The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20180620 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING June 20, 2018 4:30 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. 12:00 SITE VISITS A. Please meet at historic Lift 1,or visit on your own. II. 4:30 INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items J. Call-up reports K. HPC typical proceedings III. OLD BUSINESS A. None. IV. 4:45 NEW BUSINESS A. Lift 1 Corridor Project, Worksession V. 7:00 ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant Rebuttal Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion (5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\E67BB05D-C2F8- 4228-A5A9-5DAADF4BD3E8\14213.doc 6/14/2018 HPC PROJECT MONITORS- projects in bold are under construction Nora Berko 1102 Waters 417/421 W. Hallam 602 E. Hyman 210 S. First 530 W. Hallam 333 W. Bleeker 51 Meadows Road Bob Blaich Lot 2, 202 Monarch Subdivision 232 E. Bleeker 609 W. Smuggler 209 E. Bleeker 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace 128 E. Main, Sardy House Gretchen Greenwood 28 Smuggler Grove 1280 Ute 211 E. Hallam 124 W. Hallam 411 E. Hyman 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace 101 W. Main, Molly Gibson Lodge 201 E. Main 834 W. Hallam Willis Pember 305/307 S. Mill 534 E. Cooper Jeff Halferty 540 E. Main and Holden-Marolt 980 Gibson 845 Meadows, Aspen Meadows Reception Center 232 E. Main 541 Race Alley 310/330 E. Main (Hotel Jerome) 201 E. Hyman 208 E. Main 533 E. Main Roger Moyer 517 E. Hyman (Little Annie’s) 500 W. Main 406 S. Mill 223 E. Hallam Richard Lai Scott Kendrick 533 E. Main 122 W. Main Sheri Sanzone 135 E. Cooper Need to assign: 134 W. Hopkins 517 E. Hopkins 422/434 E. Cooper 529-535 E. Cooper, Stein Building 420 E. Hyman 110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen 301 Lake P1 II.F. TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant rebuttal (5 minutes) Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion (5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. Procedure for amending motions: A “friendly amendment” to a Motion is a request by a commissioner to the commissioner who made the Motion and to the commissioner who seconded it, to amend their Motion. If either of these two do not accept the “friendly” amendment request, the requesting commissioner may make a formal motion to amend the Motion along the lines he/she previously requested. If there is no second to the motion to amend the Motion, there is no further discussion on the motion to amend, it dies for a lack of a second; discussion and voting on the Motion may then proceed. If there is a second to the motion to amend the Motion, it can be discussed and must be voted upon before any further discussion and voting on the Motion for which the amendment was requested. If the vote is in favor of amending the Motion, discussion and voting then proceeds on the Amended Motion. If the vote on the motion to amend fails, discussion and voting on the Motion as originally proposed may then proceed. P2 II.K. MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Ben Anderson, Planner THROUGH: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer DATE OF MEMO: June 14, 2018 MEETING DATE: June 20, 2018 RE: Work Session, Lift 1 Corridor Project SUMMARY: After a year-long process working with SE Group, a ski lift consultancy, a preferred option for relocating Lift 1A has been identified (a report and site plan detailing this work is attached). With direction from City Council to move forward with the proposal to bring the lift down to Dean Street, City Staff is working with project teams from the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge, Aspen Ski Company, and Aspen Historical Society to create a re-imagined west portal to Aspen Mountain. The proposed project considers a ski corridor that begins above the proposed Gorsuch Haus Lodge, moves through the Lift One Lodge and ends in Willoughby Park with a new lift terminal near Dean Street. This includes a relocated Skiers’ Chalet Lodge and Steakhouse, and a newly designed Willoughby Park. Significant impacts to historic Lift 1 are expected, including potential relocation and/or loss of some or all of the remaining lift towers. Because of the issues related to this potential development, Aspen voters will make the final decision on the Lift 1 Corridor in a special election tentatively scheduled for February of 2019. Prior to the election, the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, Open Space and Trails Board, and APCHA will be making recommendations regarding specific aspects of the project to Aspen City Council. BACKGROUND: In 2006, HPC began review of a proposed redevelopment of the former Holland House site, and surrounding properties including Willoughby Park, Lift One Park, the Skiers Chalet Lodge and the Skiers Chalet Steakhouse. The redevelopment included construction of a new hotel, Lift One Lodge, conversion of the Skier’s Chalet Steakhouse into affordable housing and relocation and designation of the Skier’s Chalet Lodge downhill to Willoughby Park, to be used as a Ski Museum. An underground parking garage was proposed below Willoughby Park. As the project proceeded through P&Z and Council, review was suspended and a stakeholder’s committee was formed due to the complex development issues and community interest in the revitalization of the western access to Aspen Mountain. P3 IV.A. The committee process did not lead to consensus and the Lift One Lodge applicant returned to the land use review process and received HPC Final approval in 2010. Evolutions to the project included a slight downhill relocation of Skier’s Chalet Steakhouse and conditions of approval related to restoration of the historic Lift 1. The concept of a surface lift, such as a platter lift, which would help skier’s get from Dean Street to Lift 1A was introduced. A ski corridor where the platter lift might be located was identified. The lift idea was not detailed but was not definitively expected to impact historic Lift 1. The Lift One Lodge property was sold and the current owner has pursued design revisions and extensions of Vested Rights through P&Z. With the introduction of the Gorsuch Haus proposal in 2017, and the associated plan to replace Lift 1A, interest in extending a chair lift, rather than a platter towards Dean increased. When the Gorsuch Haus design struggled to gain support due to massing concerns, stakeholder’s gathered again and a study of chairlift options was commissioned by the City. The Lift 1 Corridor Project is comprised of two existing Land Use Cases. The current Lift One Lodge Planned Development, which was approved in 2011 and still holds vested rights, contains the following elements: • Lift One Lodge • Historic Lift 1 bull wheel and towers • Skier’s Chalet (proposed as AHS skiing museum) • Skier’s Chalet Steakhouse (proposed as affordable housing) • Willoughby Park • Lift One Park • Underground Parking for Lift One Lodge and 5o public parking spaces The proposed amendments to the approval would incorporate the new lift terminal, related skier services and ski way, re-purposed uses of the Skier’s Chalet Lodge and Steakhouse, and redesigned Willoughby Park and Lift One Lodge. These proposed changes will be the topic of the eventual recommendation of HPC to City Council. Gorsuch Haus, the second element of the corridor project, has previously submitted a land use case that is currently tabled in front of City Council. As a consequence of the proposed relocation of Lift 1A, this lodge is also being redesigned. While HPC can make comment regarding Gorsuch Haus as part of the proposed corridor, HPC will not be making a formal recommendation on this aspect of the corridor project. P4 IV.A. REQUEST OF HPC: The purpose of this work session is to introduce the larger project and proposed process to HPC and to provide commissioner comments to the Applicants about the corridor as a whole, and more specific elements of the proposed project. At the work session this evening, staff requests initial feedback on the following topics: • General comments about the corridor project as a whole • Preferred outcomes for preservation and location of the historic Lift 1 bull wheel and towers • Site planning for Willoughby Park – including the new lift station • Presence (and scale) of commercial activity in Willoughby Park • Relationship of Skiers’ Chalet and Steakhouse to Willoughby Park • Use of Dean Street, including proposed underground parking lot access In the coming weeks, it is anticipated that Lift One Lodge will be submitting a formal application for a Major Amendment to a previously approved Planned Development. In response to this formal application, HPC will hold a public hearing and will provide a formal recommendation via resolution to City Council. EXHIBITS: A – Lift 1 – Historic Significance Report B – SE Group Report C – SE Group Preferred Option (Site Plan) D – Lift One Lodge – Conceptual Site Planning E – Skier’s Chalet – Photos and Description P5 IV.A. Prepared by : ±20'79908000798079700697059780108020802580308035804080458050805580608065795079468.5% ±25% 15%JUAN STSOUTH ASPEN S TEAST DEAN CTEAST DURANT AVESOUTH MONAR C H S T SUMMIT STGILBERT STDOLINSEK PROPERTY PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS CHAIR ROPE 35FT CLEARANCE PER CPTSB NO SKI UNDER ZONE OUTSIDE OF CHAIR PROPOSED SKIWAY PROPOSED SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 5FT CLEARANCE PER ANSI B 77 CODE PROPOSED ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING HISTORIC LIFT 1 STRUCTURE DROP-OFF SIDEWALK AND STEPS MILLING AREA + 7950.0 60 FT60 FT60 FT MOUNTAIN QUEEN EASEMENT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT + 7937.0 + 7940.0 MOUNTAIN QUEEN CONDOMINIUMS STAGING AREA EMERGENCY VEHICLE AND TRUCK UNLOADING ZONE 38 FT88 FTPROPOSED LIFT TOWER, TYPICAL A¹ B¹ A B Prepared by : 0 40 80 120 160 SCALE (ft)NLegend Property Boundaries ADA Access Pedestrian Circulation Proposed Lift Existing Building Building Under Construction Building to Remove Recreation Easement Proposed Skiway Summer Access Road Proposed Building Existing Lift 1 Tower THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 4 | OPTION 7 - PLAN VIEW 1’ Contour Intervals May 10, 2018THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 4 | OPTION 7 - PLAN VIEW May 10, 2018 1’ CONTOUR INTERVAL 0 20 40 60 80 SCALE (ft)NP6IV.A. Prepared for: City of Aspen Prepared by: SE Group CITY OF ASPEN LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT MAY 2018 P7 IV.A. PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: P8 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | i CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................ 1 EVALUATION PROCESS ............................................................................................................................................. 3 General Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Evaluation Process for Gilbert Street and Dean Street Options (Options 1 and 7) ............................................... 3 Evaluation Process for Mid-Station and Lower Dean Street Options (Options 7a and 7b).................................... 4 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Option 1 | Gilbert Street ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Description ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 Qualitative and Operational Criteria .................................................................................................................... 13 Advantages and Disadvantages .......................................................................................................................... 14 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Option 7 | Dean Street ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Description .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Qualitative and Operational Criteria .................................................................................................................... 23 Advantages and Disadvantages .......................................................................................................................... 25 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................... 26 Option 7A | Mid-Station ............................................................................................................................................ 27 Description .......................................................................................................................................................... 27 Qualitative and Operational Criteria .................................................................................................................... 31 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................... 32 Option 7B | Lower Dean Street ................................................................................................................................ 33 Description .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 Qualitative and Operational Criteria .................................................................................................................... 39 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................... 39 CPTSB VARIANCES ................................................................................................................................................... 40 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................. 41 APPENDICES Lift 1 Historic Significance Report CPTSB Variance Request Guidelines P9 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT ii | LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Option 1 Plan View ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2. Option 1 Section Views ................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 3. Option 1 3D Model View ............................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4. Option 7 Plan View ....................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 5. Option 7 Section Views ................................................................................................................................. 19 Figure 6. Option 7 3D Model View ............................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 7. Option 7a Plan View ..................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 8. Option 7b Plan View ..................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 9. Option 7b Section View ................................................................................................................................. 