HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20140715
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
July 15, 2014
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
MEETING AGENDA
I. Old Power House Property Discussion Intro to RFP
Page 1 of 3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mitzi Rapkin, Community Relations Director
THRU: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
DATE OF MEMO: July 10, 2014
MEETING DATE: July 15, 2014
RE: Draft Request for Proposals for new use for Old Power House
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This work session is to go over the draft RFP for the Old Power
House and make any necessary changes to the draft and get Council’s approval. If we have time,
we would like to set terms on how to evaluate the RFP. If we do not have time, we will do it in
another work session.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has a top ten goal to determine a use for the Old
Power House that results in the greatest benefit to the community. Council had a visionary work
session to discuss values around the project on January 21, 2014 and a second work session to
fine tune members’ goals for the project on April 8, 2014. In addition Council has received
public feedback in an open house (January 23), work session (June 3) and online forum (open
since February 2013).
BACKGROUND: The Aspen Art Museum is set to move into its new facility this summer,
mostly likely August. After that the organization has one year to vacate the property according to
the lease. Since this is a City owned facility, it is up to City Council to determine a future use for
the property. It is Council’s wish to go through a Request for Proposal process to solicit ideas for
a new use and a new tenant(s) for the Old Power House building.
City staff is currently in the process of vetting various development scenarios between
departments. This will allow us to provide potential proposers with accurate information
regarding frequently asked development questions and the limitations involved. For example, a
proposer may want to know, “Can I increase the parking on site?” This is not a simple yes or no
question, and requires discussion between departments to determine if the intersection can handle
an increased capacity of traffic and if the site can increase paved area. It is staff’s intention to
develop responses to anticipated common questions and provide them in the RFP as an
informational guide.
P1
I.
Page 2 of 3
DISCUSSION: The draft of the RFP for the Old Power House is based on discussions with
Council and the public regarding their desires, aspirations and values for this property. City staff
took notes at each meeting as well as from online, email and mailed comments and created the
RFP to reflect the vision and hopes expressed from all parties.
The RFP is self-explanatory and fulfills a standard format. The heart of the document is the six
part section that asks proposers about their plans, how they integrate with the community and
financials. As you will note, such items as rent, lease terms and expenses are up to the applicants
to propose.
We will go through the RFP in the work session to get your feedback to the questions below
and suggested edits to the RFP document.
1. What information from proposers is important to know in order to evaluate their
proposals? What are the questions you want to ask? Does the DRAFT RFP cover
everything you want to know? How complex should the questions be?
2. Do you determine the terms of a lease (length, rate, options, etc.) in advance of the RFP
being issued, make that part of the individual proposals as suggested in the staff RFP
draft, or negotiate terms after picking a proposal you want to pursue?
3. As part of any negotiations with a reduced list of proposers, do you want to retain the
right to “put groups together” in a “new” proposal?
If there is time, we will talk about the evaluation criteria, which must be included in the
RFP. If not decided at the July 15th work session, we will schedule additional time to
determine:
4. How will responses be evaluated? Who does the evaluations?
a. Is there a one or two-step review process?
i. Should we issue a Request for Qualifications, reduce the applicant list to
some number, then ask for a Request for Proposals from that smaller
group? or
ii. Do we issue one RFP/RFQ, then begin negotiations with one or more of
the reduced list of proposers?
b. Who does the review? Council as a whole? An appointed group? Staff group?
Same group for multi-step process? Different groups? Who makes up that/those
groups? Role in review process for staff? Community? Council?
P2
I.
Page 3 of 3
5. How should the responses be scored? Should questions/criteria be weighted?
a. Scale
b. Weights
c. Scoring methodology
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: At this point there are no budget impacts for issuing the
RFP. There will be financial choices to make regarding money City wants to put into the
building or project later in the process.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council offers direction on how and if staff should edit the RFP
along with any other Council direction on issuing process.
ALTERNATIVES: Council directs staff in some other manner.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft RFP with attachments
P3
I.
1 | Page
City of Aspen
Request for Proposals
Old Power House – New Use
SEALED PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED UNTIL:
DATE AND TIME: ________________________________
PLACE: City of Aspen Purchasing Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81612
CONTACT: Rebecca Hodgson, City of Aspen Purchasing Officer at
Rebecca.Hodgson@cityofaspen.com or 970-920-5079
PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING: ________________________
P4
I.
2 | Page
Introduction
The City of Aspen is requesting proposals from qualified applicants to propose a new use and
how they would administer/manage that use for the Old Power House property at 590 N. Mill
Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611.
Background
The Old Power House was originally built in 1888 and served at the Hunter Creek Power Plant.
Then it became the headquarters for the Roaring Fork Electric Light and Power Company. It
was vacant for a time and then taken over by Holy Cross Electric and used as a warehouse. The
City of Aspen purchased the property in 1976 and leased it to the Aspen Art Museum in 1979.
The Aspen Art Museum is slated to move out this summer but then has a full year remaining on
its lease before it must vacate the property.
Basic information about the site is as follows:
7200+ square foot building, 2 floors (Blueprints from 2009 remodel are attached as
Exhibit A)
Building designated historic structure in 1978
New development would require review by Historic Preservation Commission
More than half of property is in the 100-year floodplain (map attached as Exhibit B)
20 foot grade difference from Gibson to river
Two public trails that cut through the middle of the property
Vehicular entrance is confusing and dangerous
Parking for 22 vehicles
Development Potential: Only residential uses have maximum floor areas listed, any other use
would limit floor area through an approval process. If use is for public facility, property should
be rezoned to Public and dimensional requirements defined in a site specific plan.
The building is currently zoned R-30 with a PD overlay. Site permits single-family homes and
duplexes by rights. Arts, cultural and civic uses require board review for approval.
An analysis of the building by City of Aspen staff and consultants has shown that repairs and
upgrades are needed. A copy of the report is attached as Exhibit C.
The City began taking public input on the future use of the Old Power House in February 2013
on Open City Hall. You can read the 90+ comments on the site at
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Relations/Open-City-Hall/. The public
process continued with a work session with Aspen City Council to talk about their values and
goals for the property, not specific uses. City staff had a similar open house meeting with the
public. Both took place in January 2014. A follow-up work session with Council occurred in
April and another work session solely for public input took place in June 2014. Notes and
memos from those sessions are attached. You can also watch the second two work sessions at
P5
I.
3 | Page
www.aspenpitkin.com by clicking on “Watch Webcasts” and clicking on sessions from April 8
and June 3.
The Proposal requirements in this RFP are based on these continued discussions with Council
and the public and are a reflection of the values that both groups would like to see the new use
foster. Exhibit D is all the notes taken at the Council and public sessions including memos.
Scope of Proposal
Part One: Function
It is one of Aspen City Council’s top ten goals this year to determine a use for the Old Power
House site that results in the greatest benefit to the community. This building and property is
owned by the City and has a history since 1979 of serving the public in some way. The
Council’s desire to keep this facility open to the public for a new use is the reason for this RFP.
The function of the building is to serve as a public amenity.
Part Two: Size and Footprint
The building is 7200+ square feet with two floors as earlier stated. There has been no decision
made as to whether or not the City or the new user will pay for alterations. It is up to you how
you want to configure the interior space to fit your needs and how you want to utilize the outdoor
space, given zoning and land use code regulations.
Part Three: Timeline and Occupation
The timeline for occupation of the building is tentative. The Aspen Art Museum has one year
from its move-out date (around August 2014) before it must vacate the property permanently.
The AAM may or may not utilize all its time. After that, the City may do repairs on the building
which will take some time. Roughly the City anticipates that a new user could occupy the
building in 2016.
Selection of a new tenant, based on the RFP, will occur over the fall and winter. Final approval
will be made by City Council and the selected proposer should prepare to be in attendance and
able to answer all questions and concerns by City Council members before, during and after the
regularly scheduled meeting where the selection is made.
Part Four: Term of Lease
The City of Aspen will deliver to the new user a four-wall space with utility service connections.
The Council has not yet decided if the City or new user will pay for building remodels or any
proportion of such changes to the building and land. Proposer will be offered an initial lease term
with optional extensions. Lease terms shall be for a fixed amount each month. Utilities and
property management are the responsibility of the tenant.
Lease agreements are anticipated to be set for a particular amount on one-year terms and
adjusted annually to reflect fluctuations in the consumer price index. Proposers shall specify
their preferred time period of the lease term and preferred renewal options. The limitations on
the lease are to protect the proposer and the City should the project prove unsuccessful or so
successful it needs a better space.
P6
I.
4 | Page
Part Five: Rental Rate
While this building is a City asset, a rental rate will be negotiated for the property. It is not a
given that it will be the same as the Art Museum, which was $10/year.
Part Six: Other
The selected proposers for the Old Power House property and building will be expected to
maintain the space in keeping with the high standards for quality and customer service the City
of Aspen expects. This shall apply to the interior and exterior space.
Submission Requirements
Proposer(s) must submit four (4) paper copies and one (1) electronic copy on a disc combined
into a single PDF document on or before TBD DATE, at the City of Aspen Purchasing
Department, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611. The City cannot accept late,
emailed, or faxed proposals. Proposals must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly marked
on the outside “Proposals for Old Power House 2014”. Proposers must answer all questions
below and follow the format as outlined. Failure to do may result in disqualification. Once the
RFP is made public proposers are prohibited from contacting City Council members on this
topic. Failure to do may result in disqualification.
Section 1 Introduction of Organization, staff, and general purpose of the building you
propose
1.1 Tell us who you are.
1.2 What is your proposal?
1.3 List your project team, the role of each member listed and their experience in
the construction or development of a site for the use as described.
1.4 List your operating team for the building after it is ready for use, the role of
each member listed and their experience in the operation of a facility as you
have described.
1.5 Provide the most current annual income statement and balance sheet for your
organization.
1.6 If your organization is already in existence, please provide 990s or other
applicable financial forms for the last four years of operation.
Section 2 Proposed use of the building and grounds.
2.1 How does your proposed use of the building contribute to the vitality of
Aspen?
2.2 Have you been inside the building, looked at your needs and know the
building fits your use physically? If so, what have you done to that end?
