Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.046-92 ,Iii :)1'.. {t \'; "\; '...,,'.._... I~ ~ ., 6\11' {;Z,. :* .. RESOLUTION NO. 'I to Series of 1992 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO A WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT DATED JULY 9, 1990, BETWEEN LESLIE WEXNER AND THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO EXECUTE SAID ADENDUM ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an addendum to a Water Service Agreement dated July 9, 1990, between Leslie Wexner and the City of Aspen, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that addendum to a Water Service Agreement dated July 9, 1990, between Leslie Wexner and the City of Aspen, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the Mayor of the City of Aspen to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the B- day of ~ 1992. 2::;. ~~";;,~ I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. ~J~ Kat n S. Koch, CIty Clerk addendum.res (. ''<:",. tit (- ill' ADDENDUM TO WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT bATED JULY 9. 1990 THIS ADDENDUM modifies and amends that certain Water Service Agreement dated July 9, 1990, by and between the parties hereto, the City of Aspen, Colorado, a Colorado municipal corporation and home rule city (hereinafter "City") and Leslie Wexner (hereinafter "Wexner") ; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties previously entered into a city Water Service Agreement dated July 9, 1990 (hereinafter "original Agreement") which included an easement for a tank site and pipeline on the Wexner property attached as Exhibit "B" to the original Agreement (hereinafter "Original Tank site and Pipeline Easement") ; and WHEREAS, Wexner executed an easement in favor of the City for limited purposes encompassing the original Tank site and Pipeline Easement concurrently with the execution of the original Agreement (hereinafter "Grant of Easement"); and WHEREAS, the City has constructed improvements and disturbed areas upon the Wexner property outside of the original Tank site and Pipeline Easement; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the original Agreement Wexner was to revegetate the area disturbed; a greater area has now been disturbed and requires revegetation as a result of the City having exceeded and acted outside of its Original Tank site and Pipeline Easement; and WHEREAS, Wexner is desirous of obtaining three phase power for installation of a raw water sprinkler system and other improvements upon the Wexner property; and WHEREAS, the parties believe that conditions warrant revising the original Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Addendum. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein and for good and val~able consider- ation, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the terms of this Addendum as follows: 1. Wexner consents to the vegetation disturbance which occurred during 1990 and the spring of 1991, outside of the original Tank site and Pipeline Easement. Notwithstanding, the City shall have no right to hereafter enter upon, constructor undertake any other activities outside of the original Tank site and Pipeline Easement. The original Agreement, this Addendum and the Grant of Easement shall be the controlling documents with respect to the installation, operation, mainte- nance, repair and replacement of the City'S water facilities upon the Wexner property. If.'", '" "\~ <It '. '!l \\1 '" 2. In recognition of the fact that the Original Agreement anticipated the construction by the city of an underground water tank, should the city hereafter determine in its judgment that geological and site conditions require further installation of artificial stabilization structures in order to ensure slope stability (such as, but not limited to, qabions, retaining walls, soil anchors, etc.), the city shall pay all costs of such design and construction and shall first submit its design for stabilization to Mr. Wexner for Mr. Wexner's review and approval on the basis of aesthetic and revegetation concerns in keeping with the character and quality of existing revegetation and landscape plan for the Wexner property; Mr. Wexner's approval shall not be unreason- ably withheld. The city shall ensure that the tank site is stable. The city shall timely undertake in a workmanlike manner all recommendations for completing the site work set forth in the letter dated July 6, 1992, prepared by