37 P10 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 1 I NTRODUCTION During the summer and fall of 2017, SE Group prepared the City of Aspen Lift 1A Assessment Report (October 2017) that evaluates nine optional lift configurations for replacement of Lift 1A as they relate to proposed developments of the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge properties and creating a skiers’ link to the original ski area portal near Dean Street. The 2017 Lift 1A Assessment concluded that Options 1 and 7 are possible concepts for replacement of Lift 1A and are worthy of further consideration. Option 1 (also referred to as the Gilbert Street Option) terminates the lift just south of Gilbert Street, and Option 2 (also referred to as the Dean Street Option) terminates the lift just south of Dean Street. Following completion of the 2017 Assessment Report and its presentation to City Council, the City of Aspen (the City), with agreement from the Gorsuch Haus developers, the Lift One Lodge developers, and Aspen Skiing Co. (SkiCo) decided to further evaluate Options 1 and 7, as well as two alternatives to Option 7: Option 7a adds a loading and unloading mid-station adjacent to the Gorsuch Haus building, and Option 7b moves the bottom terminal closer to Dean Street. The purpose of the additional “Stage II” evaluation is to assist the City and stakeholders in defining the one scenario that best meets the needs and desires of all parties for replacement of Lift 1A. This City of Aspen Lift 1A Stage II Assessment Report evaluates physical feasibility considerations related to integrating the optional ski infrastructure scenarios with surrounding development, as well as important operational aspects and qualitative criteria related to maintaining a quality guest experience for the skiing public and lodging guests at the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge properties. The physical feasibility considerations account for the physical and spatial requirements of the various ski infrastructure components themselves (ski lift terminals, towers and clearance corridors; ski trail corridor widths; ski lift mazing and circulation spaces; etc.), and the physical integration of ski lift infrastructure construction with surrounding existing and proposed grades, elevations, buildings, roads, ski runs, property boundaries and pedestrian circulation corridors. The qualitative and operational criteria address parameters related to the guest experience and operational functions for the SkiCo, Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge that result in a quality overall development. To assist in addressing the full range of qualitative and operational aspects, a list of important criteria was assembled with input from SkiCo, Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge. The following is a summary list of the qualitative and operational criteria that have been considered in the Lift 1A Stage II Assessment. • Optimize the interface between ski infrastructure and lodging buildings • Maintain acceptable space for skier and pedestrian circulation • Design encourages access from points in Aspen to the east of the site • Optimize repeat skiing and return ski access to the Lift 1A bottom terminal • Desired minimum return ski run width of 60 feet • Priority of lift technology: #1 – Telemix (clockwise rotation), #2 – gondola, #3 – detachable chairlift; the study should recommend what is appropriate based on locational feasibility and compatibility with surrounding properties, boundaries, etc. • Mid-station terminal functionality (Option 7a only) P11 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 2 | • Account for snowmaking, snow management, maintenance and grooming operations • Provide 1,000 to 1,500 square feet of ticketing and guest services space near the lift base • Provide ~1,500 square feet of ski patrol operational space on the Gorsuch Haus site • Maintain emergency service access and staging at the top of S. Aspen Street • The mountain access road must be maintained in both winter and summer for wheeled and tracked vehicles. Sufficient staging and circulation space must be maintained to: (a) turn a cat around in winter conditions, and (b) park, unload, and transfer materials and heavy equipment to and from trucks in both winter and summer conditions at the top of S. Aspen Street • Summer vehicular and heavy equipment access must be provided to the lift terminal, towers, cables and other lift equipment • Obtainable variances from Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board (CPTSB) It is understood that some of these criteria are not absolute requirements for acceptance of an optional scenario, but rather points of considerations in developing design recommendations for the site plans that best fit the available spaces, and evaluating the relative merits of each option. There are historic resource issues that impact the evaluation of potential replacement options for Lift 1A. The remnants of Lift 1, a bull wheel and three lift towers, are located within the area being evaluated for Lift 1A replacement options. The City has undertaken research into the history associated with these structures to gain a more robust understanding of the designated structures and is considering what review process would be required if resources need to be relocated or removed. The City historic resources report is included as an appendix to this report. The following report presents: 1) a description of SE Group’s evaluation process; 2) the evaluation of each of the four options, which includes a detailed description of the scenario, illustrative plans, assessment discussion, and conclusion; 3) a discussion regarding CPTSB variance requirements and factors; and 4) a conclusion. P12 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 3 EVALUATION PROCESS This section describes the evaluation process and planning determinants considered for the four options that were analyzed (Options 1, 7, 7a, and 7b). GENERAL OVERVIEW To initiate the Lift 1A Stage II Assessment, the 2017 planning base map was updated to reflect current data for existing structures, buildings, key properties, parcels, easements, rights-of-way, roads and vegetation. The planning base map was also revised with updated proposed building footprints and site plans for the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge projects. The source data for this planning map is Google Earth imagery dated 6/23/2017, topographic data (1-foot contour interval) provided by SkiCo, property and planimetric data supplied by Design Workshop, the recorded Lift One Lodge PUD Subdivision Plat map supplied by the City, and current site plans and architectural plans from Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge. This planning base map is intended to be a basic, locational site plan for orientation, and is not represented as being a fully surveyed and dimensioned map, such as an ALTA survey map, depicting all existing conditions, utilities, legal interests, etc. For all four options, the plans were generated to depict the worst-case scenario in terms of spatial requirements based on lift technology (Telemix, gondola, or detachable chairlift). In summary, the Telemix and gondola terminal structures are approximately the same size, and they are about 20 to 25 feet longer than a quad chairlift terminal and slightly wider. The mazing and circulation space requirements for a Telemix are greater than for a gondola and chairlift, and the lift corridor air space clearance requirement for a Telemix is slightly wider. Therefore, all plans depict terminal, maze/circulation area, and air space clearance corridor requirements (ANSI and CPTSB) for a Telemix with six-place chairs and eight-place cabins to represent the worst case (except the Gilbert Street option, as described later). All lift structural elements and sizing are based on current information from the lift supplier (Leitner-Poma of America). Evaluation Process for Gilbert Street and Dean Street Options (Options 1 and 7) For the Gilbert Street and Dean Street options, the evaluation process began with preparing schematic site plans for each option. The schematic site plans illustrate the following design elements: • Pedestrian paths and vertical circulation with ADA access • Pedestrian access routes from the Monarch Street area, Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off, Lift One Lodge project area, Gorsuch Haus project area, and S. Aspen Street • Lift corridors, grading, and retaining wall placement • Lift terminals and equipment, including loading/unloading platforms, maze areas and circulation areas • Ski rack and pedestrian/skier milling areas • Required ski corridor limits and building setbacks • 1,000 to 1,500 square feet of ticketing and skier services space • Events and operations staging space at the top of S. Aspen Street • Access and staging space for emergency vehicle loading at the top of S. Aspen Street P13 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 4 | Development of the schematic site plans involved coordination with Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge planners and architects to integrate the Lift 1A plans with their site plans to the extent possible. The physical feasibility of each option was then tested by studying the spatial requirements and vertical clearances for lift terminals, structures and slopes, and grading requirements for construction (i.e., cuts, embankments, retaining walls, etc.). This physical feasibility assessment is demonstrated by north-to-south and east-to-west site sections depicting vertical information and relationships, with elevations, contours, grades, towers and presumed lift profiles, to more clearly illustrate the feasibility and impacts of ski infrastructure on the surrounding landscape and development proposals. Three-dimensional (3D) renderings were prepared of the schematic site plans to illustrate the spatial arrangement of all Lift 1A elements relative to the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge buildings, as well as other existing buildings and features surrounding the project area. Initial draft plans of each option were delivered to the City and subsequently to SkiCo, Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge for review and comments, and revisions were made as necessary to finalize the plans. A written description of Options 1 and 7 is provided under the Evaluation of Options section and includes an assessment of how each option conforms with the identified qualitative and operational criteria, describes the advantages and disadvantages of each option, and provides a conclusion. The written description and evaluation of each option is accompanied by the schematic site plan, site section illustrations, and 3D renderings. Evaluation Process for M id-Station and Lower Dean Street Options (Options 7a and 7b) Options 7a and 7b were developed to address comments from City Council regarding the configuration of Option 7 and are variations of that basic concept. Option 7a adds a loading and unloading mid-station adjacent to the Gorsuch Haus building, and Option 7b moves the bottom terminal closer to Dean Street. Because these options are very similar to Option 7, and because Option 7a was determined early in the study to present significant operational and physical construction challenges, a more general evaluation of these two options was undertaken to better understand their perceived limitations and practical feasibility, and determine whether they were worthy of further evaluation or should be abandoned from consideration. The partial analysis of Options 7a and 7b involved preparing schematic site plans for each option like those developed for Options 1 and 7, and a study of the physical feasibility and practical limitations of each option when considering the intention of the scenario and conforming to the identified qualitative and operational criteria. Site section illustrations and 3D renderings were not prepared for Option 7a, and one site section and no 3D renderings were prepared for Option 7b. A written description of Options 7a and 7b is provided under the Evaluation of Options section and includes a summary assessment of the option, along with a conclusion as to whether the option is worthy of further evaluation or should be abandoned from consideration. P14 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS OPTION 1 | GILBERT STREET Description The Lift 1A bottom terminal would be located just south of the Dolinsek property and Gilbert Street right-of-way, approximately 350 feet south of the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off (see Figures 1 through 3). This terminal location displaces the Lift One Lodge east building, and that entire building (with the possible exception of sub-grade levels) would need to be removed under this scenario. The terminal elevation would be 7986, placing it about 11 feet higher than the Lift One Lodge motor court and level 1 (7975) and 4 feet below level 2 (7990). A U-shaped retaining wall would wrap around the south end of the terminal site with a maximum wall height of 11 feet. This retaining wall would preclude a continuous ski route returning to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off. A 1,000- to 1,500-square foot ticketing and guest services facility would be located underneath the northeast corner of the terminal loading platform area and would form the NE corner of the retaining wall. The floor elevation of the guest service building would be 7975, at the same elevation as Lift One Lodge motor court/level 1 and slightly higher than Gilbert Street (~7971). A stairway and elevator would be located in the NE corner of the building, providing access (including ADA) to the lift terminal loading platform above. Pedestrian access from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off would be via a sidewalk along S. Aspen Street, and either around the north and east sides of the west Lift One Lodge building, or through the Lift One Lodge motor court to Gilbert Street. In either case, the walking distance would be about 440 feet over a vertical climb of 40 feet (9% average gradient). Pedestrian access from the Gorsuch Haus property would be through their roundabout and along the Lift One Lodge building to Gilbert Street. Pedestrian access from the St. Regis and other properties east of the project area would be along Monarch Street to Gilbert Street. Public ADA access to the lift loading platform would be via vehicle drop-off on Monarch Street at Gilbert, and along Gilbert Street to the guest service building elevator. ADA access from Gorsuch Haus would be via shuttle to the Lift One Lodge motor court or through the Lift One Lodge vertical circulation, and