P7
I.
5 | Page
2.3 Describe how your proposal – and what a visitor’s would see, feel, hear,
touch, learn, etc. – would produce a “memory-making” experience that
would have a visitor relating that visit to others in an enthusiastic way.
2.4 Outline specifically why this location is necessary for your plan? There are
likely many locations in Aspen to create your project, why is this
location/building/setting essential to your operation?
2.5 Describe how your proposed use of the building/grounds would provide a
unique experience – unduplicated by any other venue in Aspen or the valley.
2.6 Describe what your design would look like.
2.7 Describe how you would activate the grounds of the property and integrate
its use with the existing trails that cross the property. How would you use the
interface with the river and the John Denver Sanctuary to enhance a visitor’s
experience to both your property and to those features?
2.8 Would you be willing to partner with other organizations that have creative
ideas for the outdoor space?
2.9 Do you foresee the need for a commercial kitchen, or any sort of kitchen, in
the facility? How would you use it?
2.10 How would your proposal create a reason for people to travel by foot from
Aspen’s town core to the Old Powerhouse site?
2.11 Provide a hypothetical annual calendar of programming for your proposed
use for the first year of your existence. How many days/nights are
programmed? How many “dark days/nights” are there? How will you
approach off seasons?
2.12 Describe the market for your proposed use. Tell us your approach to
marketing that use to those groups of potential users. Please attach a market
study if you’ve done one.
2.13 Describe the need for parking/drop off areas associated with your proposed
use and how you will meet that need.
Section 3 Community
3.1 Describe how your proposal creates a “center of community” for those who
live here, work here and visit here.
3.2 The City Council is open to single and multiple-use proposals but members
also indicated that they want to see this project exemplify “collaboration,
inclusiveness and innovation.” Please describe how your proposal would
fulfill those desires?
3.3 Does your plan allow rental of any of the interior or exterior space to other
organizations? How?
3.4 Does your plan allow for rental of the facilities for special events like
weddings or fundraisers? How?
3.5 Explain if/how your plan might partner with other organizations?
3.6 Explain if/how your plan would allow for community uses, such as a dance,
bingo night, music concerts etc.
Section 4 Financials
P8
I.
6 | Page
4.1 Describe how you propose to finance:
a) The capital expenses associated with retrofitting the building and
grounds for the purpose proposed. Provide an estimate of those
expenses.
b) The operating and maintenance expenses associated with the proposed
use of the building and grounds.
c) What portion of the expenses in a) and b) do you propose to pay? (ie.
what do you expect the City to pay)
4.2 Do you propose to charge an admission fee? If so, how much? What will that
money be used for?
4.3 Provide a 5-year Pro Forma of revenues and expenses by major category for
your operation.
4.4 Have you or your group ever filed for bankruptcy? If so, what year?
4.5 Proposers should include a copy of their business plan if this is a new
venture.
Section 5 Timelines and Schedules
Pre- Proposal Meeting/Site Visit ___________________
Question and Answer period Closes ___________________
Proposals Due ___________________
The pre-proposal meeting/site visit is not mandatory, but is strongly suggested for all potential
proposers. Failure to join the meeting and site visit may result in a proposal that is ill-informed
and unlikely to be selected for further consideration.
The City reserves the right to modify the timeline if necessary.
Section 6 References
6.1 Please supply at least five (5) recent references
Group will determine what type of reference(s) they are looking for.
Evaluation Criteria
Selection of a new tenant, based on the RFP, will occur over the fall and winter. Final approval
will be made by City Council and the selected proposer should prepare to be in attendance and
able to answer all questions and concerns by City Council members before, during and after the
regularly scheduled meeting where the selection is made.
Specific evaluation criteria to come from City Council.
Questions and Answers
P9
I.
7 | Page
All questions related to this Request for Proposals must be submitted in writing to the Purchasing
department via email to Rebecca.hodgson@cityofaspen.com. Q&As will be posted on the
Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing website for all interested parties to review. Proposers are
responsible for checking the website regularly for updates. Since the Old Power House is still
occupied by the AAM, drop-in site visits are discouraged and proposers are asked to attend the
pre-proposal meeting described below.
Legal
Pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. Section 24-72-200.1 (CORA), any and all of
the documents that are submitted to the City of Aspen may be deemed public records subject to
examination and inspection by third parties. The City of Aspen reserves the right, at its sole
discretion, to release for inspection or copying any document, plan, specification, proposal or other
writing submitted pursuant to this request.
Proposers are encouraged to review the lease terms with the current tenant to fully understand
the legal parameters of contracting with the City of Aspen (see Exhibit D).
Summary
The City reserves the right to reject any or all Proposals or accept what is, in its judgment, the
Proposal which is in the City’s best interest. The City further reserves the right, in the best
interest of the City, to waive any technical defects or irregularities in any and all Proposals
submitted.
P10
I.
Exhibit A
Aspen Art Museum blueprints from 2009 remodel
P11
I.
P1
2
I.
P1
3
I.
P1
4
I.
P1
5
I.
P1
6
I.
P1
7
I.
P1
8
I.
Exhibit B
Map
P19
I.
P2
0
I.
Exhibit C
An analysis of the building by City of Aspen staff and consultants
has shown that repairs and upgrades are needed
P21
I.
0 20 40 80 22
(6) Holy Cross SiteSite Analysis
The historic Holy Cross Building and site are located
along the Roaring Fork River and North Mill Street.
The building was originally a hydroelectric power plant
fed by Hunter Creek, but the plant was shut down
in the 1930’s as the demand for mining electricity
declined. The building was occupied with storage
until the 1970’s when the City was approached with
a proposal to turn the building into the Aspen Art
Museum. The Aspen Art Museum is in the process of
finishing a new facility in the downtown core and will
be vacating the facility. No plans are in place for the
future program and use of this building. The building
is listed on Aspen’s Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structure and therefore would be subject to
review by the Historic Preservation Commission.
Access and Parking – The site is accessible from
North Mill Street with 21 parking spaces provided. Six
feet of grade change separate the road way entrance
from the parking lot. It can be difficult to navigate the
small turning radii of the parking lot. Large trucks
would not have access if the lot were occupied. A
secondary access road along Gibson Avenue allows
for art unloading currently to a reconstructed sevice
bridge connecting the second story of the building.
Trails – The Rio Grande trail connects the site
connecting pedestrians to the Rio Grande Park,
John Denver Sanctuary to the Puppy Smith Street
businesses area. This trail will be maintained and
defines the limits of redevelopment area.
Drainage – The parking lot and building back up to a
hillside connecting to Gibson Avenue. Occupants of
the building describe standing water on the north and
north-eastern side of the building which has flooded
into the structure on a few occasions. Because the
Roaring Fork River flows along the eastern edge
of the property, fifty feet of the existing parcel are
undevelopable. The majority of the site is within the
100’ year floodplain.
Trees and Vegetation – The site vegetation is
characterized by mature riparian vegetation including;
cottonwoods, spruces, dogwoods, willows and other
perennial riparian vegetation. An existing pond is
located on the site further promoting this riparian
growth. This pond and natural vegetation is described
as part of the John Denver Sanctuary.
Zoning Review
Public (PUB) Zone District
The purpose of the Public Zone District is to
provide for the development of governmental,
quasigovernmental and nonprofit facilities for cultural,
educational, civic and other nonprofit purposes.
Permitted Uses include: library, museum, post office,
hospital, essential government and public utility
uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding
maintenance shops), public transportation stop,
terminal building and transportation-related facilities,
public surface and underground parking areas, fire
stations, public and private schools, public park, arts,
cultural and recreational activities, accessory buildings
and uses, public and private nonprofit uses providing
a community service and child care center.
Conditional Uses include: maintenance shop and
affordable housing.
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures
- Since the site is listed on the Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures, a development
application review would be subject to review by
the Historical Preservation Commission (HPC). If
the Community Development Director deems the
development application to generate significant
community interest, the application will be reviewed
jointly by the Planning and Zoning Commission
and the Historic Preservation Commission. The
brick building dating back to the 1890s is classified
as “Aspen Victorian.” Any development would
require approval of a development order and either
a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate
of appropriateness before any permits or work
authorization.
• The historical nature of the site warrants other
considerations:
• This lot is not required to meet the minimum lot
area requirement of its zone district.
• Community Development Department may
determine neighborhood outreach is required.
• Utility encroachments into the alleyways shall
be minimized but may be allowed if the historic
structure dictated such an encroachment.
• To preserve and maintain the historic and
architectural character of the structure, the HPC
or City Council may approve variations from the
Land Use Code and make recommendations to
the Chief Building Official to grant exceptions to
the International Building Code.
• The structure cannot be demolished unless
approved by the HPC.
• Park reductions are permitted.
The site is subject to the City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines; including:
• Promote creative, contemporary design that
reflects the historic context.
• Maintain traditional building scale.
• Reflect the variety of building heights seen
historically.
• Accommodate outdoor public spaces.
• Promote variety in the street level experience.
• Preserve the integrity of historic resources within
the district.
Conclusions
Access – The site is .44 miles from the downtown
core and therefore is not considered as having strong
pedestrian access. The site is obscured by mature
vegetation furthering the gap in public visibility.
Build-out – The site’s historic building and existing
parking would be considered at full build-out of the
site. The floodplain restricts further development.
Redevelopment may be hampered by the current
structure’s historic designation.
Zoning – The site is in a public zone district creating
no issues for further public or civic use of the current
building.
Public View - The site is likely to generate significant
public opinion on the reuse of this historic structure.
Many different uses are possible on this site and
will generate a competitive dialogue for how the site
should be used.
Compatibility – Even though the site is surrounded by
open space, it is still compatible for office space. The
site has always been used publicly, generates traffic,
and has no close neighbors.
.44 Miles
P2
2
I.
0 20 40 8019
Gi
b
s
o
n
A
v
e
Entrance
Roaring
Fork River
Rio Gra
n
d
e
T
r
a
i
l
N Mill
S
t
.