Banner Associates, Inc. entitled "Wexner Tank site". The parties understand that this site work may require work occurring each year for up to three (3) seasons to complete. upon completion of such activity, the city shall provide Mr. Wexner with a letter signed by a registered Colorado professional engineer (which may include the city Engineer if he is a registered Colorado professional engineer) confirming that all recommen- dations have been properly undertaken and completed. In the event additional restabilization techniques require the disturbance of areas previously revegetatedby Wexner, the city shall bear all costs of such revegetation however, revegetation shall be done at the direction of Wexner so as to duplicate the area revegetated and disturbed with plantings of similar type, spacing and maturity. 3. provided in the original irrigate and the original 4. Upon the City's experts' confirmations, as paragraph 2, above, Wexner shall complete revegetation and construct all facilities to maintain the revegetation in accordance with Agreement. The City hereby waives all rights to its share of any present and future share of existing line extension refunds (deposit or contribution allocations) from Holy Cross Electric Associa- tion for the three phase power extension "to the ci ty I S municipal ~r pump and storage site upon the property of Wexner, wh" jmay be due in the event Wexner connects to the Holy Cross Electric Association and city electrical facili- ties. Wexner shall contract separately with Holy Cross Electric Association and provide a separate meter to be installed by Holy Cross to ensure that Wexner is billed separately and pays for his own power use for any purp0ge, including irrigation of Wexner's property and the disturbed area. To the extent that such is consistent with the aboVe- described waiver of line extension refunds (deposit and contribution allocation) and the contractual arrangements between Holy Cross Electric Association and the city (Holy Cross Project No. 91-12671), the city may count Mr. Wexner's 2 ~ '. 5. 6. tA .. power usage from the three phase power source toward meeting the city's monthly minimum contract requirements which it has with Holy Cross Electric Association for electric service to the Red Mountain tank. The city agrees to monitor and maintain the slope and site condition on no less than a quarterly basis and to report to Wexner any evidence of soil instability, erosion or distur- bance of the area. The city's obligations to inspect on a quarterly basis, as described in the preceding sentence, shall expire two years from the date that the city performs the last soil, site, revegetation or other work on the Wexner property. Thereafter the City shall inspect the site only as often as the city deems advisable in its discretion. The City agrees and represents that Mr. Wexner agreed to the location of a tank site as set forth in the original agreement and attached exhibits. The city further agrees and represents that Mr. Wexner did not have any responsibility, or involve- ment in the city's site investigations, design, construction or construction techniques beyond those granted to him by the original agreement. The City further agrees and represents that Mr. Wexner has no responsibility for the operation, replacement or maintenance of the water storage, pumpline and pipeline facilities upon the Wexner property beyond those set forth in the original agreement. 7. All other provisions, terms and conditions contained within the original Agreement shall be unchanged, deemed reaffirmed and incorporated herein by reference, provided however, should any term or condition hereof contradict or be deemed inconsis- tent with any provision, term or condition within the Original Agreement, the terms of this Addendum shall control. 8. Should any party hereto employ an attorney for the purpose of enforcing or construing this Agreement, or any judgment based on this Agreement, for any reason or in any legal proceeding whatsoever; including ,insolvency, bankruptcy, arbitration, declaratory relief or other litigation, including appeals or rehearing, and whether or not an action is actually commenced, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive from the other party or parties thereto reimbursement for all attor- neys' fees and all costs and expenses. Should "any judgment' or final order be issued in that proceeding, said reimbursement shall be specified therein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this~~n~iL ./ duplicate original in Aspen, Colorado this / tf day of . 