along Gilbert Street to the guest service building elevator. Option 1 only impacts one historic Lift 1 tower (the upper tower). P15 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 6 | This page intentionally left blank. P16 IV.A. 8010802080258030803580408045805080558060806580007990798679887976798010% 8.5%±25%JUAN STSOUTH ASPEN S TEAST DEAN CTEAST DURANT AVESOUTH MONA R C H S T SUMMIT STGILBERT STDOLINSEK PROPERTY PROPOSED ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS RECREATION EASEMENT CHAIR ROPE 35FT CLEARANCE PER CPTSB MOUNTAIN QUEEN EASEMENT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT STAIR/ELEVATOR BUILDING PROPOSED LIFT TOWER, TYPICAL NO SKI UNDER ZONE OUTSIDE OF CHAIR PROPOSED SKIWAY STAGING AREA EMERGENCY VEHICLE AND TRUCK UNLOADING ZONE MILLING AREA PROPOSED SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 5FT CLEARANCE PER ANSI B 77 CODE 32 FT60 FT35 FT86 FTPROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING + 7937.0 7975.0 ++7986.0 +BW 7987.0 8002 8017.5 + 8022 + + MOUNTAIN QUEEN CONDOMINIUMS HISTORIC LIFT 1 STRUCTURE DROP-OFF A¹ B¹ A BLegend Property Boundaries ADA Access Pedestrian Circulation Proposed Lift Existing Building Building Under Construction Building to Remove Recreation Easement Proposed Skiway Summer Access Road Proposed Building THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 1 | OPTION 1 - PLAN VIEW Prepared by : 0 40 80 120 160 SCALE (ft)NExisting Lift 1 Tower 1’ Contour Intervals May 10, 2018P17 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 8 | This page intentionally left blank. P18 IV.A. 7940 7960 7980 8000 8060 8080 8100 8020 8040 100 0200300400500600700800900 100 0200300400 7960 7980 8000 8020 8040 8060 8080 PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSED GONDOLA TERMINAL & PLAZA ADA ACCESS AT GILBERT ST. EAST DEAN CT & SOUTH ASPEN ST DROP OFF EXISTING LIFT 1 HISTORIC STRUCTURE ENTRANCE TO SKIER SERVICES PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, WEST BUILDING PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, WEST BUILDING PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, MOTOR COURT PROPOSED GONDOLA TERMINAL & PLAZA PROPOSED LIFT TOWER PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS 7975.0 SKIER SERVICES ENTRANCE TERMINAL PLAZASOUTH MONARCH ST.GILBERT ST. PROPOSED ELEVATOR/STAIRWAY FOR ADA ACCESS TO/FROM SKIER SERVICES 8006.0 SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 8002.0 GORSUCH DROP-OFF 7986.0 TERMINAL LOAD 7975.0 SKIER SERVICES BW 7975.0 7986.0 Prepared by : 0 30 60 90 120 SCALE (ft) N NSECTION B: EAST - WEST SECTION A: SOUTH - NORTH THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 2 | OPTION 1 - SECTION VIEWS May 10, 2018P19 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 10 | This page intentionally left blank. P20 IV.A. Prepared by :VIEW 1VIEW 3VIEW 2VIEW 4THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 3 | OPTION 1 - 3D MODEL VIEWMay 10, 2018P21 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 12 | This page intentionally left blank. P22 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 13 Qualitative and Operational Criteria Overall Skier Experience – The Lift One Lodge west building has direct skier and pedestrian access to this terminal location, but the lift infrastructure causes elimination of their east building. Gorsuch Haus has direct slopeside access and a short ski (~200 feet) to the lift terminal, but pedestrian access is indirect. Proposed slope grading matches well with proposed building elevations and plaza/entrance levels, and lift structures do not conflict with circulation around the buildings. Skier and Pedestrian Circulation – Skier circulation and milling space at the lift maze area is quite constrained by the narrow width between the terminal structure and the Lift One Lodge building, and the required retaining wall. The retaining wall would preclude a continuous ski route returning to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off. Public pedestrian circulation is compromised by the 40-foot vertical climb from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off and the indirect routing from Gorsuch Haus, but it is still considered acceptable. Pedestrian access from Lift One Lodge and properties to the east is very good. Repeat Skiing and Return Ski Access – Repeat skiing and return ski access to the bottom terminal in this option is very good, with only a very short “run-out” of about 200 feet with shallower slope gradient and narrower width. There would not be a continuous return ski access to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off. Minimum Width of Return Ski Run – The minimum width of the return ski run is about 35 feet adjacent to the Gorsuch Haus cul-de-sac, which is acceptable based on the slope gradient and projected skier traffic flows, but narrower than the 60-foot minimum width identified in the qualitative and operational criteria. Lift Type – Because of the confined nature of this terminal site, it is not possible to fit a Telemix terminal and associated maze and circulation space within this area. Accordingly, either a gondola or detachable chairlift would need to be installed. The Option 1 site plan (Figure 1) depicts a gondola terminal, loading configuration and airspace clearance corridor. Snowmaking and Snow Management – The last 200 feet of the return ski run is relatively narrow and proximate to existing and proposed buildings, which would have an impact on snowmaking operations. It is possible that snowmaking operations would require stockpiling machine-made snow uphill of the narrow run section and pushing that snow down towards the lift maze area. The return run directly above the lift maze area is about 3 snowcat widths wide but tapers at the bottom to about 35 feet. Maneuvering space for grooming operations and turnaround at the maze area would be confined and inefficient, but possible. Snowcat maneuvering in this area would involve multi-point turns and backing up, with associated noise impacts from the back-up warning attenuation on snowcats (“beep-beeps”). Ticketing and Guest Services Space – There is ample space below the lift loading platform to build a 1,500-square foot ticketing and guest services structure. The space would be connected to the loading platform above by stairs and an elevator and would have pedestrian and ADA access from Gilbert Street. P23 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 14 | Ski Patrol Operational Space – It is understood that Gorsuch Haus has programmed ski patrol operations and employee space within their building that is acceptable to SkiCo. Emergency Service Access and Staging – Emergency vehicle access and staging must be located at the top of S. Aspen Street, immediately accessible to snow to enable the transfer of injured skiers from sleds to ambulances. This functionality would need to be accommodated within the Gorsuch Haus cul-de-sac, and their current site plan appears to address this need. Mountain Access Road – The mountain access road must be maintained for both winter and summer access for wheeled and tracked vehicles. The current Gorsuch Haus site plan includes a realigned mountain access road that terminates at the northeast corner of their cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac site plan provides for a pull-out and staging area, and it is assumed that curbing in this area would be eased so vehicles could enter the mountain access road without encountering a prohibitive curb. The proposed mountain access road crosses under the no ski-under clearance zone of Lift 1A so the required 14-foot minimum vertical clearance may not be met in the winter or summer when chairs or gondola cabins are on the line. There would be adequate clearance if carriers were not on the line. Sufficient staging and circulation space has been maintained to: (a) turn a snowcat around in winter conditions, and (b) park, unload, and transfer materials and heavy equipment to and from trucks in both winter and summer conditions. Space for staging and transferring materials would occur within the Gorsuch Haus drop-off plaza, so appropriate arrangements regarding delivery scheduling would need to be agreed upon between Gorsuch Haus and SkiCo. Maintenance Access to Lift Equipment – Maintenance access to lift equipment is provided by the mountain access road and a short (125 feet) spur road from the bottom of the mountain access road to the bottom terminal of Lift 1A. Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board – The Gilbert Street option would not require a variance from the CPTSB. Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages • Very good repeat skiing and return ski access to the Lift 1A bottom terminal • Minor negative impact on snowmaking operations • Very good accommodation of ticketing, guest services, and ski patrol operations spaces • Does not require a variance from the CPTSB • Only encounters the upper historic Lift 1 tower Disadvantages • Requires elimination of the east Lift One Lodge building • Constrained skier circulation and maze area at the bottom terminal • Public pedestrian circulation is compromised by the 40-foot vertical climb from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off P24 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 15 • Public ADA access requires some type of vehicle drop-off at the intersection of Monarch and Gilbert streets • Does not allow for a Telemix lift • Grooming operations would be constrained near the bottom terminal and maze area • Possible vertical clearance issues on the mountain access road Conclusion Option 1 is a viable alternative for replacement of Lift 1A. It is physically feasible to construct the ski infrastructure as presented without uncommon construction challenges, and the option is largely responsive to the established qualitative and operational criteria. The key advantage of Option 1 is that it maintains a skier experience on Lift 1A that is very similar to what it is currently, and doesn’t present significant operational challenges, property ownership issues or historic resource issues related to extending the ski corridor further down towards Dean Street. The primary disadvantages of Option 1 are that it requires elimination of the east Lift One Lodge building, and it does not create a direct lift and ski-return connection to the Dean Street/ S. Aspen Street drop-off. Additionally, the provision of public ADA access to the lift terminal platform would need to rely on an alternative transit system to Monarch and Gilbert streets for which a solution has not been confirmed. Another key disadvantage is that the space for the base lift terminal, ski return and maze area is very confined and is not big enough for the desired Telemix lift. While Option 1 is a viable alternative for replacement of Lift 1A that is worthy of further consideration, the significance of the disadvantages identified in this assessment outweigh the significance of the advantages. P25 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 16 | OPTION 7 | DEAN STREET Description The Lift 1A bottom terminal would be located about 140 feet south of the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off and about 13 feet vertically higher (see Figures 4 through 6). The terminal would be at the same elevation as the historic lift base terminal structure and about 20 feet to the south of it. Fill material would be placed on the south half of the existing Lift 1 Park volleyball court, extending to the north Dolinsek property boundary, to create a flat milling and maze space that ties in with existing grade at the Dolinsek property. A 1,000- to 1,500-square foot ticketing and guest services facility would be incorporated into the proposed Aspen Historical Society Ski Museum building. The ground floor elevation of the guest service building would be about 7940, approximately 3 feet higher in elevation than the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off (~7937). A stairway and elevator would be located on the south end of the building, providing access (including ADA) to the lift terminal loading platform at elevation 7950. Pedestrian access from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off would be via a sidewalk to the ski museum/guest services building and internal or external stairs to the loading platform level. The walking distance to the guest services building would be about 150 feet over a vertical climb of 4 feet (3% average gradient). Pedestrian access from the Gorsuch Haus property would be through their roundabout and along a sidewalk on S. Aspen Street Access from Lift One Lodge would be along S. Aspen Street or through their property. Pedestrian access from the St. Regis and other properties east of the project area would be along Monarch Street and Dean Street to the ski museum/guest services building. Walking distance from the St. Regis to the guest services building would be about 300 feet. The museum and guest services building would be ADA accessible from the Dean Street/ S. Aspen Street drop-off. Option 7 impacts all three historic Lift 1 towers, but not the base terminal. P26 IV.A. ±20'79908000798079700697059780108020802580308035804080458050805580608065795079468.5% ±25% 15%JUAN STSOUTH ASPEN S TEAST DEAN CTEAST DURANT AVESOUTH MONA R C H S T SUMMIT STGILBERT STDOLINSEK PROPERTY PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS CHAIR ROPE 35FT CLEARANCE PER CPTSB NO SKI UNDER ZONE OUTSIDE OF CHAIR PROPOSED SKIWAY PROPOSED SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 5FT CLEARANCE PER ANSI B 77 CODE PROPOSED ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING HISTORIC LIFT 1 STRUCTURE DROP-OFF SIDEWALK AND STEPS MILLING AREA + 7950.0 60 FT60 FT60 FT MOUNTAIN QUEEN EASEMENT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT + 7937.0 + 7940.0 MOUNTAIN QUEEN CONDOMINIUMS STAGING AREA EMERGENCY VEHICLE AND TRUCK UNLOADING ZONE 38 FT88 FTPROPOSED LIFT TOWER, TYPICAL A¹ B¹ A B Prepared by : 0 40 80 120 160 SCALE (ft)NLegend Property Boundaries ADA Access Pedestrian Circulation Proposed Lift Existing Building Building Under Construction Building to Remove Recreation Easement Proposed Skiway Summer Access Road Proposed Building Existing Lift 1 Tower THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 4 | OPTION 7 - PLAN VIEW 1’ Contour Intervals May 10, 2018P27 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 18 | This page intentionally left blank. P28 IV.A. 100 0200300400500600700800900 7940 7960 7980 8000 8020 8040 8060 8080 8100 8120 100 0200300 7940 7960 7980 8000 8020 8040 8060 PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSED GONDOLA TERMINAL & PLAZA ADA ACCESS ADA ACCESS EXISTING LIFT 1 HISTORIC STRUCTURE EXISTING LIFT 