Waste
Management
Storage
Utilities
Open
Space
John Denver
Sanctuary
Roaring
Fork River
Aspen Art
Museum
Ron
Krajian
Bridge
22 Parking
Spots
Pond
Diane Lewy
Memorial
Ampitheatre
Service
Bridge
Trail
Underpass
Spruce
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Parcel Line
(6) Holy Cross Site
P2
3
I.
0 20 40 80 20
(6) Holy Cross Site
Utilities and Storage
Views of Aspen Mt. and Roaring Fork River
Snow Build-up
Parking Entrance from N Mill and Gibson Corner
Art Museum Entrance and Connection to Trail Rio Grande Trail, Trees Against Building
Service Bridge from Gibson
Grade Change from Roads to Parking Steep Slopes
Diane Lewy Memorial Amphitheatre
Rio Grande Trail through Open Space John Denver Sanctuary P2
4
I.
0 20 40 8021
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Parcel Line
Pedestrian Walk
Viewshed
Roaring Fork River
50’ Offset
100 Year Flood Plain
Vegetation
Parcel Size: 11,780 SF
.44
M
i
l
e
s
t
o
C
i
t
y
H
a
l
l
Gi
b
s
o
n
A
v
e
Rio Grande
Trail Continues
Under Road
Roaring
Fork River
N M
i
l
l
S
t
.
Storage
Utilities
Steep
Slopes
Ron
Krajian
Bridge
22 Parking
SpotsPond
Service
Bridge
Historic
Hydroplant
Building
Mature
Cottonwood
Grove
Drainage
Pools
Here
Snow
Build Up
Views to
Aspen
Mountain
Preserve Scenic
Quality of
Riparian Areas
(6) Holy Cross Site
John Denver
Sanctuary
Roaring
Fork River
P2
5
I.
CITY OF ASPEN POWER HOUSE BUILDING
590 N. Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado
BUILDING ASSESSMENT
Overview: On April 2, 2014, a walk through at the facility was
conducted with Jonathan Hagman (Aspen Art Museum),
Scott Smith (CCA), Stan Humphries and Taylor Critchlow
(AEC).
ARCHITECTURE
Facility Description:
The original, rectangular-shaped building was constructed in the late 1880’s as a
hydroelectric facility on the Roaring Fork River. The original, one -story building was
about 3,145 sq. ft. and was constructed of stone foundation walls, brick exterior walls,
and a wood framed gable roof.
In 1979 a rectangular, gable-roofed addition was added to the northwest end of the
building. This addition consisted of about 5,220 sq. ft. of new first floor spac e, and a
second floor above the original building’s first floor, for a building total of about 8,365
sq. ft.
A long shed roof dormer was also added at this time with clerestory windows, as well
as a pedestrian walkway bridge which connects the second stor y of the building to
Gibson Avenue on the north side.
The new addition was constructed of a reinforced concrete (spread footing, stem
wall and floor slab) foundation, wood framed brick veneer exterior walls and a steel
roof truss/wood joist structured roof system (over the existing and new building areas).
The City indicated they were not aware of asbestos testing at this building.
EXTERIOR
The building exterior envelope consists of a galvanized, corrugated metal roof, wood
fascia and plywood soffit, galvanized metal sheet siding (dormer walls), brick walls, wood
(historic) windows, and metal/glass entry doors. The pedestrian bridge on the north side
is constructed of glulam beams, wood joists and decking.
The bridge had a problem with damage from ca rpenter ants with the wood structure.
Steel members were added to the glulam beams for additional support.
There are several roof leaks evident on the interior (see Image #1) in the entry vestibule
and at the stair. Several roof snow fences have broken off due to sliding snow, as well as
damage to mechanical roof penetrations on the north side (see Image #2).
There is no noticeable damage to the structural foundation or walls resulting in cracks or
settling. The brick walls are in good shape considerin g the age of the historic building.
Some of the brick areas could benefit from repointing (see Image #3) as well as several
areas with cracks thru the bricks (see Image #4). It would probably be good to have a
restoration company evaluate the historic building prior to a remodel.
P26
I.
The building’s wooden surfaces were painted six years and are in need of new
refinishing.
There is some moisture damage to the soffits of the bridge gable entry roof (see Image
#5).
Building flashing and sealants need to be re viewed and in many cases repaired or
replaced. Poorly constructed and weathered material connections have created gaps
in the building envelope (see Image #6).
INTERIOR
The interior finishes consist of painted gyp. board ceilings and walls, wood, vinyl and
carpet flooring.
The exterior original windows have been covered by interior walls and panels to prevent
light entering exhibit areas.
The interior finishes are in average condition although most need to be replaced due to
wear, especially in the toilet rooms (see Image #7).
RECOMMENDATIONS
A new roof (along with underlayment and sheathing) is needed to replace the existing
metal roof. Roof drainage solutions need to be planned for (snow fences, heat tape,
gutters, downspouts). The main entry has no protective overhang and the roof slopes
toward the entry door. A gutter is in place but a safer solution would be advisable (see
Image #8).
Much of the roof perimeter drains directly to the ground around the building with little
water control. On the north side large amounts of snow pile up against the building
walls. It would be good to control this drainage and direct it away from the building.
There is a make-shift storage shed on the northwest side of the building which is a visual
distraction and should probably be removed (see Image #9).
The entry doors and metal windows should be replaced as they have exceeded their
useful life and are not energy efficient.
Weatherization (flashing, sealants) should be implemented for the entire envelope.
New roof and wall insulation should be installed to comply with current energy codes.
The roof structure should be evaluated resultant, additional snow loading.
The exterior, paintable surfaces should be repainted.
The walkway bridge on the north side sh ould be evaluated for structural soundness and
possibly replace the walking surface and railings (which don’t comply with current
building codes).
The site drainage should be studied as there is a problem with water ponding near the
auto entry.
P27
I.
Interior walls and panels should be removed from the historic windows, windows
refinished, and new insulative storm sashes added.
A public passenger elevator would be a good addition to the building to facilitate
handicap accessibility.
IMAGE #1: IMAGE #2:
IMAGE #3: IMAGE #4:
P28
I.
IMAGE #5: IMAGE #6:
IMAGE #7: IMAGE #8:
IMAGE #9:
P29
I.
aec
Architectural Engineering Consultants, Inc.
Mechanical, Electrical, & Lighting Design Services
An Office with LEED TTMM Accredited Professionals
40801 US Hwy 6 & 24, Suite 214, Eagle-Vail, CO 81620 Post Office Box 8489, Avon, CO 81620
phone: 970-748-8520 fax: 970-748-8521 email: stan@aec-vail.com web: www.aec-vail.com
Observation Report – Aspen Art Museum
Overview
On April 2, 2014 Taylor Critchlow and Stan Humphries provided a walkthrough of the existing
Aspen Art Museum. They were accompanied by Scott Smith of Charles Cunniffe Architects, and
Jonathan Hagman of the City of Aspen. The purpose of this walkthrough was to provide a
general inventory and assessment of the existing MEP systems.
The Aspen Art Museum is located at 590 North Mill Street in Aspen, Colorado. The building was
originally constructed in 1980. There are two levels to the building. The first level houses a
large exhibit area, restrooms, storage, shop, and a small bookstore area. The second level
consists of a smaller exhibit area and offices. The overall area of the building is approximately
8400 SF.
Mechanical Systems Assessment
The building is heated by a central boiler plant. This plant provides heating water to (2) large
air handling units which provide forced air heating and cooling to the building. This plant also
provides hot water to a few unit heaters in support areas. All of the equipment, with the
exception of the gas-fired water heater, was installed during the original construction and is
approximately 35 years old. All controls are stand-alone.
Boiler Plant
A single atmospheric (standard efficiency) boiler is located in the NW mechanical room. This
boiler is 35 years old, and has outlived its useable life. While originally an 80% efficient device,
time has likely reduced efficiency levels to the 60-70% range. This unit is common vented out
the roof with a gas-fired water heater within the mechanical room.
Observation Date: 4/2/14 Location: Aspen Art Museum
Project: Aspen Art Museum Weather Cond.: Mostly Cloudy, 40
degrees
Project No.: 14019.00 Time: 11:00 am
Client: CCA Duration: 1 hour
Prepared By: Taylor Critchlow,
Stan Humphries
Date of Issuance: 4/25/14
P30
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 2 of 9
April 25, 2014
Existing Boiler – Installed 1980 Common Venting Through Mech Room Ceiling
Heated water is distributed from this boiler with a single constant speed circulator, also past its
useable life. All hydronic piping is uninsulated, even in unconditioned areas. This is inefficient,
and is also against current energy codes. The boiler system does not have any redundancy, so
a failure in the boiler or pump would cause a complete shutdown of the system.
Lower Level Gallery HVAC System
The gallery is served by a large and old commercial air handling system. The strict temperature
and humidity requirements of the gallery led to the installation of a very energy intensive
system which would not be well suited to alternative space usages.
A single air handling unit (Liebert Model UD199) is located in the second level mechanical room,
and is from the original construction. At 16.5 tons cooling, it is significantly oversized for even
the strict temperature requirements of the gallery. There is no outside air to the unit, which is
against current code. The unit is past its useable life and should be removed during a future
remodel.
Ducting and Diffusers in Lower Gallery Air Handling Unit – Installed 1980
All ducting is uninsulated, and is routed to sidewall grilles in exposed ductwork in the ceiling of
the gallery. There is a significant amount of duct leakage in the system. A single return grille
exists on the sidewall above the Women’s room. This grille transfers a lot of noise from the
unit to the space.
P31
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 3 of 9
April 25, 2014
The lower level gallery air handler is connected to a remote condenser located to the East of
the building. This condenser was irreparably damaged by a roaming bear many years ago. As
such, it is only able to run at half capacity. This has not been an issue, as the original unit was
well oversized. It has actually served to cut back on nuisance trips by limiting the instances of
coil freeze ups. Like the air handler, this unit should be removed during a future remodel.
Gallery Condenser – Installed 1980 Gallery Humidifier – Installed 2007
The system also includes a high-capacity commercial humidifier which was installed in 2007.
This unit attempts to keep the space at 50% RH and runs constantly. It has been subject to a
multitude of maintenance issues and should be removed during a future remodel.