1992. CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal cor- poration ~ 5. (?~ ennett, Mayor ,a ,Attest: ~~ ~~~ ~~o.,/),/;;: By: K~hryn S. Koch, city Cl k~~~ohn 3 ." APPROVED AS TO FORM: III ~ ~ \_/,,\f' \ \:\ , ~_.-<--.' 1 I " \...I::..,,~-'>...l'-~~ Edward Caswall, Esq. City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM: KEVIN L. PATRICK, P.C. A professional Corporatio @I)' ~. , 'h '"", STATE OF,COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this !)('1{!!?( day of kAJ"1ii;:;;#n._" 1992, by John Bennett, as Mayor for the City of Aspen, a ~l corporation. witness my hand and ,official seal. My commission expires: My CommIssIon e~ 9I271ll2 (~/)'t~eJ 1J I (1/)/lU2M___ No ary Publi IJ V STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2,,~ :ay of l".4::-1,., , 1992, by Kathryn S. Koch, as City Clerk for the city of~a municipal corporation. witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: MyCommlsalane""'~912719l! '. (p,1IN/) )~ i (J{lilA/#J- Nary Pu!::lI' c () 4 .,;" "'< -- I.~' .,~l'" STATE OF ) ) ss. ) COUNTY OF -- Subscribed and sworn 1992, by Leslie Wexner. to before me this ;qLfi'.-- day of ~, My commission expires: witness my hand and official seal. 0092BDAD.01 ~/~I /q6 , ~f.m7!lad!'bch 5 . t. _~I. \j(' .'\', a"'...... " \\" . ~ IBANNER .--.."""" CONSULTING ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS July 6, 1992 BANNER ASSOCIATES, INC. 2777 Crossroads Boulevard Grand Junction, Colorado 81506 (303) 243.2242 FAX (303)243-3810 605 East Main, Suite 6 Aspen, Colorado 81611 {303) 925-5857 Robert Gish Director of Public Works City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO. 81611 Ig~UW~~ Jut I 0 1992 RE: WEXNER TANK SITE CITV AITORNEY'S ~ OFFICE Dear Bob: Pursuant to our discussions, this letter is written as a result of the site investigation made by Banner Associates, Inc. on June 30, 1992 with you and John Worcester. Additionally, we have reviewed the correspondence that you provided from. Backuound Banner Associates, Inc. was requested to review relative information contained in correspondence from: Chen Northern, Inc. dated September 18, 1990 and July 1, 1991, Rea Cassens & Assoc., Inc., dated May 28, 1992, and the report from AnlUedo and Ivey, Inc., dated May 1, 1992. Additional information was obtained through discussions with Bob Gish, Director of Public Works relative to means and methods of construction during the project. Site Findings The tank site was visited to review the condition of the slope and revegetation program above the tank site. The weather conditions at the time of the site visit were clear and warm. There had been no significant precipitation in the 12 hour period prior to the visit. Walking the tank site and cut slope, considerable vegetation was found that had been established since the completion of the project. This vegetation extended from the toe of the slope at the base of the tank to the area over the tank. Significant amounts of the matting are still in place. Upon traversing the top of the tank the area above the tank was inspected. It appears that there has been some erosion at the top of the cut slope immediately below some remaining scrub vegetation. This erosion has caused an approximately 30' wide by 10' long area that has not taken to seed. From the evidence of topsoil below this area it appears that water has been introduced in this area to contribute to the erosion. Discussions with you revealed that this area was directly watered by a lower sprinkler head. An existing head which was directed to the eroded area was encountered on this visit. ,. ~- ~e fe" \'( - BANNER Robert Gish July 6, 1992 Page 2 of 3 It appears that the method of controlling the spray direction has failed and this head has fallen over to introduce water directly on the aforementioned area. There are areas above the cut slope to the east and west of the tank site which have been mentioned as eroded areas. These areas were evidently not part of the construction of this project but are merely areas that do not contain vegetation on this hillside. The area to the east was evidently used to create a chute for topsoil to be handled into the revegetation area. There appears to have been wildlife use of this area in route to the revegetated tank site. Review of the area where the Red Mountain Ditch is culverted evidenced no significant