Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcclc.ag.04201994 COMMERCIAL CORE & LODGING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING April 20, 1994 SISTER CITY MEETING ROOM 8:30 I. Roll Call II. Public Comments Commissioner Comments 9:00 III. Art Sculpture Discussion of Parks concerns 9:30 IV. Mall Performances/pamphlet Barbara Umbreit 10:30 VI. Adjourn PENDIN~ ISSUES Sound control-service vehicles alleys trash removal delivery trucks Special Event performers on mall guidelines - pamphlet to coincide with SEP April 1, 1993 - Newsrack meeting placement discussion Street signs Amplified music on the mall Mall - performers on mall (permit) etc. (sign up sheet) (rotating areas, prohibiting) (reserved MAA space) Street lights - energy efficient Mall lighting carriages-vending agreement Business Licenses Notices-January newpaper ad, pick up trash; street/sidewalk cleaning; Help PM10 standards; snow ice removal; plastic bag trash PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS Delivery Trucks on mall - none completed 1993 Swamp cooler Main Street Music Newsracks 5 streetlights on Durant Inter-relationship of Engineering, CCLC, Planning and HPC. worksession scheduled, slide shows and CCLC reviewing encroachments, planter designs. Phone pedastal at Elli's Bolt in front of Collins Block Special Event Guidelines Bylaws YEARLY ISSUES Snow removal - (ad in paper) Mall lease notice-Kathy (March) send out contact adjacent property owners Art display - budget issue 03/16/1994 12:16 3039201824 SUZANNE FARVER PAGE 02 PLAN FOR CCLC PUBLIC ART PROGRAM MISSION: The CCLC Public Art Program has been initiated with the purp,o,~e of c. ommissloning site specific art projects in the commercial core of the City of Aspen. The ~ projects will be temporary and rotating, with the possibility of evolving to more permanent mst'/llations with larger budgets. The goal is to bring vitality to the commercial core by incorporating creative and sometimes surprising works of a~. PROGRAM GOALS: 1. To involve artists in the selection of sites for projects; 2. To support outstanding mists of the Roaring Fork Valley and Colorado by providing public · exposure to their work, but not to exclude artists of national reputl~tion; 3. To commission artists to create works which are responsive to the Aspen area and its unique characteristics; 4. To inform and educate Aspcn residents and visitors about the An Program, and to provide opportunities for A~pcn residents to identify with the art works; and $. To respect the public nature of the An Program by assuring that its administration is open, fair and professional. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS: Public information and education activities are considered primary elements of the Program. ~onies.~h~fl-bebudg,~ T0-providc ii,~ programs w,t,~c.~h-devatepublic,~varcnes~f One of the primary objectives will be to provide enhanced exposure to the artists of the region involved in the Program. Activities may include conferences, symposia, tours and cooperative programs with educational and arts institutions. STEERING COMMFI'I'EE: A. The initial Steering Committe~ shall be: Frances Chaves, Co--Chair Suzanne Farver, Co-Chair $ohn Busch loann¢ Lyon fay Magidson lulla Marshall Laura Theme Ex Officio: City Council Representative and Amy Margerum 1 83/1S/1994 12:iS 3839281824 SUZANNE FARVER PAGE 83 Each member shall serve a rene~gble two-year term. Replacements or additions to this committee shall be nominated by the existing Steering Committee, with the approval of the CCLC Committe& All actions of the Steering Committee are subject to the approval of the CCLC Committee. B. Purpose: The Steering Committee will provide an overview and long-term planning vision for balancing diverse points of view and for facilitating the implementation of this Program. C. Responsibilities: I. Ensure adherence to the goals oft}tis Plan and to provide the highest standard of aesthetics and continuity to the CCLC Public Art Program; 2. Appoint the ad-hoc Review Committees; 3. Provide guidane~ to the Review Committees and CCLC Program staff, 4. EValuate Review Committee recommendations for artist sdections and to commission proposals and submit to the CCLC~and 5. Constitute itself as a Review Committee where appropriate and expedient. 6. Create and distribute basic guidelines for materials and security. D. Composition: The makeup of the Steering committee shall be at least 5 and not mote than 7 people, with the majority of its members being visual arts professionals, and with at least one community representative, One person may satisfy more than one category. For the purpose of this Plan, arts professionals shall be defined as visual arts professionals including visual artists, critics, curators, arts administrators, collectors and educators who are recognized by their peers as expert in contemporary art and experienced in recent public art. Arts professionals shall not include gallery owners or for-profit intermediaries. All membe?s of the Steering Committee and Review Committees shall serve without compensation. E.xC~n~tants: . Co?~s~tant"g'mayJ~.