Upper Level Gallery/Offices and Lower Support Areas HVAC System
These areas are served by a two-zone reheat air handling system located in the attic above the
storage area. The air handler (McQuay Model 3JH00092) was installed during the original
construction. Outside air is provided to the unit, but the dampers are broken and unable to be
adjusted. All ducting is uninsulated, which is inefficient and against code in the attic spaces.
This unit is past its useful life and should be removed during a future remodel.
Air Handling Unit – Installed 1980 Two-Zone Reheat System with Uninsulated Ducts
Cooling is provided to the upper level zone only with a cooling coil and exterior condensing unit.
This system is undersized and cannot keep up with demand.
P32
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 4 of 9
April 25, 2014
Mechanical Systems Recommendations
The mechanical systems are original from the original 1980 construction and are past their
useable lives. Additionally, they are very inefficient and overly energy intensive for any other
space usage than art display. Regardless of what future programming needs are, they should
be gutted and replaced with entirely new systems. Several options are available, and
dependent upon usage, budget, and zoning requirements.
1) If an event center is planned, fewer and larger pieces of larger equipment would be
required. This would likely require cooling and a large amount of ventilation for high
occupancy loads. The cheapest option would be a gas-packaged roof top unit (located
in the attic space).
2) If offices are planned, more zoning would likely be desired. If air conditioning is not a
requirement, this could be done easily with gas-fired furnaces or a boiler with zoned
baseboard or radiant heat. If air conditioning is desired, a refrigerant based multisplit
option would provide optimal comfort.
Plumbing Systems Assessment and Recommendations
A 1½” domestic water service enters the building at the mechanical room. This service includes
the required pressure reducing valve and backflow preventer. There is no fire protection to the
building. This is a relatively large service for such small loads, and could likely accommodate
additional fixtures, and possibly even a new sprinkler service.
Domestic hot water is produced by a 40 gallon gas-fired water heater located in the mechanical
room. This unit is common vented with the boiler. It was installed in 2004, and likely has
another 5 years of useable life remaining. Consider replacement with a high-efficiency direct-
vent water heater.
A 1½” low pressure gas line enters the building at the mechanical room. This was originally
designed for current and future loads of 600 MBH, and could serve a variety of future schemes.
Gas Meter Location in Front of Building 1½” Water Entry Assembly (PRV, BFP, Meter)
P33
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 5 of 9
April 25, 2014
Electrical Distribution and Incoming Service – Assessment
The building has an exterior utility transformer located nearby at the north side of the building.
The transformer is directly in line for ice and snow being shed from the roof. A large dent at
the top of the transformer is evidence that heavy ice has fallen in the past.
The incoming service is routed into the building underground to the main electrical room at the
west end of the building, approximately 200 feet. The incoming service is two sets of 300 MCM
aluminum, 120/208V 3P, 4W. This would be equivalent to 460 amps.
At the main electrical room the service is routed through a utility CT cabinet for metering. After
the CT cabinet the service enters a 400 amp main disconnect. At the main lugs of that
disconnect an additional service is tapped to a 200 amp 2nd main disconnect, fused at 150 amps
that serves the chiller for the building. The 400 amp main disconnect is fused at 300 amps
which then feeds the two main distribution panels for the building.
There is a sub panel from the two main distribution panels that feeds the exterior heat trace.
The distribution panels for the building are all full with no spare space for additional circuits.
These panels would be considered loaded with little spare capacity. Storage is stacked up
against the electrical panels.
Electrical Distribution and Incoming Service – Recommendations
1. At the exterior transformer location, heat trace and snow fencing should be installed to
prevent potential ice falling on the transformer. See photo below.
2. Remove storage from the electrical area to maintain national electric code clearances
and fire code requirements.
3. If significant remodel is planned, reworking the electrical service would be
recommended. Rework of the electrical distribution would include:
a. Set new main distribution panel at exterior of the building to distribute power to
interior distribution panels.
b. Plan new distribution panels as required for new loads.
P34
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 6 of 9
April 25, 2014
Exterior transformer exposed to potential ice damage Interior Incoming service and main disconnect
Main service area cluttered with storage Distribution Panel
P35
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 7 of 9
April 25, 2014
Branch Circuit Distribution and Power Receptacles – Assessment and Recommendations
Branch circuits for lighting and receptacles are primarily distributed from the main distribution
panels located at the electrical room. No surge suppression is installed at the main incoming
service. Back up UPS and surge suppression is provided at each desk. Overall there is
sufficient power distributed throughout the building for receptacles. At the art display areas
receptacles are mounted unusually low which would not meet ADA requirements.
Recommendations,
1. Add surge suppression to main building service to supplement the individual surge
suppression at each desk. We’re working with Jeff Pendarvis to provide an overall plan
for surge suppression; we’ll provide that information in a separate report.
2. If a substantial renovation is planned, include in the planning to reset existing
receptacles to ADA requirements. This would be primarily raising the mounting height
of the receptacles to the standard 18” above finished floor.
Receptacles at art display areas mounted unusually low
P36
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 8 of 9
April 25, 2014
Lighting and Lighting Controls – Assessment and Recommendations
Exterior lighting is nonexistent at the main entrance. Additional exterior lighting is provided by
acorn style pole mounted lights at sidewalks and parking area. Exterior lighting is controlled via
timeclock/photocell. All exterior lights were noted as “non-cut off type” which means there was
is significant glare and light pollution coming from the lights.
Exit and egress signage throughout the building is sufficient. Exit and egress lighting is battery
backup units located throughout the building. No exterior egress lighting was noted.
Interior lighting throughout the building consisted of the following types of lights:
Substantial specialty incandescent/halogen track lighting is provided throughout the
art display areas.
Back of the house lighting is primarily fluorescent lighting.
Lighting controls are traditional wall mounted switches.
Recommendations for lighting:
1. Exterior lighting should be reviewed further to confirm adequate lighting at the main
entry. Lighting should be added in this area.
2. Exterior pole mounted acorn style fixtures should be replaced with cut off type lighting
to prevent glare and light pollution.
3. Add code required egress lighting at exits.
4. Replace standard light switches with occupancy sensors.
5. Inventory all existing fluorescents and plan to replace with LED.
No entry lighting at main entrance Acorn style pole mounted area lighting at parking
P37
I.
Aspen Art Museum Observation Report Page 9 of 9
April 25, 2014
Specialty incandescent/halogen track lighting throughout the art display area
Art Display lighting is controlled by some dimming
but primarily switched on/off
P38
I.
Exhibit D
All notes from work sessions and public meetings including memos.
P39
I.
COUNCIL
COMMENTS
P40
I.
Repurposed Buildings
Repurposed buildings or adaptive reuse refers to the process of reusing
an old site or building for a purpose other than which it was built or
designed for. There are repurposed buildings all over the world and
likely you have been in one.
What are some examples of repurposed buildings you have been in?
REI Denver, First building I was in was in the Army campus, Faneuil Hall in
Boston, Army Barracks in Marfa, Texas
What are your favorites?
Can you pinpoint why?
Someplace everyone can engage with
P41
I.
What is Aspen missing from its public spaces?
Facilities/Buildings
• Locally serving Retail
• Bakery (eg. Baked in Telluride) +1
• Outdoor swimming pool
• Cool “science/geek” lab
• Adequate/sufficient public safety + facilities
• Outdoor community ice skating facility + summer water park
(seasonal outdoor uses)
Cultural opportunities
• Science/Math Center + ditto
• More environmental ed venues
• Black Box Theater
Gathering spaces
• Meeting spaces
Educational events
• MSE Programs = Cool geeks + children’s science education + agree
P42
I.
What is Aspen missing from its public spaces?
Community programs
• Tech/Start up workspace with badass presentation and/or meeting
space which could double as theatre or lecture hall
• Next new
math/science/engineering/engagement/programs/thought
leadership (think youth)
• Next generation of visitors/guests have a memorable experience to
keep them coming back to Aspen
• Quirky, organic stuff
• Nutritional Education – classes, lectures, studies
• A research center
• Scientific discourse beyond physics
• Tech incubator communal work space
Social Needs
• Community hang out
• Next generation gathering venue
Functions
• Large group meeting space (not here)
• Youth Hostel
P43
I.
Public Value of Site
Low --------------------------------------------------------------------5--High
Social Value of Site
Low --------------------------------------------------------------------5--High
Single Use Multiple Use
]---------------------------------3 --------------2-----------------------2-----[
Static Space Flexible Space
(Can’t change interior configuration) (Can change interior configuration)
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------5---[
Public Use Private Use
]--5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------[
Targeted to Specific Age Demographic
Low Priority--1------------2---------------------------1-----------High Priority
If you are interested in targeting the use to specific demographic, please specify
Kids Teens Adults Seniors
-4--------------------4------------------------2--------------------------2----
P44
I.
In terms of costs for renovation/rehabilitation construction if needed, I want
City to pay --------------1---------2--------1------------------New user to pay
Depends on use for above and below questions
In terms of costs for ongoing operations of building, I want
City to pay -------------------------3---------------------- 1----New user to pay
How important is it to you that the use in the building be related to the need for
auto/parking?
Low Priority---5--------------------------------------------------High Priority
How important is it to you that the use in the building be related to the need for
walking/public transit?
Low Priority----------------------------------------------------5--High Priority
How important is it to you that use is compatible with Aspen Area Community
Plan?
Low Priority-----------------------2---------------------------3--High Priority
I think it is very important to…
Determine use now-2----2--Leave space empty/flexible now and see how it goes
I am interested in a
Use that fits my values-4-------------------A use that generates revenue for City
P45
I.
I am interested in seeing a use that
fits this category:
Art 5 yes
Culture 5 yes
Environment 3 yes
Health 2 yes
Education 5 yes
Non-Profit 2 yes
Food
Lodging
Community Center 4 yes
Business/Commercial
Housing
Offices
Meeting Space 3 yes
Mixed 3 yes
Other (please fill in) Science
I am interested in seeing the
grounds outside:
Developed more as a park 1 yes
Innovative gathering space 5 yes
Having a separate operator-
purpose than indoor use NO
Mixed 1 yes
Other (please fill in)
mse = cool
P46
I.