areas of erosion resulting from this project. The flat area where the ditch is culverted appears to be stable and show no signs of erosion. Additionally, there is a small berm at the edge of the culverted area which would inhibit erosion down the slope from rainfall or snowmelt. This might not provide protection in the event of a significant rainstorm. There are not evidences of erosion due to rainfall or snowmelt down this area. Recommendations Based upon the review of the site conditions and work performed to date, Banner Associates, Inc. would make the following recommendations to further the stabilization effort on the slope above the tank: * Install additional topsoil material in the cell fabric below the existing vegetation line. Intertwine the matting material in areas where erosion is below the cell fabric. Place straw or hay in the topsoil area to further protect the area from erosion. Redirect the sprinkler system to avoid direct saturation, of the newly restored area. Use a dryland seed mix that requires less moisture. Closely monitor the irrigation system to avoid saturation levels in the soil. Plant sage in the areas of erosion as has been done on the lower slope. * * * * * * Due to the severity of the slopes on this project the revegetation process may take up to three growing seasons to be established. I would recommend monitoring to stay abreast of any erosion that may occur prior to the establishment of the vegetation. .- ~.'" &q \'i; ~~ e, ~i \\,~. tA... ~- BANNER Robert Gish July 6, 1992 Page 3 of 3 Please feel free to contact Banner Associates, Inc. should you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Df.,a--/ Robert E. Daniel, Jr.,PE Aspen Projects Director BANNER ASSOCIATES, INC. ~,~HH"''''J, ......,~~~. "-"i J' fll",,,^, .' ~.,. ? /~~~>~':':~;.,~ \ ~ '1 (';; ~~o ~\ .; :,:-:;. -0 r' .,~::: ;: ;::~ I'''J f::1 ""'I ";" :;: ,;:, . '. ';"'\ Q '<u <',_' _;' 0 ~ '. J'.I.... ~:-\"' ,I <<~<.' :;) j ", ~.'" IvN~\._ ':" .~\t ~ "'~' ,'>. '., ....., C";- <:.':f -<~"( vi!=, :- 0..... \/:.-- . ~((~~'t4.U{~~~i.t~I'."\\. -.J/-d~ Kenneth J. Brotsky Senior Vice President BANNER ASSOCIATES, INC. RED:cjb wp-doc\9017\wexner .veg ~e'",'"", IZ:'. ''0,_ ",,'.'It..... pi"l 'i:) d'e' ,,@ I(i\~ Huqlmg{lQ!l - r~ ;~:: .p'-; ,:..r..~~'-.~~~-'W~, (;hen-Northern, Inc.. Division 96 South Zuni Street Denver. Colorado 80223 13031744.7105 Fax: 1303)744;0210 July 27, 1992 J U L 2 9 1992 , I ! I C:i'T"'.' ,,;,j\EER j l...____,.._,,_,_..____._ City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Attention: Mr. Robert F. Gish Public Works Director Subject: Review of Significance of the Fault Mapped in the Vicinity of the 500,000 Gallon Water Storage Tank, Red Mountain Ranch, Pitkin County, Colorado Job No. 4 552 90 Gentlemen: At your request, we have reviewed the potential significance of a fault which has been mapped by others in the vicinity of the subject tank which is located in the Red Mountain Ranch area about 1.3 miles north of the City of Aspen. As you are aware, in addition to the fault issue, which is the subject of this letter, other issues pertaining to the geotechnical conditions of the tank site have been raised. A discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of this review. Opinions presented in this letter are based primarily on review of the regional geologic map and professional paper by Bryant (1971 and 1979) and a letter prepared by Amuedo and Ivey, Inc. on May 1,1992. Our senior engineering geologist made a cursory observation of the tank site on July 9, 1992, but detailed field work was not done with regards to the fault at that time. Based on this review, it is our preliminary opinion that the fault mapped by Bryant (1971) may pass through or very close to the tank site, but we do not consider that the fault will have a significant impact on the satisfactory performance of the tank, during a reasonable service life, as a result of potential fault activity. Active faults, for general construction evaluations, are usually considered to be faults which have been active during the Holocene or about the last 10,000 years. For critical facilities, such as major dams, active faults are usually considered' to be faults which have been active during the latest Pleistocene or Holocene or about the last 50,000 years. Our preliminary opinion regarding the potential activity of the fault is based on the following: (1) The fault in question is not a primary regional structure, but appears