1 HISTORIC STRUCTURE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, WEST BUILDING PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS 8002.0 GORSUCH DROP-OFF 8006.0 SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 7950.0 TERMINAL LOAD 7950.0 TERMINAL LOAD PROPOSED HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM 7937.0 DROP-OFF 7937.0 TRANSIT DROP-OFF PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, WEST BUILDING PROPOSED GONDOLA TERMINAL & PLAZA PROPOSED LIFT TOWER 7940.0 Prepared by : 0 30 60 90 120 SCALE (ft) N SECTION A: SOUTH - NORTH NSECTION B: EAST - WEST THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 5 | OPTION 7 - SECTION VIEW May 10, 2018P29 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 20 | This page intentionally left blank. P30 IV.A. Prepared by :VIEW 1VIEW 3VIEW 2VIEW 4THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 6| OPTION 7 - 3D MODEL VIEWMay 10, 2018P31 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 22 | This page intentionally left blank. P32 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 23 Qualitative and Operational Criteria Interface Between Ski Infrastructure and Lodging Buildings – Lift One Lodge and Gorsuch Haus have direct slopeside access and a short ski (Lift One Lodge ~250 feet, Gorsuch Haus ~500 feet) to the lift terminal, but pedestrian access to the terminal is indirect. Proposed slope grading matches well with proposed building elevations and plaza/entrance levels, and lift structures do not conflict with circulation around the buildings. The lift alignment comes within close proximity of both buildings, with chairs or gondola cabins passing within about 10 feet of the building faces at the nearest point. Skier and Pedestrian Circulation – Skier circulation and milling space at the lift maze area extends into the Dolinsek property and is ample. The Gorsuch Haus and both Lift One Lodge buildings have slopeside access along the length of the buildings. This option provides a continuous ski route returning to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off. Public pedestrian circulation is excellent from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off, with a walking distance of 150 to 250 feet (depending on whether the guest walks directly to the lift or enters via the guest services building) over a vertical climb of about 13 feet. By comparison, the routing from drop-off to lift terminal at the Silver Queen gondola is 200 feet over about a 15-foot climb, and at Buttermilk the routing from drop-off to lift terminal is 300 feet over a climb of nearly 10 feet. Pedestrian access from Lift One Lodge and properties to the east is very good. Access from Gorsuch Haus involves a walk of about 650 feet over about 55 vertical feet (8% average gradient). Repeat Skiing and Return Ski Access – Repeat skiing and return ski access to the bottom terminal in this option is good, although there is a relatively long “run-out” of about 500 feet with shallower slope gradient and narrower width. By comparison, the Lionshead run-out at Vail, from Forest Road across the skier bridge to the Eaglebahn lift, is 750 feet long with similar width and slope gradient. Minimum Width of Return Ski Run – The minimum width of the return ski run is about 60 feet where it passes between the Lift One Lodge buildings, which is acceptable based on the slope gradient and projected skier traffic flows, and meets the 60-foot minimum width identified in the qualitative and operational criteria. Lift Type – With generous flat ground in this area, there is adequate space for either Telemix, gondola or detachable chair lifts. Snowmaking and Snow Management – The 350-foot section of the return ski run from Gorsuch Haus to the south Dolinsek property line is relatively narrow and proximate to proposed buildings and the Gorsuch Haus drop-off area, and making snow within this narrow corridor presents operational challenges. A proposed solution is to stockpile machine-made snow uphill of the narrow run section and downhill on the Dolinsek property and pushing that snow into the narrow section of the trail with snowcats, a distance of about 200 to 250 feet in each direction. The total volume of snow required to initially cover this corridor to a depth of 2 feet is about 45,000 cubic feet, which would take in the order of 15 to 20 hours to produce assuming the use of four snowmaking guns (two at Gorsuch Haus and two adjacent to the Dolinsek property). If P33 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 24 | half this volume of snow were stored at each location, a pile would need to be made approximately 60 feet in diameter and 10 to 15 feet deep in each location. For maintenance of the snow pack depth and snow quality throughout the ski season, additional snow would need to be made in December and January and stored, primarily on the Dolinsek property but to a lessor degree adjacent to Gorsuch Haus, and pushed into the narrow corridor throughout the season as the coverage wore thin. Mid-season snow storage in front of Gorsuch Haus would be limited by the need to maintain a flat ski run in front of the building. It is likely that the snow pile stored on Dolinsek property for mid- and late-season use would be larger than the piles made at the beginning of the season. The return run is about 3 snowcat widths wide above the Dolinsek property but widens at the bottom to about 100 feet at the maze area. This is adequate space for grooming operations, maneuvering and turnaround at the maze area. Ticketing and Guest Services Space – 1,000 to 1,500 square feet of ticketing and guest services space would need to be programmed into the proposed ski museum building. The building footprint shown on Figure 4 is about 3,200 square feet, and the proposed building has a second and third level of 2,000 square feet each plus a 4,000-square foot basement, giving a total building square footage of 11,200 square feet. The space would include stairs and an elevator at the south end to provide ADA and pedestrian connections from the ground floor elevation to the loading platform above. Ski Patrol Operational Space – It is understood that Gorsuch Haus has programmed ski patrol operations and employee space within their building that is acceptable to SkiCo. As a potential alternative, ski patrol space could be accommodated in the ski museum building adjacent to the guest service functions, provided that: 1. There is adequate space in the ski museum building to house ski patrol (~1,500) as well as the programmed museum and guest service functions, 2. Emergency vehicle staging can be accommodated on Dean Street, and 3. An acceptable configuration can be designed for transporting injured guests from rescue sleds to an ambulance on Dean Street about 12 feet lower in elevation. Emergency Service Access and Staging – Emergency vehicle access and staging must be located at the top of S. Aspen Street, immediately accessible to snow to enable the transfer of injured skiers from sleds to ambulances. This functionality would need to be accommodated within the Gorsuch Haus cul-de-sac, and their current site plan appears to address this need. Alternatively, if ski patrol were located near the bottom terminal as described above, ambulance service access and staging would be on Dean Street. Mountain Access Road – The mountain access road must be maintained for both winter and summer access for wheeled and tracked vehicles. The current Gorsuch Haus site plan includes a realigned mountain access road that terminates at the northeast corner of their cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac site plan provides for a pull-out and staging area, and it is assumed that curbing in this area would be eased so vehicles could enter the mountain access road without encountering a prohibitive curb. P34 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 25 Sufficient staging and circulation space has been maintained to: (a) turn a snowcat around in winter conditions, and (b) park, unload, and transfer materials and heavy equipment to and from trucks in both winter and summer conditions. Space for staging and transferring materials would occur within the Gorsuch Haus drop-off plaza, so appropriate arrangements regarding delivery scheduling would need to be agreed upon between Gorsuch Haus and SkiCo. Maintenance Access to Lift Equipment – Maintenance access to lift equipment is provided by the mountain access road and a short (350 feet) spur road from the bottom of the mountain access road to the bottom terminal of Lift 1A. An alternative to the short spur road would be to use Gilbert Street to access the bottom terminal. Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board – The Dean Street option would require a variance from the CPTSB because the setback of Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge buildings from the lift does not meet the lift corridor air space clearance requirements. Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages • Direct lift access and ski return to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off • Very good pedestrian and ADA access to the Lift 1A bottom terminal • Does not require elimination of the east Lift One Lodge building • Ample skier circulation and maze area at the bottom terminal • Good accommodation of ticketing, guest services, and ski patrol operations spaces • Minimal constraints to grooming operations near the bottom terminal and maze area • Allows for all three lift types – Telemix, gondola, or detachable chairlift Disadvantages • Negative impact on snowmaking operations • Repeat skiing and return ski access to the Lift 1A bottom terminal compromised by longer runout • Requires a variance from the CPTSB • Impacts all three historic Lift 1 towers P35 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 26 | Conclusion Option 7 is a viable alternative for replacement of Lift 1A. It is physically feasible to construct the ski infrastructure as presented without uncommon construction challenges, and the option is largely responsive to the established qualitative and operational criteria. The key advantages of Option 7 are that it creates a direct lift and ski-return connection to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off, and it does not require elimination of the east Lift One Lodge building. Additionally, there is ample space at the base lift terminal area for skier and pedestrian circulation, as well as grooming operations. The primary disadvantages of Option 7 are that it presents snowmaking operations challenges, and property ownership (Dolinsek,) CPTSB, and historic resource issues related to extending the ski corridor further down towards Dean Street. Also, it results in a somewhat compromised repeat skiing experience and return ski access to the Lift 1A bottom terminal because of the longer run-out (500 feet versus 200 feet for the Gilbert Street Option). Many of the disadvantages cited for Option 7 can be mitigated or put into perspective. • A reasonable solution has been presented for addressing the snowmaking operations challenges. • The City has established that skiing over the Dolinsek property is an acceptable use of the land. • Preliminary discussions with CPTSB indicate that the necessary variances are attainable. • Vail’s Lionshead return run is an example of a longer run-out that does not overly diminish the ski experience. Only the issue related to impacts to the historic lift towers remains as a factor that could affect the feasibility of Option 7. Option 7 is a viable alternative for replacement of Lift 1A that is worthy of further consideration. When considering the mitigating factors of the stated disadvantages, and assuming there is an acceptable solution to removal of the historic lift towers, the significance of the advantages identified in this assessment outweigh the significance of the disadvantages. P36 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 27 OPTION 7A | MID-STATION Description Option 7a would incorporate a loading and unloading mid-station in the original Option 7 alignment, located adjacent to the Gorsuch Haus building (see Figure 7). The mid-station would be about 550 feet to the south of Dean Street. The purpose for adding the mid-station would be to provide lift access from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off to the top of S. Aspen Street and on to the current top of Lift 1A. With mid-unloading on the up-line, guests could ride the lift from Dean Street and disembark at Gorsuch Haus, or continue to the top of the lift. With mid- loading on the up-line, skiers could load the lift at Gorsuch Haus (a similar location as existing Lift 1A) and would not need to ski back towards Dean Street to return to the top of the lift. With mid-unloading on the down-line, guests could ride down the lift from the top and either disembark at Gorsuch Haus, or continue to the bottom of the lift at Dean Street. With mid- loading on the down-line, guests could load the lift at Gorsuch Haus and ride to the bottom of the lift. The type of lift technology employed (Telemix, gondola or detachable chairlift) affects the level of functionality of the mid-station for this specific application. With a Telemix, gondola cabins on the up-line can be loaded and unloaded at the mid station but chairs can only be loaded. On the down-line, only gondola cabins can be loaded or unloaded and not chairs. On a gondola, all gondola cabins can be loaded or unloaded in either direction (up-line or down-line). On a detachable chairlift, chairs could only be loaded and unloaded on the up-line, and there could be no loading or unloading on the down-line (other than potentially for pedestrians). The length of terminal for a mid-station is approximately 130 feet for a chairlift and 170 feet for a gondola or Telemix. For all lift types, the terminal building must be perfectly horizontal from end to end. With cabins and/or chairs continuously passing through the terminal at ground level it is not possible to walk through the terminal structure at any point along its length, as well as for a significant distance outside of the terminal until carriers are far enough above the surface for adequate clearance. A mid-station terminal at Gorsuch Haus would create a barrier to east/west travel that would be about 300 feet long. In order to create acceptable pedestrian and ADA passage between the east and west sides of the Option 7a mid-station, a tunnel or passageway would be required underneath or around the terminal with vertical circulation in the form of both stairs and elevators at each end of the tunnel or passageway. Such a complicated routing would be very inconvenient and undesirable. For example, a skier desiring to return