What uses, if any, are unacceptable in this space?
It would be a disaster if this space…duplicated something already in town or in
the valley, was a private entity, restaurant, offices, retail, lodging, business,
commercial or incubator space
It would be totally awesome if this space…became an even greater community
meeting space, used by a large variety of people including locals and visitors,
something like the next Wheeler, next jewel, next public facility that works year
round
I could live with…
I think if we did this, it would be a defining space for Aspen…memory maker
P47
I.
Mad Libs Worksheet
In twenty years when Aspenites approach me at
_________________ to comment on the decision we made about
(location in Aspen)
The Old Power House, they will say ______________________
(their feelings about project)
and that I was a _____________________ thinking council
(adjective)
member. When guidebooks and magazines report on Aspen,
they will say that using the space as ______________________ (noun/use)
contributed to placemaking in Aspen because it added
_________________ , _______________ and _____________ (adjective or noun) (adjective or noun) (adjective or noun)
to our city. I will say I am glad the new user contributed this
quality to our community: ___________________________.
(noun)
I will also be able to say we came to the decision in a ________ (adjective)
fashion with the community.
P48
I.
Notes from discussion at end of meeting
Steve Skadron - why would city receive $1 when the entity can build $30 million facility, I carry
that forward, I am not receptive to this term non-profit here, there needs to be a higher level of
scrutiny before I let an entity with financial wherewithall to operate in a private space to have
this public space, in our community the word non-profit is missing some spirit, the spirit of it is
right but they are essentially private entities, it would be a disaster if this is used by an
organization that can operate somewhere else, I want it to meet the four qualities of a good
public space
Art Daily - I think it would be great if uses are such that draw pedestrians from the town, draw
them down here and make this a walking entity, that feels right to me
Adam Frisch - I appreciate that there are concerns about location but I think it's a great location,
it's in confluence of great neighborhoods, it's close to parking garage and it's near new John
Denver, it's not just any space, it's somewhat site specific, if the next use could be anywhere,
maybe it should be, what will fully utliize this space, I think we do have garage that can be used
and buses with groups can be dropped off at parking lot so for those uses that need 50 cars that
won't fly but there is a lot of great opportunities to get people here, we want to draw people
down here, I think it's an awesome location
Art - I agree with this as an opportunity to more closely tie this to the rest of town,
Ann Mullins- this is one of the most exciting thing we are looking at in the next few years, could
be legacy project, we can be proactive, we have time, I have seven points: whatever use has to be
fully accessible to public, all demographics, visitors and locals; be great to see some parterships
with other groups in town with ACES, enhance other uses; connectivity, physically and visually
create this connectivity and accessible from all over town; fit into the park visually and
environmentally, maybe reduce parking or get rid of it; maximum indoor and outdoor use, entire
space in underutilized; redevelopment should be environmentally consciencious and whatever
we do it needs to be a model for environmentally conscious redevelopment of historic resource
Dwayne Romero - I keep coming back to notion of new use that is next memory maker, the next
thing that becomes the reason you have to go to Aspen, something today's youth identifies their
visit to aspen with and they remember it, this facility is known for use, and it is identified with
Aspen, it fits with how we have positioned ourselves over the last few years, this space should
support and add to that and being in that world of thought leadership, it becomes the next
Wheeler where people can engage visitors and residents, because of what is occurring here, I
have a theme of notion of potential science center which has captured my fancy and that is
important to me and where we stand as a country and how our students are performing in those
fields, a notion toward education, that is the next Aspen idea from my view, maybe its center, or
robust center where kids come to get their math and science, coordinate with physics center, a
way toward advancement, a way to solve things, children's center could be vital heartbeat of that
whole thing,
P49
I.
Art - I agree with that, we live in a world where computer science is so important
Adam - There is going to be redevelopment near here that could be incubator and office space,
this should be public meeting and should have as many people walking through here as possible,
I'd prefer to stay away from something already existing, some great entities have reached out to
us but they already have a building somewhere else, I'd like to see new thing come here that can
connect to other things existing already, something cultural, year round, wide variety of
demographics, I'd prefer not to take on a further subsidy, we should bring the building up to code
but we can think about bringing rent up to market, we should try to find something that would
have a hard time finding a way to make its vision real because of rent in Aspen, I hope it utilizes
the uniqueness of the space
Steve - very general, to inspire and nurture the aspen spirit one person at a time, leadership, there
is wild factor, there is a wow factor missing and we want to inspire that
Art - does anyone want to think about outdoor uses that are unrelated to indoor uses? Ice
skating, summer water sports park,
Adam - the problem is not sure about this part of the river for paddle board community center so
I've always viewed it as an amenity to be in rather than a place that can actively be used, having
a separate operator and purpose makes me think there is just isn't that much we can do here but if
we can use it more, I'd like to see how we can activate it more,
Ann - there is so much space out there and space is limited in town and it wouldn't necessarily
have to relate to use in building but if we could find out good use winter and summer we might
as well utilize the space as much as we can, maybe it depends on what use is in building
Can we identify themes we are agreeing on:
public v private
Steve - I don't see great philosophical division between us
Dwayne - I think there is virtue in that next public reason to visit Aspen, it would be wonderful
to add a whole new avenue, math/science is such a wonderful umbrella, symposium where non-
profits partner, to one day class for kids, we're looking for extraordinary,
Steve - I like the idea of education and we talked about this being a home for Isaacson school of
new media because it could help retrain workers, help build a foundation for Aspen as an
education center, I'd like to see it emphasize education
Ann - this should be an iconic building, but it might be premature to say its the science museum
or education, it could enhance the arts, we need to look at how do we make it iconic? there's lots
of things we can put in the shell, the access, the physical development of it comes first as a shell
and then it can be a variety of things, there aren't that many public buildings repurposed for
public buildings and we need more research
P50
I.
Adam - free admission is good, public use can be interpreted different ways, do we need to
generate a certain amount of revenue for this? I want something that people can't believe is
sitting in a 6000 person ski town
more info about outdoor use and finances and more research about repurposed public buildings
we need to develop some criteria and guidelines we are going to judge rfps for but we're not
ready for rfps now
P51
I.
P52
I.
P53
I.
P54
I.
P55
I.
P56
I.
PUBLIC
COMMENTS
P57
I.
Repurposed Buildings
Repurposed buildings or adaptive reuse refers to the process of reusing
an old site or building for a purpose other than which it was built or
designed for. There are repurposed buildings all over the world and
likely you have been in one.
What are some examples of repurposed buildings you have been in?
Red Brick Center for the Arts, Tate Modern, Third Street in Carbondale, Kennedy
School Portland (Repurposed to theater, hotel, community tub tub), Highline in
New York City, Aspen Armory Building (Current City Hall), Seventh Street
Playhouse Steamboat Springs, Seattle Waterworks, Salida Steamplant
What are your favorites?
Musee d’Orsay in Paris, Kennedy School
Can you pinpoint why?
Combining history and culture with needs of present, great incorporation of
historic elements into new purposes, strong and active community center, diverse
uses, honoring historical building and diverse uses
P58
I.
What is Aspen missing from its public spaces?
Facilities/Buildings
Unprogrammed space that could be used for a variety of purposes
Facility designed for science and related education. This is the future. Kids need
hands-on, teachers can gain resources, it will be a visitor magnet for families and offer
our kids global opportunities
Adequate space for community access TV station
Community incubator space, program space, meeting space
Pot grow house to raise money for city
Senior Center
Youth Hostel
New Climbing gym
Outdoor swimming public pool
Science research center
Entrepreneurial
Recording studio of Ideas Festival etc.
P59
I.
Cultural opportunities
Affordable Black Box Theater for small productions and rehearsal space for all theater
companies in town
Community Performing Arts center
Youth Hostel/meeting an array of people from around the world, affordable lodging for
interesting people, not just millionaires
Mutli-use Black Box, high ceilings at site great for performances, also Wheeler is so
booked that the art film program is gone. Black Box could also be used for films
School District black box also less available as school population grows
Economic Equality Center (meaning a place that shows affordable films, theater, events
because even non-profits in town that offer events are very expensive)
Place for the numerous small performing organizations to have a home YES!
Cultural education opportunities with a diverse coalition of performing arts
organizations
Spontaneous, occasional performances that don’t fit in elsewhere
Gathering spaces
Performance venues
Outdoor science park for exploring motion, energy, sound, light, etc.
Place where kids can play while adults hang out
Performing arts park DITTO
Winter market, crafts, food, etc.
Senior Space
Kids need a place to learn in an active, hands-on way. Science and math and tech and
computer programming- Don’t they teach science and math in our schools? Where
do the schools fit in? A: school’s need outside resource, especially computer
programming
P60
I.
Educational events
Locally oriented gatherings that promote education and are accessible for all are rare,
empty bowls is the best one I can think of that exists
An entity that the Aspen Science Center could create brings all these things together
P61
I.
What is Aspen missing from its public spaces?
Community programs
Aspen Center for Mindfulness/Consciousness – ACMC works with community and
partners both locally and nationally to enhance human potential through the
therapeutic use of mindfulness. ACMC will extend its reach to include training and
education, clinical services and engagement, advocacy, development and outreach,
promoting the benefits of mindfulness both locally and nationally. Picture a building
filled with people, interactive education, a buzz of activity, progressive, cool, cutting
edge, sustainable agriculture, animals, idea exchange, classes, fun, hands-on, tangible,
socratic, joy, love, creativity and diplomacy. Platform/space to discuss, express, create
sustainable/consciousness/wellness with performance, art, science, environment,
economics, law, music, research, experimentation, clinical research, music, parenting,
family, energy, cooking, nutrition, financial literacy, yoga, meditation, computer
science, leadership, entrepreneurship
World class and entrepreneurism learning center for STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Math)
Adaptable space that can grow and evolve as needs and trends change: collaborative
space
Learning center for the sciences
Something like the Third Street Center in Carbondale
Community Incubator for muti-use nonprofit organization
P62
I.