to be a secondary structure associated with the Castle Creek Fault zone which is located about one mile to the west. The Castle Creek Fault and associated geologic structures were formed during the Laramide Orogeny of the Late Cretaceous and Paleocene about 65-70 million years ago (Bryant, 1979). Regional studies have not found evidence of Neogene activity (activity within the last 24 million years) on the Castle Creek Fault zone or related structures (Kirkham and Rogers, 1981). ArnomherufthclHIHlgroupaf[ompanies o @~a.., \~- ',e..... 1)\' ~\.. ~','_r 1ft' \:\ '+; " City of Aspen July 27, 1992 Page 2 (2) On Bryant's 1971 Geology Map the fault in question is concealed by glacial moraine, Qmc, and glaciofluvial deposits, Qgb and Qga. This would indicate that fault activity is older than these deposits. These deposits have been correlated as follows; Qgaand Qgb with the latest Pleistocene Pinedale glaciation and Qmc probably with the Late Pleistocene Bull Lake glaciation in the Rocky Mountain region (Bryant, 1979). The Pinedale glacial period is believed to have occurred between about 11,000 and 35,000 years ago and the Bull Lake glacial period between about 130,000 and 155,000 years ago (Friedman, 1986). The regional mapping would therefore indicate that the fault in question would not be considered an active fault. (3) Geologic Cross-Section B accompanying Bryant's 1971 Geology Map shows a displacement of about 900 feet on the fault in question. Considering that the fault originated about 65-70 million years ago, this 900 feet of displacement would correspond to an average displacement rate of 0.00039 to 0.00042 em/yr. Faults with average displacement rate in this relatively low average range are usually considered to be inactive faults (Slemmons, 1977). (4) Although concealed by the surficial soil deposits along much of its length, the fault in question is inferred to extend to the south of the tank site, through the City of Aspen and into the Aspen Mountain area where it branches for other faults in the Castle Creek Fault Zone (Bryant, 1971). In their letter of May 1, 1992, Ameudo and Ivey, Inc. recommend further investigations to assess possible relationships between ground movements reported on Aspen Mountain and the fault in question. We have been involved with monitoring movements on Aspen Mountain since 1987 and have concluded that these movements are associated with reactivation of a landslide in the spring of 1984. We are unaware of problems with structural displacements in buildings, which could be associated with fault creep, along the projected fault trace in the City of Aspen. Based on the above, in our opinion, creep does not appear to be occurring along the fault in question. In summary, it is our opinion tbat the regional geologic relationships indicate that the fault in question would not be considered an active fault and there is little likelihood that the fault would cause problems at the tank site during a reasonable service life for the project. " ~,'.," ~, 11_,' Vi, \\..., 411t' ~: -"" - City of Aspen July 27, 1992 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, Chen-Northern, Inc. !~#fLv[{ 4.~- Ralph G. Mock Engineering Geologist Rev. by:SLP RGM/kd Enclosures .' U,Y.<'.. 'Ii I", a_........ "'; \\\,. ~... , R__ REFERENCES Amuedo and Ivey, Inc., 1992, Preliminary Comments, Geological Investigations, Water Tank Site, Wexner Property, Aspen Colorado: Prepared for Mr. Kevin Patrick P.c., 205 South Mill Street, Suite 200, Aspen Colorado (May 1, 1992). Bryant, B., 1971, Geologic Map of the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Map GQ-933. Bryant, B., 1979, Geology of the Aspen 15-Minute Quadrangle, Pitkin and Gunnison Counties, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1073. Friedman, J.P., 1986, Alluvial Terrace Investigation Along the North Fork of the South Platte River, East-Central Front Range, Colorado in Rogers, W.P. and Kirkham, R.M. (editors), Contributions to Colorado Seismicity and Tectonics - A 1986 Update: Colorado Geological Survey Special Publication 28. Kirkham, R.M. and Rogers, W.P., 1981, Earthquake Potential in Colorado - A Preliminary Evaluation: Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 43. Slemmons, D.B., 1977, State-Of-The-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States - Report No.6 - Faults and Earthquake Magnitude: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experimental Station, Miscellaneous Paper S-73-1.