~l'ed-upamfxom-time~to time to provide additional expertise to the Steering Comn~tee. ~ ~ SELECTION OF SITES FOR ART INSTALLATION: The Steering Committee shall appoint one or more artists to recommend several sites for projects. Such sites shall be approved by the Steering Committee, the CCLC and the City before they will be available for proposals. Sites for installation shall be rather broad and flexible, allowing the selected artist to analyze and select the most appropriate approach in a particular area, rather than 2 03/16/i994 12:16 3039201824 SUZANNE FARVER PAGE 04 forcing a~ into a predetermined space. Artists who are selected for any o£tbe sites shall work with the appropriate City agefley, allowing artists to develop proposals and concepts which are technically feasible and have acceptable maintenance requirement, as well as work well within the spaces and systems of the City and without conflicting with the function ora particular area. CHANGI~NG SITE-SPECIFIC PRO,IECTS: .llud~g~.~ ~-.rgt ~,-o ' . _ ,;~art works will be temporary and will be rotated every year or two years, depending upon the budget of the program and the condition of the works, The Steering Committee sl/all have the discretion for selecting art works for rotation, and their recommendation shall be submitted to the CCLC committee for final approval. Changing site- specfl% projects will provide vitality, variety and continuing opportunities for artists. The program is intended as an ongoing creative exploration of the City's environment by artists, and it is expected that fi.om time to time permanent commissions will be developed fi.om the most successful projects. Commissions for more permanent installations will be considered after two years, depending upon the success of the projects of limited duration. All projects shall be reviewed based upon their compatibility with its surrounding area and function. REVIIgW COMMrFrEES: A. Review Committees: As individual projects are identified, the Steering Committee will appoim ad-hoc Review Committees to evaluate artists' work and propo~ls for each such project. B, Composition: Each Review Committee shall consist of four people: three visual arts professionals and one community representative. Appointmem of Review Committees shall be by the Steering Committee. C. Rationale: The ad-hoc Review Committees wi!l provide diversity and a continuous fresh perspective by allowing many individuals to be involved in the recommendation process. ART WORK SELECTION: A. Orientation: Review Committee orientation shall include: review of the CCLC Art Plan goals and processes, artist selections to date and focus of the particular project within the overall Program, tour of the proposed site, review ofthe project timetable, proposed budget and artist selection process. B. Selection Process: 1. All commissions shall be awarded through an open competition. 2. The first tier of artlsts shall be selected through the review of slides of the existing mists' work. Proposals for the site will not be requested or considered at this time. A m~anum of three artists will be invited to submit proposals for specific commissions. 83/16/1994 12:16 3839281824 SUZANNE FARVER PAGE 85 3. Review of specific proposals: The Review Committee shall evaluate the proposal subm/ssions and shall recommend up to three artists or teams for each project and shall subra/t their reco~tmendafion in order ofpreferance to the Steering Committee. Such evaluation shall include a review of technical feasibility and maintenance acceptability, The Steering Committee shall then evaluate the recommended proposals and shall select its reconunandation to the CCLC Committee for approval. CONFIDENTIALITY: All meetings at which artists materials are reviewed and opinions ventured about their merits in relation to the project at hand shall be dosed to the public and media to permit frank evaluation and discussion, A written report shall document the committee discussions and recommendations. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: 6~ ~,~9 ~' Artists servi~ a.s Steqring Committee membe~ may not be selected for direct involvemen~in-a~ =t ~ -- -l~am~:'--An-ar6st~er'~ingcona-l~,eview~-ommittee-may-~aot-be-seJe~t~d~' CONTRACTS: Individual contracts between the selected artists and the CCLC shall be executed before any work on the site is conducted. INSURANCE: Insurance for liability as well as the~ and damage shall be provided by the city.. Routine maintenance shall be provided by the City. Ii'substantial repair is required for an object, the Steering Committee shall recommend a solution to the CCLC. The CCLC shall be responsive for documentation of each work, and with communication of such documentation to the City, FUNDING AND BUDGET: The initial Budget for 1994 is $5,000. These funds shall be used as f~: $500 Administration and adv. ertising $4,500 Fee for three artists, $1,500 each Additional funding shall be sought from individuals and corporate sponsors. The Steering Committee shall be responsible for recommending each year's budget, based upon the funding available, and subject to the approval of the CCLC. 03/1G/1994 12:16 3039201024 SUZANNE FARVER PAGE 86 GI~ ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURES: Proposed