A science center – this community loves science, has intellectual curiosity and a legacy
of science vitality
A large community center for local artists, theater productions, live music and dancing
events and children’s science and art events, it should be multi-purpose
Aspen needs a place where people of all ages can learn all aspects of sciences and create
any type of science-based creation and YES have access ot our long history of scientists
and world-quality learning.
A science center for locals and visitors
Really like the idea of a science center. It would provide community programming and
new resource for science in our community, welcoming the whole valley and beyond
into the word of science
A science center would be a great new perspective from which visitors and locals could
appreciate events and the surrounding natural environment. Tie into events.
Huge need for rehearsal/performance/classroom space for youth performing
arts/educational programs
Community center for cross pollination of non-profits, NGOs, especially with an
education or environmental/ecological center
Children’s museum/science center
Something that brings multi-generations together
Social Needs
Arts are a huge part of our local culture and tourism offerings; Local arts groups,
theater, music, visual, etc. provide community engagement and are a breeding ground
for work that graduates to other levels with funded spaces. A place to rent that’s
affordable, flexible and multi-purpose would serve many needs. Black Box.
Community incubator
Mutli-purpose community center like Woody Creek Community Center with
membership but open to all
Insert the creativity of the arts into STEAM – Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts,
Math
P63
I.
Fun, learning, innovation, community gathering, science center would do all this
Functions
Large AFFORDABLE event space
Youth Hostel
Meeting room and classrooms
Community incubator for non-profit and for-profit collaboration DITTO yes, yes, yes
WALD (forest) kindergarden
Senior Center
Movie night, kids play, poetry readings
Another collaborative space like the Red Brick, art, non-profits, education, gathering
spaces out and in, meeting space
Other
If we want to be true to the Aspen IDEA we need to do more than physics, we need a
science center
P64
I.
Public Value of Site
Low ------------1-------------------------------------------------------25-High
Social Value of Site
Low --------------------------------------------------8-----------------14-High
Single Use Multiple Use
]--------------------------------------6-----------------------------------23---[
Static Space Flexible Space
(Can’t change interior configuration) (Can change interior configuration)
]-------------------------------------3--------------------------------------22-[
Public Use Private Use
]-29-------------------2--------------------------------------------------------[
Targeted to Specific Age Demographic
Low Priority--26---------------------------------------------------High Priority
If you are interested in targeting the use to specific demographic, please specify
Kids Teens Adults Seniors
----6----------------6-----------2------------8--------------------------1----
P65
I.
In terms of costs for renovation/rehabilitation construction if needed, I want
City to pay -----6--------10----------10----------2------- --3--New user to pay
In terms of costs for ongoing operations of building, I want
City to pay ---------3----------------9---------------------14---New user to pay
How important is it to you that the use in the building be related to the need for
auto/parking?
Low Priority--24-----------------------3-----------------------1--High Priority
How important is it to you that the use in the building be related to the need for
walking/public transit?
Low Priority--2-------------------15------------------9-------2----High Priority
How important is it to you that use is compatible with Aspen Area Community
Plan?
Low Priority----3-----------------14--------------------------6----High Priority
I think it is very important to…
Determine use now-15----5-Leave space empty/flexible now and see how it goes
I am interested in a
Use that fits my values--13--------------3--A use that generates revenue for City
P66
I.
I am interested in seeing a use that
fits this category:
Art 17 yes 2 no
Culture 19 yes 2 no
Environment 9 yes 8 no
Health 3 yes 4 no
Education 22 yes 3 no
Non-Profit 20 yes 0 no
Food 3 yes 9 no
Lodging 3 yes(Youth Hostel)13 no
Community Center 14 yes 2 no
Business/Commercial 1 yes 12 no
Housing 0 yes 12 no
Offices 4 yes (non-profit) 11 no
Meeting Space 9 yes 2 no
Mixed 13 yes 0 no
Science Museum 12 yes 18 no
Black Box Rehearsal space 22 yes 1 no
I am interested in seeing the
grounds outside:
Developed more as a park 4 y 1 n
Innovative gathering space 7 y 2n
Having a separate operator -
purpose than indoor use 3 no
Mixed 10 yes 1 no
Other (please fill in)
Fit use of building 2 yes
P67
I.
What uses, if any, are unacceptable in this space?
It would be a disaster if this space…
Replicated an existing entity/organization in town; wasn’t open to the community; retail;
government space; anything to do with government or RFTA; Police station; was dedicated to
one purpose; was a science center; ended up a financial burden to the community
It would be totally awesome if this space…
Was made available for performing artists/theater companies who struggle to find adequate
space to rehearse and perform. A need currently exists in the community for such a venue;
Youth hostel; science center; community access TV station/media center; empowerment; event
space – interior and grounds; performing arts/rehearsal space for all; was left as flexible as
possible; community “hive” – incubator space for collaboration and innovation; it is the perfect
solution for providing space for performing artists - the Wheeler expansion was intended to
provide this but was too costly. There is a dire need for rehearsal space; Multi-use-science
center/education facility and space for other groups that are community oriented
I could live with…
I think if we did this, it would be a defining space for Aspen…
Multi-use, science center would add to total value of Aspen experience for locals and tourists
alike if we decided on a use collaboratively, it would inspire Aspen kids to excel in science
where the future jobs are
P68
I.
What Do You Want to Happen in the Old Power House?
• A healing center, rejuvenation center, community center, inspiration center for
massage, yoga, classes on healthy living, mindfulness classes or groups, any kind of
support groups or therapy, healthy cooking classes, health practices of any sort
• The Old Power House is unique in having a very high ceiling making it suitable for a
“black box” space. Also the Wheeler is now booked so heavily with live events that the
art film program needs another space. So I call this a black box space but really it
needs to be multi-use for all kinds of public events. It could be run by Wheeler in
scheduling and operation
• I have thought for a long time the Power House Building should be returned to the
community for multiple uses. Let the long term use(s) happen organically. Science,
yoga, dances, art, picnics, a COMMUNITY CENTER call all work together. Maybe office
uses upstairs and event and daily use downstairs. Torre
• Event space both interior and exterior. Aspen needs more space to host events. The
galleries are good open spaces to house a good amount of people. The grounds are
amazing for events. (I got married there). Interior could be amended to have kitchen
space for food prep on site or to better partner with caterers. Parking is a challenge but
we could coordinate with public parking garage and walk across Rio Grande or offer
some sort of electric car shuttle service.
• It would be so wonderful to have the space used by the science center. The kids of the
community need it. There is basically no science taught at the elementary school and
kids love science.
• I really want the parking issue(s) to be addressed. NO MORE illegal parking on the
roadway(s). Thank you!! Patty Clapper
• Small theatre groups have no place for rehearsal, sometimes can’t afford district theater
or Wheeler, can’t obtain Black Box because of school use and compete for Red Brick
Studio Space. There are many quantity theater groups in and around Aspen who lack
sufficient space to create and perform
• Adequate space for our community access TV station, non-profit community hub
serving all non-profits and citizens of the RFV, as well as creating a living archive of
Aspen for the last 40+ years
• Aspen Jewish Congregation – We promote interfaith understanding and cooperation
and spiritual guidance for all who seek it. I can envision a scenario where we are the
main tenant but the building’s spaces (social, sanctuary, meeting rooms) are open to the
public for use by other non-profits and community groups in the valley. We could host
interfaith and civic events as well. We are invested in the broadminded project of
making Aspen healthier in body, mind and spirit that is perfectly compatible with our
own mission. We are financially stable with an infrastructure of staff and leadership
and equipped to manage a resource like this
P69
I.
• A science center where families can all enjoy and experience science to promote
Aspen’s legacy for interest in science. It could be a magical place where families bring
their kids, set’s us apart from other ski/hiking resorts
• Above answer in conjunction with a children’s museum that engages “kids” of all ages
and inspires volunteerism for middle/high schoolers and older
• Support the idea of a science center, good for the community and great interactive use
for the building and grounds
• A space that continues to pull in locals and visitors as a way to build community (like
AAM does) but offers something new (science, hike/bike welcome, etc.) that isn’t
offered through another space or organization
• Multi-purpose – diverse organizations, synergy in ideas and programs
• Ski museum
• A science center benefits everyone in the community as well as visitors
• Keep or maintain a historical record (display) of past use, ie. Hydro-electric and mine
history of this historic site – Jim Markalunas
• Multi-purpose, eco-education/community space for sharing ideas, resources, etc.
between non-profits/NGO/etc.
• Black Box/rehearsal space/performing arts space for small productions to be used by
all theater companies in town
• Science museum for families, kids and adults
• River ‘energy’ science center (coordinate with RMI), combination of users/uses: science
center; performing arts, river center, focus on exterior and interior
P70
I.
Mad Libs Worksheet
In twenty years when I am relaxing in Aspen, hanging out at
the river thinking about the input the community
(location in Aspen)
gave about The Old Power House, I will say I’m so glad I said
this was my top priority for the project: environment/eco education (what value project exemplifies)
at the City’s Open House meeting. When guidebooks and
magazines report on Aspen, they will say that using the space as
an eco think tank, multi use sustainability in action project contributed to placemaking
(noun/use)
in Aspen because it added innovation , leadership and (adjective or noun) (adjective or noun)
heart to our city. I will say I am glad the new
(adjective or noun)
user contributed this quality to our community:
innovative environmental stewardship in Action by sustainable building (a biophilic would be
great) filled with exo-non-profits working to solve global and local environmental problems.
Aspen CAN DO THIS!!!
P71
I.
Mad Libs Worksheet
In twenty years when I am relaxing in Aspen, hanging out at
Highlands bowl thinking about the input the community
(location in Aspen)
gave about The Old Power House, I will say I’m so glad I said
this was my top priority for the project: awesomeness! (what value project exemplifies)
at the City’s Open House meeting. When guidebooks and
magazines report on Aspen, they will say that using the space as
Aspen Center for Mindfulness and consciousness contributed to placemaking
(noun/use)
in Aspen because it added vitality , curiosity and (adjective or noun) (adjective or noun)
Progressive thinking to our city. I will say I am glad the new
(adjective or noun)
user contributed this quality to our community: LOVE!
P72
I.
