and providing mutual aid to building professionals. SPECIAL MEETING CALLED FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION Date December 12 , 2011 Call to order at: I m. I. Councilmembers present: Councilmembers not present: Mick Ireland ❑Mick Ireland Steve Skadron n Steve Skadron Adam Frisch ❑ Adam Frisch Torre ❑ Torre Derek Johnson ❑ Derek Johnson f ,/ II. Motion to go into executive session by ; seconded b - ' Y t�N- Other persons present: AGAINST: FOR: P2 Mick Ireland ❑ Mick Ireland g: Steve Skadron ❑ Steve Skadron ►1 Adam Frisch ❑ Adam Frisch Torre F Tone ❑ Derek Johnson �� � erek Johnson III. MOTION TO CONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION OF: C.R.S. 24 -6- 402(4) (a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest (b Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal ques ions. M pi (c) Matters required to be kept confidential by federal or state law or rules and regulations. (d) Specialized details of security arrangements or investigations, including defenses against terrorism, both domestic and foreign, and including where disclosure of the matters discussed might reveal information that could be used for the purpose of committing, or avoiding prosecution for, a violation of the law; (e Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; an nstructing negotiators; 4 GO i, ,i„ t 4t9 ego) a Y: a .- (0 (I) Personnel matters except if the employee who is the subject of the session has requested an open meeting, or if the personnel matter involves more than one employee, all of the employees have requested an open meeting. IV. ATTESTATION: The undersigned attorney, representing the Council and being present at the executive session, attests that the subject of the unrecorded portions of the session constituted confidential attorney -cli H om • nication: /sue" The undersigned chair of the executive session attests that the discussions in this exe ive session w- limited to the topic(s) described in Section III, above. C Adjourned at: 1 1 . 1 y pM •