gifts of art works or of funds for the acqui~of art sh~the Steering Committee for review and recomn~, en.dation to the Co~sslon on Cultural Affak~eview shall be based on the same goals and cntena as for works aequir~-~a-ceordhag~thi~%ola~ Approved by: ~ Steering Committee City ofAspen 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Conmaercial Core and Lodging Commission CC: Kathy Stricldand, Chief Deputy Clerk THRU: George Robinson, Parks Director FROM: Rebecca Baker, Parks Department DATE:' March 28, 1994 RE: Plan for CCLC Public Art Program We haxie reviewed the proposal for the display of public art on the mall as submitted by Frances Chavis and Suzanne Farver. The program proposal appears to have been well thought out and covers most details to get a program of this nature started. However, we do have a few concerns regarding site selection and maintenance for sculptures or other pieces of an. The program goals state as the first goal "to involve artists in the selection of sites for projects". While it is important for the artist to be involved in the selection of sites to display their work, the goal should be expanded upon to involve the steering committee and staff in the goal statement as well. The section describing the process for Selection of Sites for Art Installation should include involvement of city staff during initial site selection. The importance of this initial involvement is to assist artists in selecting the best site for their work. Staff can foresee problem areas with regards to flow of traffic(both emergency vehicles and pedestrians); location of art pieces conflicting with irrigation lines or sprinkler heads; areas where sculptures may be more prone to damage; snow removal routes and storage areas, etc. While it may not be agreeable to "force" art into predetermined spaces, suitable areas may .be more limited than anticipated and it may simplify the selection process for the artist if staff is involved up front. The other consideration is if art will be displayed year round or summer only. If the piece is to be displayed year round, the number of selection sites may decrease due to the complication Of snow removal and snow storage in the winter, whereas if displayed summer only more spaces may be available. Another concern with regards to the proposal is the section regarding Insurance. It may be standard for the sponsoring party to provide liability coverage for theft and damage. However, cost of these pieces should possibly be included in the selection process. For example, the City may not want to take.responsibility of a quarter million dollar piece of art when another piece is acceptable for less liability. Some maximum standard should be established for cost of replacement or damage to art. An additional consideration for insurance purposes is liability coverage with regards to personal damage to persons or property. Again, this should be detailed in the program proposal. CIRSA, the City's insurance carrier, should review the program proposal before proceeding with proposal submissions. The final Concern involves the section of Care and Maintenance. The proposal states "routine maintenance shall be provided by the City". This is a fairly ambiguous statement and needs to be more clearly defined. Public art should require minimal maintenance-and be suitable to withstand the elements of weather and climate. If an additional service level is required of staff with associated costs and labor this needs to be estimated and stated in the proposal. GE tndustria/ & Power Systems March 15 1994 Mr. Jack Garner /~v~ C_~ Area Manager United States Bureau of Reclamation c/o Eastern Colorado Area Office 11056 W County Rd. 18E Loveland, CO 80537 Subject: -~_ Ruedi Hydropower Plant ~- / Annual Maintenance Outage /~ April 18 thru April 28, 1994 Dear Mr. Garner This year we are planning the subject two week outage at the power plant. During the week of April 18 thru APril 28, we plan to inspect the penstock and request that the main outlet works be dewatered during this time. The water release can be returned to the main outlet works after April 30. Please advise if the outage schedule is acceptable and weather the main outlet works can be dewatered during this time. I can be reached at 303/753-2259 Sincerely Ronald K. Miller Field ~epresentative Industry Service Engineering CC.¸ Bob Bellamy- USBR Tim Beck High country Hydro Bill Early Aspen Bob Gish Aspen L.E. Brown G.E. ~ o ~ E'~ ~ ~ ~o°- E - rd') (D 0 ¢--~ 0 q-- U)~ 0 L ~ ~ ~-~ ~ E o~ o 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 L ~oo ~ ~B ~ ~ o~ ALLEY ENHANCEMENT STUDY REPORT Aspen Historic Preservation Program March 1994 The original Townsite of Aspen and several additions made to the City were laid out in a grid pattern, with alleys running east-west through each block. In the Commercial Core, these alleys are very important for service and delivery functions. In the residential neighborhoods, the alleys are used to access parking to the rear of each lot. The Aspen Historic Preservation COmmittee believes that alleys are important to the historic character of Aspen and finds that there is potential to improve the appearance and efficiency of