Mad Libs Worksheet
In twenty years when I am relaxing in Aspen, hanging out at
The community hot tub thinking about the input the community
(location in Aspen)
gave about The Old Power House, I will say I’m so glad I said
this was my top priority for the project: diversity/arts/environ/youth/education (what value project exemplifies)
at the City’s Open House meeting. When guidebooks and
magazines report on Aspen, they will say that using the space as
the Community Hive contributed to placemaking
(noun/use)
in Aspen because it added diversity , inter-disciplinary experience and (adjective or noun) (adjective or noun)
connection to our city. I will say I am glad the new
(adjective or noun)
user contributed this quality to our community: Partnership.
P73
I.
Page 1 of 6
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mitzi Rapkin, Community Relations Director
THRU: Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
DATE OF MEMO: April 4, 2014
MEETING DATE: April 8, 2014
RE: Repurposing of Old Power House Building and Public Process
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This is to get clear direction on the next steps of the public process
on future use(s) of Old Power House.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has a top ten goal to determine a use for the Old
Power House by September 1, 2014 that results in the greatest benefit to the community.
Council had a visionary session to discuss values around the project on January 21, 2014.
BACKGROUND: The Aspen Art Museum is set to move into its new facility this summer.
After that the organization has one year to vacate the property according to the lease. Since this
is a City owned facility, it is up to City Council to determine a future use for the property.
Inherent in the top ten goal of identifying a use for the building is the notion that the process will
include heavy public participation and input.
In Attachment A you will find a summary of the visionary meeting we held with Council and
public input from an open house meeting on the topic that was held January 23, 2014. There
have also been 586 visits to the topic on Open City Hall with 90 comments.
DISCUSSION: This discussion will be made up of four parts.
1. Information previously requested by Council
a. Are there other examples of public buildings being repurposed for public use?
b. Facilities Master Plan Information as it relates to Old Power House
2. Results and themes from last meetings with council and public
3. OPH Use scenarios and process for moving forward
4. Threshold question and next steps
P74
I.
Page 2 of 6
Information previously requested by Council
While community development staff found no similar examples of public buildings being reused
for public uses similar to what we are exploring here, they did find examples of public buildings
staying in the public realm in their new capacities. Examples: Attachment B.
The Facilities Master Plan team is currently working on site and facility assessments for the Old
Power House as well as 13 other city-owned facilities. The site assessment will address access,
zoning, and physical constraints. The facility assessment will address the current condition of the
exterior envelope, interior envelope, and mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems. This
information for the Old Power House will be available in draft form by the end of April.
Staff’s initial assessment of this facility is that the building needs the following repairs, at a
minimum:
• Replace corrugated metal roof, underlayment, sheathing, insulation.
• Upgrade structural weight bearing capacity of roof structure.
• Upgrade insulation and water intrusion systems in entire exterior envelope.
• Improve or replace all exterior windows and doors.
• Replace all mechanical systems including: boilers, air handlers, a/c equipment, and
ventilation systems.
• Replace all plumbing systems.
• Replace all electrical systems, and upgrade the service equipment.
• Drywall interior of building where appropriate. Expose interior brick where possible.
• Paint exterior of building.
Our preliminary assessment of the cost of these repairs is $900,000 to $1,200,000. This work
would bring the shell of the building up to current standards, but would not include any interior
finishes or partitions. This work cannot be estimated until the use of the building is determined
and preliminary architectural design is completed. We strongly urge, regardless of use, the
addition of a commercial kitchen. There are a variety of uses and needs it could fulfill, from
special events to kitchen rentals and more. Depending on the size and level of finishes, the cost
of a commercial kitchen would be $300,000 to $600,000.
A question for council to consider is whether to delay the conversion of the building to its
ultimate use, and use it on an interim basis to meet some of the city’s operational needs while
other facilities are being renovated or built. Possible temporary uses could include: police
facilities, office space, or meeting space. With the police vacating the current location within four
years, and the possible need to find a new location for the Building and Engineering Departments
sooner than expected, the need for a large amount of interim space is imminent.
P75
I.
Page 3 of 6
Results and themes from last meetings with Council and public
The visioning session with Council in January was meant to explore values and goals around the
future use of the building, not to hone in on any specific use(s).
Based on the responses Council gave during the visioning session as well as input from the
public, we need to push the discussion deeper to determine a greater sense of what, more
specifically, you would like to see in this space.
Major themes that emerged from the exercise with Council and the public, of which there is little
dispute, include total agreement among all parties that:
• The site has a high public and social value
• The property should be used for a public use
• The interior should be a flexible space so that it can easily change to fit various needs (i.e.
theater space, dinner party, lecture, exhibit, etc.)
• The use at the building should NOT require a high need for parking or cars
• It is more important that the use fits our values as opposed to being an economic
generator for the City
While no differences are very dramatic, the areas where Council and the public differed include:
• There was slightly more interest on the part of Council to target the use to a specific age
demographic where the public unanimously said targeting an age bracket is a low priority
• The Council was more concerned that people walk/bike/use public transit to access the
site than the public
• The Council was generally in the middle about City v. new user paying for ongoing
operations of the building and the public had a greater spread of interest with the highest
number wanting the new user to pay but also a significant number of individuals who
were in the middle and some who felt the City should pay
• Public is very interested in determining a use for the building now as opposed to waiting
whereas Council was split on this
• Members of the public indicated it was less of a priority that the new use is compatible
with AACP than Council indicated
The area with the most conflict, both with Council and the public is:
• Single versus multiple uses for the building and property
This is a significant issue that needs more exploring during the work session. On one hand the
unanimous desire from the public and Council to have a flexible interior space might indicate a
multi-purpose use, the message is mixed given the numbers, particularly from Council. While
the sample of people who showed up for the open house is not a scientific representation of the
views of the public, that meeting and Open City Hall are all we have. Of the people who voted at
the open house, 23 wanted multiple use and 6 were in the middle between multiple and single
use. Council (strangely has seven votes, so more than one vote per person) indicated that 5 are in
the middle of single and multiple use and two prefer multiple use. The message is further mixed
due to the fact three or more Council members expressed interest in a use that fit these
P76
I.
Page 4 of 6
categories: art, culture, environment, education, community center, meeting space, mixed.
Regarding the public, there was high interest in art, culture, education, non-profit, community
center, mixed and black box rehearsal space. Significantly with the public there were 18 no
votes for a science center and 12 yes votes.
When we walked away from the Council visioning session there was a high level of enthusiasm
for a “memory maker” with a “wow” factor. There was also a high level of enthusiasm for
STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Math). What does this mean more specifically
given the information we have now? This is something we need to dig deeper into.
Process for moving forward
In an effort to be as open as possible and guide the discussion, it is helpful to investigate a few
scenarios in which the decision can proceed. By no means is this exhaustive of how creative
thought could be applied to this issue; however, three potential forms the future use could take
include:
1. Single use by an outside entity
2. Multiple use by outside entity or entities
3. True community center run by non-profit or City; Community center that is shared with
one or multiple operators
Let’s look deeper at these possibilities.
Single use by an outside entity
This would most likely be determined by a request for proposal process and one user would be
selected and have exclusive use of the building and grounds. So far, parties with a single use
interest have emerged.
Pros
Strong sense of ownership
Simplicity
Requires least City funding
Cons
Putting all eggs in one basket
Flexibility of space for other uses
Significant times of “dark” period where it sits
unused
Multiple uses by outside entity or entities
This might be the result of an RFP process where groups are asked to apply together or apply for
a portion of the building or a portion of the year or even a portion of the day. How groups split
up the space could come from a proposal they provide or from the RFP the City issues or perhaps
in the decision making process on the RFPs submitted. Another idea that could fit either here or
in the true community center category below would be to “time-share” the space where the City
owns it and can put out RFPs for individual months or segments of the year or spaces within the
building. So far some non-profits and entities have discussed working together to share the
space.
P77
I.
Page 5 of 6
Pros
Still can have anchor tenant(s)
Fewer dark nights
May appeal to more diverse audience
Cons
Complexity
Questions as to control and oversight
May require City funding
True community center run by non-profit or City
The City either puts out an RFP for a non-profit to run a full-fledged community center or the
City runs it. (The City can apply through RFP process). If the City runs the community center, it
would entail a director and funds for special programming. As an asset the City already has The
Wheeler which has expertise in facility management, including capital improvements, regular
and special maintenance, complex calendar scheduling and event coordination, and could play a
role in the community center operations. In the interest of serving many desires the public has
expressed, the community center could cater to all those who have an interest by also “time-
sharing” the space whether that is a month dedicated to science twice a year, mind-body-spirit
programming every week, dedicated nights for theatre, etc. Please see Attachment C for further
explanation of what a community center might look like. This option may help all the
disenfranchised citizens who aren’t part of a non-profit or group but still passionately want to see
some type of multi-use, community center emerge. Whereas non-profits and entities with money
and organization can more easily fill out an RFP, the individuals in the community who may all
want a shared space cannot and this option may be a way to support their needs in the RFP
process.
Pros
Will appeal to most diverse audience
Consistent programming, little down time
Easily convertible for events
Can try a variety of things and see which stick
Cons
Complexity
Will require City funding, capital and
operational
Threshold question and next steps
• Dig deeper into Council’s thoughts on multi-use
• Explore what memory maker and wow factor mean
• Is there one of the three scenarios you prefer to proceed with? A combination of them or
something different?
• Financial viability?
• How do we optimize asset and for whom?
• How much desire for Council to pay to change the space?
• If you are interested in community center, do you want City to draft an RFP response to
represent this option?
• The public has expressed a desire to have time in front of Council to present their ideas.
Should we move forward with scheduling a public input work session?
P78
I.
Page 6 of 6
• Are you in agreement with using an RFP approach to receive proposals for building
use/management?
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: If the City Council decides to fund the repairs to the
building shell described above, the estimated cost is $900,000 to $1,200,000. A commercial
kitchen would cost an additional $300,000 to $600,000. If City Council is interested in pursuing
an idea where the City runs or co-operates a community center, we can research specific numbers
for operations, staff and programming.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council offers direction on how staff should proceed with
decision making. We recommend a work session solely for public input so those who are
interested can present their ideas and thoughts to Council and fellow citizens.