to Dean Street by downloading from Gorsuch Haus would need to stop, take off skis, go down an elevator or stairs, walk around the terminal, go back up stairs or the elevator, and then load a gondola cabin. Likewise, a skiing guest staying at or having lunch at Gorsuch Haus would need to go through the same routing in reverse to load to the lift. In order to fit a mid-station terminal into this site, significant modifications would be required to the Gorsuch Haus site plan. The current floor elevations and building proximity to the lift would require retaining walls in excess of 20 feet tall, and given existing slope steepness in this area and the confined east-west width of the parcel, it is unlikely that such wall heights could be avoided even with reconfiguration of the site plan. P37 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 28 | The north end of a mid-station terminal structure extends to within about 70 feet of proposed Lift One Lodge structures. A U-shaped retaining wall with maximum height of 9 feet would wrap around the north end of the terminal structure and extend into the return ski trail to Dean Street, reducing its width to about 25 feet. This is not adequate width for maintaining a public return ski route to Dean Street, so skiers would either be required or encouraged to download the lift rather than skiing. As described earlier, if downloading from the mid-station is desired, the lift would need to be either a Telemix (which has limited download capacity) or a gondola, and it could not be a chairlift. Skier downloading through this required mid-station configuration would be arduous. Option 7a impacts all three historic Lift 1 towers, but not the base terminal. P38 IV.A. ±20'8030805579908000798080108025802080358050804080458060806580305208TW 8045.0 + 8010.0 + 8025.0 + 8035.0 + 8042.0+ 8002.0797006970597 8.5% ±25% 15%JUAN STEAST DEAN CTEAST DURANT AVESOUTH MONA R C H S T SUMMIT STGILBERT STDOLINSEK PROPERTY PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS CHAIR ROPE 35FT CLEARANCE PER CPTSB OUTSIDE OF CHAIR PROPOSED SKIWAY 5FT CLEARANCE PER ANSI B 77 CODE SOUTH ASPEN S T PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE NO SKI UNDER ZONE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING MOUNTAIN QUEEN EASEMENT STAIR/ELEVATOR BUILDING PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT +7950.0 40 FT25 FT MOUNTAIN QUEEN CONDOMINIUMS PROPOSED ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM + 7940.0 60 FT60 FTHISTORIC LIFT 1 STRUCTURE DROP-OFF SIDEWALK AND STEPS MILLING AREA + 7937.0 NO SKI UNDER ZONE STAGING AREA EMERGENCY VEHICLE AND TRUCK UNLOADING ZONE PROPOSED LIFT TOWER, TYPICAL PROPOSED SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 38 FT88 FTPrepared by : 0 40 80 120 160 SCALE (ft)NLegend Property Boundaries ADA Access Pedestrian Circulation Proposed Lift Existing Building Building Under Construction Building to Remove Recreation Easement Proposed Skiway Summer Access Road Proposed Building Existing Lift 1 Tower THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 7 | OPTION 7A - PLAN VIEW 1’ Contour Intervals May 10, 2018P39 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 30 | This page intentionally left blank. P40 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 31 Qualitative and Operational Criteria Interface Between Ski Infrastructure and Lodging Buildings – Interface between the mid- station and Gorsuch Haus would be poor. Interface with Lift One Lodge would be the same as Option 7. Skier and Pedestrian Circulation – Skier and pedestrian circulation would be fair. The mid- station would improve the vertical connection between Dean Street and the top of S. Aspen Street, but the complicated routing from one side of the mid-station to the other is a compromise to both skier and pedestrian circulation. Repeat Skiing and Return Ski Access – Repeat skiing and return ski access to the mid- station in this option is very good. There would not be a continuous return ski access to the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off. Minimum Width of Return Ski Run – The minimum width of the return ski run is about 25 feet where it passes between the mid-station terminal structure and the east Lift One Lodge building, which is not an acceptable width based on the slope gradient and projected skier traffic flows, and does not meet the 60-foot minimum width identified in the qualitative and operational criteria. Lift Type – A chairlift installation for this option would not be practical because it would not provide downloading capabilities from the mid-station. Downloading capacity on a Telemix would be significantly lower than a gondola, but could be adequate. Snowmaking and Snow Management – Given the restriction of the return ski run width in this option, it would be best to not allow public skiing back to Dean Street. If this were the case, snowmaking and snow management operations would be essentially the same as they are currently to the base of existing Lift 1A. If public skiing were allowed back to Dean Street and the ski return required snowmaking coverage and grooming, the same operational procedures and conditions as described for Option 7 would apply, but transporting snow from above through the 25-foot wide bottleneck at the mid-station retaining wall would exacerbate the operational challenge to the point of being prohibitive. Ticketing and Guest Services Space – Same as Option 7 Ski Patrol Operational Space – Same as Option 7 Emergency Service Access and Staging – Same as Option 7 Mountain Access Road – Same as Option 7 Maintenance Access to Lift Equipment – Same as Option 7 Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board – Same as Option 7 P41 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 32 | Conclusion While it would be technically and physically feasible to construct a mid-station at Gorsuch Haus, the extent of retaining walls required and consequences to the Gorsuch Haus site plan and skier/pedestrian circulation make it impractical. Assessment of the qualitative and operational criteria demonstrates that Option 7a does not offer any overall benefits over Options 1 or 7, and in fact would deliver an inferior guest and skier experience. For these reasons, Option 7a should be removed from further consideration. P42 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 33 OPTION 7B | LOWER DEAN STREET Description Option 7b would be identical to Option 7, except the bottom terminal would be shifted about 75 feet to the north and lowered 10 vertical feet in elevation so that it is more easily accessible from the Dean Street/S. Aspen Street drop-off (see Figures 8 and 9). The terminal would be at elevation 7940, slightly higher than the drop-off (~7937). The narrow width between the terminal structure and the proposed ski museum (~60 feet) constrains maze space and skier/pedestrian circulation. As in Option 7, 1,000 to 1,500 square feet of ticketing and guest services space would be incorporated into the proposed Aspen Historical Society Ski Museum building. For Option 7b, no stairs or elevator would be required in the building. Pedestrian and ADA access in Option 7b would be the same as Option 7 except no stairs or elevator would be necessary. Option 7b impacts all three historic Lift 1 towers and the base terminal. P43 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 34 | This page intentionally left blank. P44 IV.A. 79908000798079700597049780108020802580308035804080458050805580608065794015% 8.5% ±25%JUAN STSOUTH ASPEN S TEAST DEAN CTEAST DURANT AVESOUTH MONA R C H S T SUMMIT STGILBERT STDOLINSEK PROPERTY UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS RECREATION EASEMENT CHAIR ROPE 35FT CLEARANCE PER CPTSB OUTSIDE OF CHAIR PROPOSED SKIWAY 5FT CLEARANCE PER ANSI B 77 CODE + 7940 PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING MOUNTAIN QUEEN EASEMENT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT MOUNTAIN QUEEN CONDOMINIUMS 7937.0 + PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE HISTORIC LIFT 1 STRUCTURE REMOVED DROP-OFF MILLING AREA PROPOSED ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SKI MUSEUM + 7940.0 60 FT60 FT60 FT PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS NO SKI UNDER ZONE STAGING AREA EMERGENCY VEHICLE AND TRUCK UNLOADING ZONE PROPOSED LIFT TOWER, TYPICAL PROPOSED SUMMER ACCESS ROAD 38 FT88 FTPrepared by : 1’ Contour Intervals May 10, 2018 0 40 80 120 160 SCALE (ft)NLegend Property Boundaries ADA Access Pedestrian Circulation Proposed Lift Existing Building Building Under Construction Building to Remove Recreation Easement Proposed Skiway Summer Access Road Proposed Building Existing Lift 1 Tower THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 8 | OPTION 7B - PLAN VIEW A¹A P45IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 36 | This page intentionally left blank. P46 IV.A. 100 0200300400500600700800900 7940 7960 7980 8000 8020 8040 8060 8080 8100 8120 PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSED GONDOLA TERMINAL & PLAZA ADA ACCESS EXISTING LIFT 1 HISTORIC STRUCTURE REMOVED PROPOSED LIFT ONE LODGE, WEST BUILDING PROPOSED GORSUCH HAUS 7940.0 TERMINAL LOAD 7937.0 DROP-OFF 8002.0 GORSUCH DROP-OFF 8006.0 SUMMER ACCESS ROAD Prepared by : 0 30 60 90 120 SCALE (ft) NSECTION A: SOUTH - NORTH THE CITY OF ASPEN FIGURE 9 | OPTION 7B - SECTION VIEW May 10, 2018P47 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 38 | This page intentionally left blank. P48 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 39 Qualitative and Operational Criteria Interface Between Ski Infrastructure and Lodging Buildings – Same as Option 7 Skier and Pedestrian Circulation – Same as Option 7 except skier circulation and milling space at the lift maze area is more constrained. Repeat Skiing and Return Ski Access – Same as Option 7 Minimum Width of Return Ski Run – Same as Option 7 Lift Type – Same as Option 7 Snowmaking and Snow Management – Same snowmaking operational challenges as Option 7. Maneuvering space for grooming operations and turnaround at the narrow maze area would be confined and inefficient, but possible. Snowcat maneuvering in this area would involve multi- point turns and backing up, with associated noise impacts from the back-up warning attenuation on snowcats (‘beep-beeps’). Ticketing and Guest Services Space – Same as Option 7 Ski Patrol Operational Space – Same as Option 7 Emergency Service Access and Staging – Same as Option 7 Mountain Access Road – Same as Option 7 Maintenance Access to Lift Equipment – Same as Option 7 Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board – Same as Option 7 Conclusion Option 7b is a viable alternative for replacement of Lift 1A. It is physically feasible to construct the ski infrastructure as presented without uncommon construction challenges, and the option is largely responsive to the established qualitative and operational criteria. The key advantage of Option 7b in comparison to option 7 is that it simplifies and shortens pedestrian and ADA access to the lift terminal. The primary disadvantages of Option 7b relative to Option 7 are that it requires removing the historic Lift 1 base terminal structure, it displaces the majority of Lift 1 Park, and it causes skier/ pedestrian circulation and grooming constraints in the maze area. In consideration of the relatively minor improvements to pedestrian and ADA access to the lift terminal created by Option 7b versus the significant consequences it creates with the historic lift structures, Lift 1 Park, and circulation in and around the skier maze area, it is suggested that Option 7b be removed from further consideration . P49 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 40 | CPTSB VARIANCES Options 7, 7a and 7b would require a variance from the CPTSB because the setback of Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge buildings from the lift does not meet the lift corridor air space clearance requirements. In phone conversation with a board member from CPTSB, in which the circumstances of the Option 7 variance requirement were explained, the board member indicated that such variance requests are not uncommon and are commonly granted. The primary reasoning for the air space clearance requirements is to protect the lift in the event of fire in adjacent structures or buildings. In circumstances where the adjacent structure or building is not easily visible from the lift operator house or other operations personnel, and/or is difficult to access with fire fighting equipment, the CPTSB is reluctant to grant a variance for air space clearance. For Options 7, 7a and 7b, both Gorsuch Haus and the two Lift One Lodge buildings are clearly visible from the bottom terminal lift operators house as well as ski area personnel and the public. Additionally, the lift and buildings are in a heavily populated area with quick-response fire fighting capabilities. For these two primary reasons, and recognizing that without the variance the project may not be possible or financially feasible, the board member from CPTSB felt that an air space variance for Option 7, 7a or 7b would likely be granted. Attached as an appendix to this report is the Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board: Variance Request Guidelines (Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies). P50 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A STAGE II ASSESSMENT REPORT | 41 CONCLUSION This evaluation of the four options proposed by the City, Gorsuch Haus, Lift One Lodge and SkiCo for replacement of Lift 1A involved a description of each option, an assessment of how each option conforms with the identified qualitative and operational criteria, a listing of the advantages and disadvantages of each option, and a conclusion indicating whether each option was worthy of further consideration or not. Of the four options evaluated, Options 1, 7 and 7b were found to be possible concepts for replacement of Lift 1A and worthy of further consideration. Option 7a was not found to offer any overall benefits over Options 1, 7 or 7b, and in fact would deliver an inferior guest and skier experience. Additionally, construction of the Option 7a mid-station would involve very tall retaining walls and challenging construction. For these reasons, Option 7a was found to be an impractical concept that is not worthy of further consideration. In consideration of the relatively minor improvements to pedestrian and ADA access resulting from Option 7b versus the significant consequences it creates with the historic lift structures, Lift 1 Park, and circulation in and around the skier maze area, it is suggested that Option 7b also be removed from further consideration. Overall, Options 1 and 7 are equally