the alleys, and to increase their overall liveliness and use by pedestrians. The following is an analysis of current conditions in commercial Core and residential alleys and recommendations for improvement. The study was prepared with input frOm the Aspen I-Iistoric Preservation Committee, I-Iistoric Preservation Officer and City Public Works Department. COMMERCIAL CORE ALLEYS Alleys in the Commercial Core are 20 feet wide. Currently, there are significant problems with objects which encroach into the alley and create circulation problems. Examples of existing encroachments are dumpsters, sheds, stairways, building overhangs, telephone pedestals and other utility boxes. There are no building setbacks in the Commercial Core. The Commercial Core alleys are paved, and there are drainage problems caused by a combination of poor gutter systems and a lack of direct sunlight into the alleys. Standing water, icicles and snow slides are common. A number of objects obstruct the alleys and do not allow a full twenty feet of clear space for service vehicle traffic. Many a//eys l~ave become very unattractive and unpleasant places to move through. They are treated, a..s.a back door area or as a good place to throw empty beer cans, although they are a very vlslt~le part of downtown AsPen. Many businesses are not attempting to limit their waste by recycling. For those that are, a much more efficient way of storing and colleCting recyclables must be developed. Although not clear in the photo, a sign on this building reads "NO PARKING- All unauthorized vehicles will be toWed." These types of rules are apparently not being enforced. New building designs often overlook special concerns related to alley traffic movement. The full story set of windows in the foreground of the photo could quite possibly be hit by large vehicles trying to negotiate through the alleys. It is apparently not uncommon for other encroaching objects to be hit by vehicles as well. In rare cases, alleys have b~en closed offand development haS been permitted to cross the alley right of way. In general, this should be discouraged. This illustrates the heavy use that Commercial Core alleys get each day. Note the private vehicles which are parked in the alley and increase the congestion. RESIDENTIAL ALLEYS In residential neighborhoods, building setbacks help to limit encroachments, but fences, bushes, trees, dumpsters and utility boxes occasionally cause problems. Some historic outbuildings encroach into the alleys, but I-IPC does not encourage relocating these structures. It is the City's policy to recommend that parking for residential lots be located to the rear of the parcel and be accessed from the alley. The residential alleys are unpaved and should continue to be so. There are some problems with pm-10 pollution from unpaved roads, but paving them would cause drainage problems. Additionally, the unpaved alleys are important to the character of Aspen's residential neighborhoods. In 1990, the City of Aspen created the "Cottage Infill Program," which encourages property owners to construct new outbuildings or convert existing outbuildings into living units (especially for employee housing). This helps to relieve Aspen,s housing problems and creates liveliness along the alleys. This dumpster has been placed outside of the property line and may obstruct the alley. Most of the residential alleys maintain a 20 foot wide clearance and function well. These historic outbuildings have been converted into architectural studios. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALLEY ENHANCEMENTS COMMERCIAL CORE ALLEYS 1. Enforce encroachment violations. 2. Enforce parking violations. 3. In new buildings, encourage construction of an alcove at grade level where trash and utilities can be placed. 4. Encourage businesses to recycle in order to lower the amount of waste they create. Establish an efficient storage and collection system. 5. Consider establishing a central waste disposal area for each block, including a trash compactor. 6. Support the formation of "Alley Enhancement Districts," wherein business owners could fund clean-up and visual improvements to the alley on their block. 7. Work with business owners and delivery people to improve the delivery system. 8. Consider potential for art along the alleys, such as trompe l'o~il paintings. (Note some historic "billboards" still exist on Commercial buildings.) 9. Consider the future potential for developing small shops with entrances on the alley. 10. The Historic Preservation Committee and the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission should work together to carry out these recommendations and to consider additional solutions2 RESIDENTIAL ALLEYS 1. Enforce encroachment violations. 2. Enforce parking violations. 3. Continue to encourage property owners to access parking off of the alleys. 4. Continue to support the goals of the "Cottage Infill Program." 5. As there are no sidewalks in some residential neighborhoods, include alleys in pedestrian plans. 6. The Historic Preservation Committee and Neighborhood AdvisorY Committee should work together to carry out these recommendations and to consider additiOnal solutions.