ALTERNATIVES: Council directs staff in some other manner.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Summary of Council and Public Comments from visioning session
B – Examples of public building reuse for public purposes
C – Examples of community center and mock schedule
P79
I.
Attachment A is the same thing as the first document that says Council Comments and Public Comments
P80
I.
Attachment B
P8
1
I.
Bryant Arts Center - Granville, OH
former Cleveland Hall gymnasium at Denison University
Lower Manhattan Cultural Council Arts Center - New York, NY
former munition storage and military offices
1
P8
2
I.
Jefferson Market Library - New York, NY
former Jefferson Market Courthouse
City Hall Annex - Cambridge, MA
former Harvard Grammar School
2
P8
3
I.
Children’s Museum of Phoenix - Phoenix, AZ
former Monroe School
Des Moines County Heritage Center - Des Moines, IA
former Burlington Public Library
3
P8
4
I.
Greater Cleveland Aquarium - Cleveland, OH
former Cleveland FirstEnergy Powerhouse
Red Brick Center for the Arts - Aspen, CO
former Red Brick School
4
P8
5
I.
Attachment C
Community Center Mock Calendar and Ideas
As a pure community center, along with programming as seen below, there are other things the
center could offer.
Center could use office space on second floor to host visiting writers, artists, scientists,
engineers, designers, etc. who can work in the OPH for a month and also give public lectures.
Community center could program visitors for a year out and have a group of rotating visitors
that would add vitality to the center’s offerings.
Room rentals could be a large part of a community center so outside groups can have board
meetings or get other business done in the space.
Rental for events such as benefits, weddings, parties, etc.
Use part of the office space for a sort of HIVE space where seamstresses, craftspeople,
filmmakers etc. work during the day to collaborate on different projects.
Based on feedback on Open City Hall and the open house, there is significant interest in seeing the
Old Power House function as a community center. There could be opportunities given the desire and
willingness of many organizations to share the space to create a project that meets a majority of the
ideas, needs and hopes that have been expressed.
These are some basic ideas for how to create a center for all.
Add stipulation in RFP for a certain amount of days for community center with diversity in
programming as mandatory and have board oversight on what constitutes community
activities
City runs community center but “time shares” the space if others want it for more than two
days in a row. Organizations and groups fill out applications for segments of time they want
to use the space
City runs community center but divides up the physical space into pieces that different people
can use at the same time
City runs community center but divides up the hours of the day for others to bid on for their
uses
Partnership between City and a conglomerate of organizations that bid together to create a
multi-purpose community center that also highlights bidding organizations’ needs and desires
Below you will see two different mock-ups of what a community center might look like. One is
programming the space as an exclusive community center. The second is a hybrid scenario. These
are by no means exhaustive representations of what a community center might look like but meant to
offer some examples and get your imaginations going.
P86
I.
Sample Month – Pure Community Center
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
New Year’s AA meeting Meditation Tai Chi Room Rental AA Meeting Coffee and
Day Potluck Room Rental Kids Dance Tech help Canning AED Training Conversation
First Aid Lunch Lecture Kids Music Genealogy Stocks 101 Kids
Homework
Help
Science Hour Youth
Leadership
Free Yoga Watercolor Free Pop Up
Shop
Scavenger
Hunt
Poetry Night Barter Hour Cooking Class Film
Appreciation
Community
Lecture
Energy
Efficiency Tips
Family Dance
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
AA Meeting Meditation Tai Chi Room Rental AA Meeting
Bridge Club Room Rental Writing Group Acoustic AM Room Rental
Kids Matinee Play Dough
Hour
Card games Free Yoga Kids Comedy Random
Kindness Group
Scrabble
Tournament
Homework
Help
Pechakucha Teen ping
pong
Public Service
Club
Ropes and
Pulley Class
Kids Math
Explosion
Health
Lecture
Music Concert Salon Night Storytelling
Night
Community
Class
Travel Club Teen Dance
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
AA Meeting Meditation Tai Chi Room Rental AA Meeting
Engineering
with Legos
Public
Speaking
Room Rental River Walk Used Book
Exchange
Altitude
Gardening
Flea Market
Day
Mind Body Photo
Competition
Free Yoga 48 hour film Knitting Club 48 hour film
Homework
Help
Songwriters
and Stories
Kids Cooking Visiting
Resident Talk
Mah Jongg Aspen Chess
Tournament
Parents Night
Out
Bronco Night Stand-up
Comedy
Pop-up
Gourmet
Community
Class
Swing Dance Motown Night
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Gospel
breakfast
AA Meeting Meditation Tai Chi Room Rental AA Meeting
Reuse Craft Toy Trade Tech Tips CPR Class Floral Design Event Rental
Dog
Obedience
Room Rental Writing for
Kids
Free Yoga Sewing Class Senior/kid
activity
Homework
Help
Healthy
Cooking Class
Finance Talk Room Rental Author
reading
Singles
Dinner
Teen Bingo Improv Class Family Picnic Bingo Bar
Night
Community
Class
Open Mic
Night
29 30 31
Bagels and
Blues
Craft Class Meditation
Cookie
Bake-off
Entrepreneur
lecture
Nutrition
Lecture
Homework
Help
Documentary
Night
Badminton
Tournament
Bocce
Tournament
Visiting
Lecturer
International
Night
Drum Circle
P87
I.
Sample Three Months – Community Center with Major Partnerships
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Community Community Community
Events Events Events Prep for
Exhibit
Prep for
Exhibit
Prep for
Exhibit
Prep for
Exhibit
Room Rental Room Rental Room Rental
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Science Science Science Science Science Science Science
Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit
Night Events Night Events Community
Night
Night Events Community
Night
Night Events Community
Night
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Science Science Science Science Science Science Science
Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit
Night Events Night Events Community
Night
Night Events Community
Night
Night Events Community
Night
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Science Science Science Science Science Science Science
Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit
Night Events Night Events Community
Night
Night Events Night Events Community
Night
Night Events
29 30 31
Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit
Break Break Break
Down Down Down
P88
I.
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Community Community Community Community Community Community Community
Center Center Center Center Center Center Center
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Mind Body Mind Body Mind Body Mind Body Mind Body Mind Body Mind Body
Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater Theater
29 30 31
Community Community
Theater Center Center
P89
I.
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Community Community Community Community Community Community Community
Center Center Center Center Center Center Center
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Event
Rental
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
Local Art
Show
29 30 31
Community Community Community
Center Center Center
P90
I.
WORK SESSION SUMMARY
TO: Mayor Skadron and Aspen City Council
FROM: Mitzi Rapkin, Community Relations Director
MEETING DATE: April 8, 2014
PRESENTED BY: Mitzi Rapkin, Community Relations Director
TOPIC: Next Steps in Public Process for Old Power House
COUNCIL PRESENT: Skadron, Frisch, Daily, Mullins, Romero
DATE: April 11, 2014
______________________________________________________________________________
TOPIC SUMMARY:
The discussion was about the next steps in the public process for the future use of the Old Power
House. City staff met with Council on April 8, 2014 to discuss options for moving forward and
crafting an RFP for the future use of the Old Power House. In addition staff wanted to clarify
statements from the first visioning session with Council regarding the property.
General questions staff sought answers to include:
• Dig deeper into Council’s thoughts on multi-use
• Explore what memory maker and wow factor mean
• Is there one of the three scenarios you prefer to proceed with? A combination of them or
something different?
• Financial viability?
• How do we optimize asset and for whom?
• How much desire for Council to pay to change the space?
• If you are interested in community center, do you want City to draft an RFP response to
represent this option?
• The public has expressed a desire to have time in front of Council to present their ideas.
Should we move forward with scheduling a public input work session?
• Are you in agreement with using an RFP approach to receive proposals for building
use/management?
CONCLUSIONS:
The Council is open to a single or multiple use scenario for the property, members just want to see
what proposals come in. Council will pay for basic and needed upgrades to the building. Council
will hold a work session where the public can pitch their ideas. The Council wants staff to work on
crafting an RFP. Council does not want the City to pursue the RFP as an applicant.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS:
Staff confirmed that the building will need approximately up to $1.2 million in repairs to bring the
building up to an acceptable level and fix ongoing problems. Council said they are open to funding
for these improvements/repairs but it may depend on user. In addition, Council members said they
are open to the concept of funding the installation of a community kitchen depending on future use
P91
I.
of the space. Council was not keen on funding the ongoing operations of whatever use goes into the
building but is not completely closing the door on this notion.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION SUMMARY:
Staff presented several scenarios for mixed use and single use and Council was open to either
single or multiple use and wanted to leave options open for the RFP process to answer that
question. In addition, Council asked that the City not pursue answering the RFP with a proposal
for a community center.
Regarding temporary use of the facility for City offices before converting it to its final use, the
Council was mixed, although generally not in favor of the concept. The results of the Facilities
Master Plan will aid in this decision making process.
In defining a “Wow Factor” and “Memory Maker” Council said the use of this building should be:
Dwayne Romero - a compelling reason for people to visit Aspen, a platform for today’s youth, a
place for thought leadership, an impetus to bring us to a higher community conversation
Ann Mullins - the whole package of beauty, architecture and history, iconic
Adam Frisch - New entity not something existing, something hard to replicate in other areas of
Aspen, something that belongs in this particular space on the river
Art Daily - Imaginative, multi-faceted, something where people walk out and say, “look what
Aspen is doing”
Steve Skadron- Something to grow over time, a promise not a product, defy convention.
Council generally agreed they do not want to pay for operations of this future use. They want to see
a self-sufficient organization(s).
Council agreed to hold a work session with public comment so anyone with an idea can come and
pitch it to Council in a three to five minute time period. That date is TBD, but most likely will be in
mid-June.
DIRECTION:
Council instructed staff to start to craft an RFP that includes requirements that correspond with
Council’s desires for a “Wow Factor” and “Memory Maker” as well as being open to mixed or
single use. In addition, the RFP will correspond to other preferences Council has expressed in
earlier visionary meeting.
Work session for public comment coming in June.
P92
I.