responsive to the established qualitative and operational criteria. They each have a range of advantages and disadvantages that must be carefully and collectively contemplated, by all stakeholders, for a final decision on which option best meets the needs and desires of all parties for replacement of Lift 1A. Based on the results of this assessment, the advantages versus disadvantages of Option 7 were found to be more favorable than those for Option 1, which suggests that Option 7 would be the superior scenario for replacing Lift 1A. P51 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN | LIFT 1A ASSESSMENT REPORT 42 | This page intentionally left blank. P52 IV.A. A PPENDICES LIFT 1 HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE REPORT CPTSB VARIANCE REQUEST GUIDELINES P53 IV.A. This page intentionally left blank. P54 IV.A. LIFT 1 HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE REPORT SUZANNAH REID P55 IV.A. Photo Credits, Cover Berko Photo;Aspen Historical Society;Aspen Historical Society, Duke Collection; Aspen Historical Society, Kaeser Collection P56 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 1 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 Aspen’s Lift 1 is the embodiment of the birth of recreational skiing. It tells the story of Aspen’s ski history, along with the incredible drive and dedication of Friedl Pfeifer and his contemporaries. Lift 1 brings together the two strands of Aspen’s post WWII history. It is the crossroads of Walter Paepcke and his mind, body, spirit philosophy and the explosion of alpine skiing in the US. As an artifact of skiing, Lift 1 represents a direct line from the most influential people in the world involved in developing alpine technique and equipment, and those focused upon the invention and perfection of ski lift technology. The lift’s builders went on to innovate and the lift itself opened the door for international racing and recognition of Aspen on the world stage. As an artifact of a particular time in history, Lift 1 represents the emergence of the postwar tourist class in America, the rise of Aspen from the ‘Quiet Years,’ and the transition from a focus upon mineral extraction as a generator of wealth to the economy of outdoor recreation. It also has a compelling story to tell of the impacts of WWII on the development of recreational skiing in Colorado. Aspen Skiing to 1943 Movement on skis arrived in Colorado with the Norwegian and Scandinavian men who came to work the mines. Not only were skis useful for traveling to and from the mines, they provided recreation for men who had little else to do. Even then the quality of the snow and slopes around Aspen stood out. Coloradans had been enjoying winter sports since the early part of the 20th century. Ski clubs and ski hills, mostly located in the Front Range foothills, grew in popularity in the 1920s and 30s. In 1932, bobsleigh, skating, hockey, and Nordic skiing events were held at the Winter Olympic Games in Lake Placid, NY, sparking excitement for winter sports in North America. 1 Peter Shelton, Aspen Skiing: the First Fifty Years, 1947- 1997: Aspen's Long Love Affair with Skiing, Mountains & Memories, Snow & Skiers. Western Eye Press, 1996. p.14. 2 Roxanne Eflin. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of In the summer of 1936, T.J. Flynn, son of Aspen miner and Olympic bobsledder Billy Fiske, teamed with Ted Ryan to form the Highland Bavarian Corporation. By that winter, paying guests were staying in the new Highland Bavarian Lodge along Castle Creek and skiing on Little Annie. The men invited Andre Roch, a well-known alpinist and avalanche expert, to create a plan for Mount Hayden and Ashcroft. He found that “Aspen Mountain, directly above the town of Aspen, could be superior to anything in the U.S. at that time."1 Roch spent the winter of 1936-37 exploring and teaching skiing to guests of the Highland Bavarian Lodge as well as to interested locals. He also marked the location for the first trail on Aspen Mountain, which would be named in his honor. Local boys had already been skiing the mountain on rudimentary equipment for years. Fred Willoughby recalled: “…people would climb to the upper end of Aspen Street and come straight down either with a pole, or with one held between the legs to be used as a brake…My brother and I and a few others would climb from the Midnight Mine to Buckhorn Saddle and ski down to town over the same general area as the existing Aspen Mountain courses, using this same unsightly means for control and turning.” 2 Roch introduced Aspenites to new skiing equipment and techniques, and helped them found the Roaring Fork Winter Sports Club, which became the Aspen Ski Club. “Before Roch left the Aspen area for home in Switzerland in May, 1937, he impressed upon the members the importance of starting a development on Aspen Mountain, … His purpose for developing the run…was his firm belief that Aspen might go unnoticed for many years as a ski resort, but with a good race course … the publicity gained from such thing would make an overall development of the mountain easier and faster.”3 Aspen. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Draft Nomination Form, September 1989, p. 3. 3 Eflin. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of Aspen. p.6. P57 IV.A. page 2 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 Roch was correct, a good race course would put Aspen Mountain on the map. With focus on the new Roch Run, the Aspen Lions Club raised money in 1937 for the purchase of the cable needed to convert an old mining rig and a Model A engine into a lift. This consisted of two wooden ‘boats’ that could drag four skiers at a time a short distance up the hill from Aspen Street. Carrying 100 skiers per day, this was Aspen’s first ski tow. The Aspen Ski Club members cleared the run designed by Roch. Two key races on the run attracted international attention. The Rocky Mountain Ski Association Championship was held in 1938, and three years later, the ski club hosted the U.S. World Alpine Championships. Roch Run and the passion of the Aspen Ski Club resonated with Friedl Pfeifer when he first saw Aspen in 1943, and set the stage for the construction of Lift 1. Friedl Pfeifer Friedl Pfeifer (1911-1995) left his birthplace of St. Anton, Austria shortly after the Anschluss in early 1938. Already an accomplished skier and instructor, he found his way to Sun Valley, Idaho where he was instrumental in setting up Averell Harriman’s new resort. By the 1939-40 season, he was director of the Sun Valley Ski School and undertook the installation of a two-stage single chair lift, the first chair lifts in the world. His experience laying out the route and working with the American Steel & Wire Company would directly inform his ideas for Aspen’s Lift 1. During World War II, Pfeifer joined the 10th Mountain Division in 1943 and was stationed at Camp Hale near Leadville, Colorado. He was first introduced to Aspen on a training mission and was enthralled. “The mountain peaks looming over town made me feel like I was returning to St Anton. Even the meadow sloping into town reminded me of home. I felt at that moment, an overwhelming sense of my future before me.”4 During training he and other members of the 10th Mountain Division travelled to Aspen as often as possible 4 Friedl Pfeifer. Nice Goin': My Life on Skis. Pictorial Histories Publishing Co., 1993, p. 111. to enjoy the mountain and begin work on developing their vision. The 10th Mountain Division was deployed to Europe in 1944 and by February 1945 they were in combat in Italy. Pfeifer was seriously wounded and lost part of his lung. The Army moved him to Colorado Springs for rehabilitation. Pfeifer first met with industrialist Walter Paepcke, who was developing plans for Aspen’s postwar development, at his ranch in Larkspur, Colorado. Although Paepcke was interested in Pfeifer’s plans for skiing in Aspen, he was not ready to invest. After the War Pfeifer was discharged from the Army in October of 1945 and immediately returned to Aspen. He met with the Ski Club, which gave him the responsibility of fixing up the Boat Tow. He also set out to establish the Roch Cup, a comb ined downhill and slalom race. The ski school was next on his list. His experience in St. Anton led him to believe this would be an essential part of the area’s growth. Pfeifer, Percy Rideout and Johnny Litchfield, fellow veterans of the 10th Mountain Division, joined the effort and the Friedl Pfeifer Ski School, also known as the Aspen Ski School, was born. The next step was to widen the trails and get some rudimentary lifts working. The land on Aspen Mountain was divided into numerous mining claims and rights to use the surface had to be secured. Frank and Fred Willoughby (owners of Midnight Mine) and Fred and John Dolinsek (residing at the base of Aspen Mountain) were property owners and members of the Aspen Ski Club. They had cleared Roch Run and built the Boat Tow, and shared Pfeifer’s vision for a skiing community. Enough snow had fallen by December 18, 1945 to open the Ski School. In March of 1946, the first Roch Cup was held and the racers climbed to the start. Friedl Pfeifer was busy identifying claims and trying to raise the money to secure the land for new runs and a lift. With little money but a focused mind, he forged ahead, reestablishing contact with G.H. Bannerman from American Steel & Wire who had constructed the lifts at Sun Valley to discuss his plans for the new Lift 1. P58 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 3 of 9 Bannerman agreed to begin acquiring the steel that would be needed, “on Pfeifer’s word that the money would be forthcoming, a show of faith that was astounding 5.” Pfeifer also called on another friend from the 10th Mountain Division, Bob Heron. Heron was a civil engineer based in Denver, who had designed temporary lift systems for the US Army. Together the men chose the appropriate route for Lift 1 and devised a plan to transform an existing mining tramway into Lift 2. Lift 1 would take skiers up the hill over Roch Run to the top of today’s Ruthie’s lift, then on to the top of the mountain from near the top of today’s Lift 6. The master plan included construction of the Herbert Bayer designed Sundeck. With planning complete, all that remained was to secure the funds. Pfeifer was concerned that the 1946-47 season might pass by with no progress, so he again approached Paepcke. Paepcke’s vision had evolved and he became convinced that skiing could entice investors to his own grand plan. Pfeifer would have to surrender control of his Aspen Skiing Company in exchange for shares in Paepcke’s new Aspen Skiing Corporation. Paepcke gave exclusive rights to Pfeifer to control the ski school and named him President of the Aspen Skiing Corporation. With this arrangement, Pfeifer handed over the “four-inch stack” of mining claims that needed to be acquired for the new ski area and promised to have the lifts running by Christmas. Articles of incorporation were filed on May 16, 1946.6 The sale of shares was designed to raise $150,000 (about $2 million dollars today) for the installation of the new lift. Paepcke announced that the towers for the lift would arrive in Aspen on September 1, with operations to begin exactly two months later. Pfeifer’s crews were on the mountain cutting the Silver Queen trail and in mid -June they moved over to clear the new lift line. It took only four days to clear the mile and a half long, 30’-wide line, saving a considerable sum of money. Frank Willoughby surveyed the routes for Lift 1 and Lift 2 and brought the electric lines over from the Mountain Utilities Corporation’s Midnight Mine. The Robert Heron Engineering Company was on site, laying 5Morten Lund and Mary Hayes. Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers. Skiing Heritage Journal, Second Issue 1997, p. 18. 6“Incorporation Articles for Tow Recorded.” Aspen Times. 16 May 1946. p. 1 out the location of each tower footing and supervising construction. The trail crew, averaging eighteen men, was headed by Percy Rideout and John Litchfield. Newt Klusmire was the foreman of the concrete crew. His rock crusher, one of the few mechanized tools, provided aggregate for the foundations. They worked six days a week from 6:30 am to 5:30pm. Anyone who wanted to work just had to show up in front of Mike Magnifico’s ski shop in time to meet the trucks. Without modern motorized tools, the work was physically demanding and slow going. They would race the snow to get all the construction completed by the deadline. The September 12, 1946 issue of the Aspen Times reported that all tower footings and the concrete for the top and bottom stations were complete. The article also made a plea for more men: “With the first freezing nights already at hand, we would like to have it everyone’s interest that the construction continue on schedule. A larger crew on the mountain would naturally be of great help, so if you have your haying and potatoes out of the way, why not look Friedl up?”7 On September 19, 1946, the Aspen Times reported that twenty-two miles of new trails had been cut during the previous four months. The Silver Queen now extended to the top of Tourtelotte Park and the Magnifico Cut off east of Roch Run. The crews had also cut the Billy Zaugg trail, Schiller Road and the Little Annie trail down to the Highland Bavarian Lodge. On October 31, 1946, the headline in the Aspen Times exclaimed “THEYRE UP!” “Construction crews under the direction of Robert Heron of the Heron Engineering Company completed erection of the 52nd 8 and last tower of the giant chair lift that will carry the skier or sightseer from Aspen to a point on Ajax mountain that is more than 3400 feet higher in vertical elevation.” Ten more days were required to ensure all the towers were plumb and 7Leonard Woods. “Aspen Ski Lift Construction on Schedule.” Aspen Times. 12 September 1946. p. 1 8 This description refers to the total number of towers for both Lift 1 and Lift 2, exclusive of the base and top terminals. P59 IV.A. page 4 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 bolted tightly. On November 11, 1946 the Sundeck was finished. On December 14, 1946 the Aspen Skiing Corporation opened Lift 1 to local skiers at no cost. The completed Lift 1 consisted of 32 steel towers plus a terminal at each end. This was a monocable lift, where the chairs are attached directly to the drive cable. It was 8,500 feet in length and rose 2,560 feet in elevation. Powered by an electric motor stationed at the top terminal, along with a diesel backup motor, the new Lift 1 was the longest, fastest chairlift in the world. Among the other accommodations, the chairs had foot rests and a safety bar with a canvas blanket attached. Lift 2 had 17 9 towers and was 5,300’ long. It gained about 900’ in elevation to reach the newly completed Sundeck. It was designed and constructed by Bob Heron from parts available from an old mine tramway. Lift 2 was a two- cable system where one cable was fixed with the chairs hung on roller carriages. The smaller drive cable pulled the chairs along the fixed cable. It deposited its passengers just outside of the new Sundeck. Lift 2 opened on December 21st. “Promptly at 10 a. m. Miss Allene Robison, daughter of Mayor A. E. Robison christened the lift with a well-aimed blow, smashing a bottle of rare, old champagne against the uprights. Immediately the power was applied to the cable by Newt Klusmire, engineer at the power plant at the upper end and Mayor Robison swung easily into the first chair. Frank Willoughby, president of the Aspen Ski Club was seated in the second chair and Miss Robison took the third. …”10 It was estimated that 1,000 people rode the lift that day. The biggest party, however was yet to come. The Official Opening The official opening was held on January 11, 1947. “One sunny Saturday in January 1947, businessmen from Denver, Colorado Springs, Chicago, and 9 Assumed by the author based on total number reported in the Aspen Times on various occasions. 10 “Many People Enjoy Ride on Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 19 December 1946. p. 1. Washington; famous skiers; 10th Mountain Division veterans; and the governor-elect of Colorado joined Aspen townspeople at the base of Aspen Mountain for the opening of Aspen’s Lift No.1. Set in motion with the push of a button, it carried skiers a mile and a half through the air and up 2,200 feet, where, after a short hop on Lift No.2, they could enjoy the scenery from the top of the mountain, have a snack at the Sundeck, and ski down the famous Roch Run. The world’s longest chairlift at the time, and the fastest (moved 275 skiers an hour), Lift No. 1 introduced masses of people to the joys, thrills, and fears of skiing.”11 Friedl Pfeifer described the off-hill festivities: “In town, crowds of visitors strolled the streets looking at restored homes, reminders of the silver boom, and newly opened stores. The bars that were once filled with miners talking about silver and gold, were now filled with skiers eager for Aspen’s future. …. The celebration was a glimpse into the future of what was to become ASPEN. People walking the streets window shopping, music and parties, lights, the mountain open for skiing from top to bottom…Aspen was alive.”12 With the opening of the Lift, Aspen’s “Quiet Years” came to an end. Two thousand people attended the lift opening, overwhelming the town’s eight hundred residents. It had taken ten years from the first thought of an Aspen Ski Resort to arrive at this moment. “The ski resort at Aspen had its roots in some of its citizens’ struggles to revive the town they loved. In the last half of the 1930s, and the first half of the 1940s, even as the old mining Aspen slid towards virtual extinction, these citizens propelled Aspen forward on its first crucial steps to becoming a destination ski resort.”13 Friedl Pfeifer, Johnny Litchfield, Percy Rideout and the other men who constructed Lift 1 had displayed an extraordinary physical and visionary commitment to the project. 11 Annie Gilbert Coleman. Ski Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies. University Press of Kansas, 2004, pg. 118. 12 Friedl Pfeifer. Nice Goin', Pg 147. 13 Lund, M. and Hayes, M. Skiing Heritage Journal, Second Issue 1997, Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers, page 14. P60 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 5 of 9 After the Opening Lift 1 sparked a boom. Dilapidated Victorian Aspen was reborn to meet the needs of the new ski tourist. With the lift complete, trail construction continued in anticipation of the 1950 FIS World Championships, where Aspen sealed its international reputation. Lift 1 and Roch Run were integral parts of bringing the event to Aspen and of its success. “Aspen Mountain’s Lift No.1, a huge cultural event organized by Walter Paepcke in the summer of 1949, and the World Alpine Championships, hosted for the first time in the United States at Aspen in 1950, won national media attention for the town and its young ski resort. Skiers from Denver, Chicago, Sun Valley and New York showed up to see what Aspen was like for themselves. With its organization, technology, management, and out-of-state customers, Aspen’s ski area outgrew every prewar resort except for Sun Valley.”14 After twenty-five years of transporting skiers up the mountain, Lift 1 ceased operation on April 11, 1971. Most of the towers were removed to make way for Lift 1A, which, in combination with the Ruthie’s chair replaced Lift 1. A portion of Lift 1 below the new Lift 1A, consisting of three towers and the base terminal, remain in their original location. Standing in the Lift 1 loading area, one still gets the sense of the majesty of boarding the world’s longest lift and rising up, beyond view, to the top of the mountain. A Brief History of the Ski Lift Early in the history of recreational skiing, it quickly became clear that the need to hike uphill was a hindrance to the growth of skiing as an industry. The first mechanized ski lift in North America was a rope tow installed in 1930-31 at Big Hill in Canada. Rope tows dominated the 1930s, with 113 in use by the end of the decade. They were easy to build and could be driven by any number of jerry rigged car engines. However , they were discouraging to use. In Davos, Switzerland, an engineer named Ernst Constan invented the J-bar. Dartmouth College hired American 14 Annie Gilbert Coleman. Ski Style. p. 122. 15Morten Lund and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. p. 24. Steel & Wire to install a Constan designed J-bar lift on its ski hill in 1935-36. This was a turning point for both Constan and American Steel & Wire, as they were now in the ski lift business. The overhead single cable lift design was a significant improvement and became the basis for all lifts to come. Averell Harriman understood that he needed a comfortable, easy to master lift to attract the wealthy class of skier he had in mind for Sun Valley. Looking to his company, the Union Pacific Railroad, he formed a group of engineers to redesign the ski lift. James Curran was an engineer with the company with experience designing lifts for the United Fruit Company, which needed to lift great bunches of bananas onto their ships. He envisioned the same design could be used for people by simply replacing the large hook with a chair. This provided for comfort as well as the ability to span steeper, rockier terrain, a problem not found in Eastern resorts where surface lifts predominated. Harriman chose to install the design on Proctor Hill (704’ long) and a second shorter version on Dollar Mountain. American Steel & Wire was contracted to build the lifts and the first aerial chair lifts began operating in 1936. Sun Valley’s lifts began to inspire a rush of chairlift construction across America. In 1942, there were eighteen documented chairlifts in the country.15 American Steel & Wire had built half of them. World War II delayed further development until the 1946 season, when steel again became available for non-military uses. The next two years saw the construction of ten more chairlifts, including Aspen’s Lift 1 and Lift 2.16 After 1947, double chairs would rise to prominence. The Aerial Ski Tramway received its patent (#2,152,235) on March 28, 1939. The men listed on the patent are Gordon H. Bannerman, James M. Curran, Glen H. Trout, and the American Steel & Wire Company of New Jersey. “This invention is an aerial ski tramway intended to convey skiers from the bottom of snowy hills to the top so that they can ski back down again. One of the objects is to transport the skiers back up the hill in a manner involving as little effort on the part of the skiers as is possible. Another object is to carry the skiers in an absolutely safe manner so that regardless 16 Morten Lund and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. p. 24. P61 IV.A. page 6 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 of their peculiarities it is practically impossible for them to be injured”17 Lift 1 Lift 1 has a very open, straightforward structure that reveals the simplicity of the original design and drive components. While simple in construction, the top and bottom terminals had to be designed to withstand the dynamic forces of the 1-1/8” cable that traveled 8,500 feet in distance, rising 2,560 feet in elevation and back down again. The design needed to provide tensioning for the cable, prevent dangerous backsliding, and allow people to ski on and off the chair. These technical challenges were all solved in a straightforward, economical manner. Popular Mechanics featured the lift on the cover of its January 1948 issue, noting it as a major engineering feat. The towers were prefabricated by American Steel & Wire of steel angle (’L’ shaped) components, making up both the vertical corners of each tower and the diagonal struts that create vertical truss configuration. The majority of the height of each tower was riveted in the shop and shipped to the site, where the top frame and sheave wheels were bolted on. Each tower was lifted into place by hand and bolted to a concrete base. Of the original towers, three free-standing towers and the base terminal remain. The base terminal construction is similar to the towers, with additional welded steel tube and channel members to account for the significantly larger structural loads on the frame. The steel frame supports a 10’-diameter bullwheel and a rolling steel carriage that allows for the main 1-1/8” cable to be tensioned by the large concrete counterweight at the northernmost end of the terminal. The counterweight tower extends several feet above the bullwheel and several feet below the height of the chair loading area. This provides a wide range of travel for tensioning the extremely long cable. The original ticket office and operator shack adjacent to the lift have been lost. The steel structures are in remarkably good condition and are complete assemblies, with the exception of the cable, stored off-site with the remaining chairs. Some areas of peeling paint reveal the original orange color. The board 17Library of Congress, Historic American Engineering Record, US patent Office, by way of Mad River Glen, Single Chair Ski Lift, HAER #VT-38. formed concretework shows some deterioration, not unusual in the freeze-thaw climate conditions. The bull wheel is rusty but appears in good condition. There are several wood components at the chair guide structure that are missing or seriously deteriorated. This is also not unusual considering age and climate and lack of long term maintenance. The sheave wheels on the towers remain and appear to be in good condition. Lift 1 was the sixth property in Aspen to receive historic designation from the City (Ordinance #37, Series of 1974). At the time, the Historic Preservation Commission recommended designation, finding that the lift was vital to Aspen’s heritage. Conclusion It took enormous physical effort to build Lift 1. Crews cut the lift lines and trails with axes. The lift components, installed before helicopters were available for such use, were brought to Aspen by train and hauled up the mountain by truck, then set in place by hand. The cable had to be pulled into place and the chairs installed on the cable on site. The entire effort is a testament to the sheer force of will involved in bringing Aspen to the forefront of the ski industry. Many of the men who accomplished this feat remained active in the Ski Corporation, running and servicing the lifts and expanding the trails. Friedl Pfeifer went on to develop Buttermilk. Bob Heron, who got his ski lift start with Lift 1 and Lift 2, would go on to design the Berthoud Pass double chair in the fall of 1947, the second double chair in North America. Three other single chairlifts survive in North America. Two are operational, one at Mad River Glen in Vermont (1948) and one at Mt. Eyak (originally from Sun Valley c1939) in Alaska. The Ruud Mountain lift (1936) in Sun Valley is actively preserved but is not functional. Mad River Glen’s lift operated into early 2000, at which time the cooperative that owns the area raised funds to completely refurbish it and see it listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Reopened in 2007, it is now the fastest fixed grip lift in the US. Though closely related in time and character, Lift 1 differs from the Mad River Glen lift in a couple of interesting areas. Lift 1 was driven P62 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 7 of 9 by an electric motor at the top terminal, instead of the bottom drive diesel at Mad River. By now many of the men who visualized and built Aspen Mountain have passed and the city is losing that direct connection to its origin story. It is easy in an age of modern machinery and modern lifts to take for granted what was achieved by these men. Lift 1 is a powerful reminder of where it all began. To stand at the loading area and let your eye follow the lift line up the mountain engages the imagination and drives the question ‘Who did this and how did they do it?’ It is critical to preserve these touchstones so that future generations will also be able to look up in wonder and understand what those of the past achieved. P63 IV.A. page 8 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books • Alphabetical order Allen, E. John B. From Skisport to Skiing: One Hundred Years of an American Sport, 1840-1940. University Of Massachusetts Press, 1996. Coleman, Annie Gilbert. Ski Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies. University Press of Kansas, 2004. Flower, Raymond. The History of Skiing and Other Winter Sports. Angus & Robertson, London Editions Ltd., 1976 Huntford, Roland. Two Planks and a Passion: The Dramatic History of Skiing. Continuum, 2011. Philpott, William. Vacationland: Tourism and Environment in the Colorado High Country. University of Washington Press, 2014. Pfeifer, Friedl. Nice Goin': My Life on Skis. Pictorial Histories Publishing Co., 1993. Shelton, Peter. Aspen Skiing: the First Fifty Years, 1947-1997: Aspen's Long Love Affair with Skiing, Mountains & Memories, Snow & Skiers. Western Eye Press, 1996. ---------------------- Periodicals • By date Cookman, A.O., Jr. “Skiers Awaken a Bonanza Town.” Popular Mechanics. January 1948. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. Lund, M. and Mary Hayes. “Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers.” Skiing Heritage. Second Issue 1997. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. Lund, M.and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. ---------------------- Newspapers • By date “Ski Lift Details Revealed This Week.” Aspen Times. 7 March 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Incorporation Articles for Tow Recorded.” Aspen Times. 16 May 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Work Started On Lift Right-of-Way.” Aspen Times. 13 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Construction of Ski Lift to Start Next Monday.” Aspen Times. 20 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Ski Lift Foundations Work in Progress.” Aspen Times. 27 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Aspen Ski Lift Construction on Schedule.” Aspen Times. 12 September 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. P64 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 9 of 9 Woods, Leonard. “Team Cuts 22 Miles of New Ski Trails.” Aspen Times. 19 September 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “THEYRE UP!”. Aspen Times. 31 October 31 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Sundeck Finished.” Aspen Times. 7 November 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Aspen Ski Club Will Celebrate Opening of Aspen Ski Lift.” Aspen Times. 5 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Aspen Ski Club to Celebrate Opening of Longest Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 12 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Many People Enjoy Ride on Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 19 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Gvernor-Elect Lee Knous To Dedicate Ski Lift Saturday A. M.” Aspen Times. 9 January 1947. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Friedl Pfeifer Dies.” Aspen Times. 27 February 1995. Smith, B.G. “Aspen Pioneer Roch dies at 96. Aspen Times. 21 November 2002. aspentimes.com 4 May 2018 ---------------------- Websites The History of Skiing in Colorado, www.coloradoskihistory.com/History.html. www.skiresort.info www.coloradoskihistory.com/History wikipedia.org. Andre Roch. (With link to Brent Gardener Smith authored Obituary in Aspen Times.) www.aspenhalloffame.org/inductee/friedl-pfeifer www.skiinghistory.org/history/timeline www.skimuseum.net www.skilifts.org ---------------------- National Register Nomination Forms Hibbard, D. Proctor Mountain Ski Lift. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form, April 1978. Papazian, L. Mad River Glen Ski Area Historic District,.National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form July 2012. Eflin, R. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of Aspen. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Draft Nomination Form, September 1989. Library of Congress, Historic American Engineering Record, US patent Office, by way of Mad River Glen, Single Chair Ski Lift, HAER #VT-38 P65 IV.A. 5/4/2018 Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board: Variance Request Guidelines | Department of Regulatory Agencies https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dora/Tramway_Variance_Request 1/2 In accordance with Rule 1.2.3, the Board may grant exceptions, usually referred to as variances, to its Rules and Regulations. Rule 1.2.3 states: 1.2.3 Exceptions Strict application of the provisions of this standard may not be appropriate in every instance. Wherever it may be proposed to depart from the provisions of this standard, the authority having jurisdiction may grant exceptions from the literal requirements or permit the use of other devices or methods that provide features comparable to those included in this standard, providing that after receiving such evidence as the Board may require, the Board determines that: 1. The granting of such an exception would be consistent with, and would aid in, implementing the legislative policy set forth in C.R.S. 25-5-701; and either, 2. Compliance with applicable rules and regulations from which an exception is sought would create an unreasonable operational or design condition; or 3. Compliance with applicable rules and regulations from which an exception is sought would create an unreasonable economic burden. It is important when requesting a variance that the request meets the necessary criteria as set forth in Rule 1.2.3 (a) and (b) and/or (c). To legally grant a variance, a finding that the criteria of Rule 1.2.3 has been met must be made. The following are the guidelines for submission of a variance request to the Board. It is important that all criteria are met in the variance request prior to submission to the Board. If submissions are incomplete the variance may not be granted. When applying for a variance, it is important that why the variance is being requested is fully outlined and why it will not jeopardize the public's health or safety if it is granted. The following guidelines will assist in submitting a complete variance request. Define whether a temporary or permanent variance is being requested: Explain what length of time is required and why; Is the request a waiver of the rule, a delay of implementation or a suggestion of an alternative solution? Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board: Variance Request Guidelines P66 IV.A. 5/4/2018 Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board: Variance Request Guidelines | Department of Regulatory Agencies https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dora/Tramway_Variance_Request 2/2 Provide definitive information as to why the variance can be granted with no additional or undue threat to the health and safety of the public, such as: Operational history; History of similar lifts with similar conditions; Expert testimony; or, An alternative solution to protect the public. Give a complete explanation defining the necessity of the variance: An explanation of the current or proposed condition; Why it does not conform with the rule; What would be necessary to comply with the rule; Background information about the condition; How it has affected public health and safety. Note: Photographs and diagrams are helpful to the Board. Clearly state under which reference in Rule 1.2.3 that the variance is being requested: Is it unreasonable operational or design condition or unreasonable economic burden? If based upon unreasonable operational or design condition, explain what has been done in an attempt to comply with the rule and why it was not successful. Note: Referring to professionals and experts in the field who have been consulted is helpful to the Board, but please provide their qualifications. If based upon unreasonable economic burden, provide estimates to complete the work and documentation of how those costs would affect other operational demands. Show why the expenditure is considered an economic burden to the area. If you require further information or have questions please contact the Board office at 303-894-7785 or dora_tramwayboard@state.co.us P67 IV.A. LIFT 1 HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE REPORT SUZANNAH REID P68 IV.A. Photo Credits, Cover Berko Photo;Aspen Historical Society;Aspen Historical Society, Duke Collection; Aspen Historical Society, Kaeser Collection P69 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 1 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 Aspen’s Lift 1 is the embodiment of the birth of recreational skiing. It tells the story of Aspen’s ski history, along with the incredible drive and dedication of Friedl Pfeifer and his contemporaries. Lift 1 brings together the two strands of Aspen’s post WWII history. It is the crossroads of Walter Paepcke and his mind, body, spirit philosophy and the explosion of alpine skiing in the US. As an artifact of skiing, Lift 1 represents a direct line from the most influential people in the world involved in developing alpine technique and equipment, and those focused upon the invention and perfection of ski lift technology. The lift’s builders went on to innovate and the lift itself opened the door for international racing and recognition of Aspen on the world stage. As an artifact of a particular time in history, Lift 1 represents the emergence of the postwar tourist class in America, the rise of Aspen from the ‘Quiet Years,’ and the transition from a focus upon mineral extraction as a generator of wealth to the economy of outdoor recreation. It also has a compelling story to tell of the impacts of WWII on the development of recreational skiing in Colorado. Aspen Skiing to 1943 Movement on skis arrived in Colorado with the Norwegian and Scandinavian men who came to work the mines. Not only were skis useful for traveling to and from the mines, they provided recreation for men who had little else to do. Even then the quality of the snow and slopes around Aspen stood out. Coloradans had been enjoying winter sports since the early part of the 20th century. Ski clubs and ski hills, mostly located in the Front Range foothills, grew in popularity in the 1920s and 30s. In 1932, bobsleigh, skating, hockey, and Nordic skiing events were held at the Winter Olympic Games in Lake Placid, NY, sparking excitement for winter sports in North America. 1 Peter Shelton, Aspen Skiing: the First Fifty Years, 1947- 1997: Aspen's Long Love Affair with Skiing, Mountains & Memories, Snow & Skiers. Western Eye Press, 1996. p.14. 2 Roxanne Eflin. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of In the summer of 1936, T.J. Flynn, son of Aspen miner and Olympic bobsledder Billy Fiske, teamed with Ted Ryan to form the Highland Bavarian Corporation. By that winter, paying guests were staying in the new Highland Bavarian Lodge along Castle Creek and skiing on Little Annie. The men invited Andre Roch, a well-known alpinist and avalanche expert, to create a plan for Mount Hayden and Ashcroft. He found that “Aspen Mountain, directly above the town of Aspen, could be superior to anything in the U.S. at that time."1 Roch spent the winter of 1936-37 exploring and teaching skiing to guests of the Highland Bavarian Lodge as well as to interested locals. He also marked the location for the first trail on Aspen Mountain, which would be named in his honor. Local boys had already been skiing the mountain on rudimentary equipment for years. Fred Willoughby recalled: “…people would climb to the upper end of Aspen Street and come straight down either with a pole, or with one held between the legs to be used as a brake…My brother and I and a few others would climb from the Midnight Mine to Buckhorn Saddle and ski down to town over the same general area as the existing Aspen Mountain courses, using this same unsightly means for control and turning.” 2 Roch introduced Aspenites to new skiing equipment and techniques, and helped them found the Roaring Fork Winter Sports Club, which became the Aspen Ski Club. “Before Roch left the Aspen area for home in Switzerland in May, 1937, he impressed upon the members the importance of starting a development on Aspen Mountain, … His purpose for developing the run…was his firm belief that Aspen might go unnoticed for many years as a ski resort, but with a good race course … the publicity gained from such thing would make an overall development of the mountain easier and faster.”3 Aspen. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Draft Nomination Form, September 1989, p. 3. 3 Eflin. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of Aspen. p.6. P70 IV.A. page 2 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 Roch was correct, a good race course would put Aspen Mountain on the map. With focus on the new Roch Run, the Aspen Lions Club raised money in 1937 for the purchase of the cable needed to convert an old mining rig and a Model A engine into a lift. This consisted of two wooden ‘boats’ that could drag four skiers at a time a short distance up the hill from Aspen Street. Carrying 100 skiers per day, this was Aspen’s first ski tow. The Aspen Ski Club members cleared the run designed by Roch. Two key races on the run attracted international attention. The Rocky Mountain Ski Association Championship was held in 1938, and three years later, the ski club hosted the U.S. World Alpine Championships. Roch Run and the passion of the Aspen Ski Club resonated with Friedl Pfeifer when he first saw Aspen in 1943, and set the stage for the construction of Lift 1. Friedl Pfeifer Friedl Pfeifer (1911-1995) left his birthplace of St. Anton, Austria shortly after the Anschluss in early 1938. Already an accomplished skier and instructor, he found his way to Sun Valley, Idaho where he was instrumental in setting up Averell Harriman’s new resort. By the 1939-40 season, he was director of the Sun Valley Ski School and undertook the installation of a two-stage single chair lift, the first chair lifts in the world. His experience laying out the route and working with the American Steel & Wire Company would directly inform his ideas for Aspen’s Lift 1. During World War II, Pfeifer joined the 10th Mountain Division in 1943 and was stationed at Camp Hale near Leadville, Colorado. He was first introduced to Aspen on a training mission and was enthralled. “The mountain peaks looming over town made me feel like I was returning to St Anton. Even the meadow sloping into town reminded me of home. I felt at that moment, an overwhelming sense of my future before me.”4 During training he and other members of the 10th Mountain Division travelled to Aspen as often as possible 4 Friedl Pfeifer. Nice Goin': My Life on Skis. Pictorial Histories Publishing Co., 1993, p. 111. to enjoy the mountain and begin work on developing their vision. The 10th Mountain Division was deployed to Europe in 1944 and by February 1945 they were in combat in Italy. Pfeifer was seriously wounded and lost part of his lung. The Army moved him to Colorado Springs for rehabilitation. Pfeifer first met with industrialist Walter Paepcke, who was developing plans for Aspen’s postwar development, at his ranch in Larkspur, Colorado. Although Paepcke was interested in Pfeifer’s plans for skiing in Aspen, he was not ready to invest. After the War Pfeifer was discharged from the Army in October of 1945 and immediately returned to Aspen. He met with the Ski Club, which gave him the responsibility of fixing up the Boat Tow. He also set out to establish the Roch Cup, a comb ined downhill and slalom race. The ski school was next on his list. His experience in St. Anton led him to believe this would be an essential part of the area’s growth. Pfeifer, Percy Rideout and Johnny Litchfield, fellow veterans of the 10th Mountain Division, joined the effort and the Friedl Pfeifer Ski School, also known as the Aspen Ski School, was born. The next step was to widen the trails and get some rudimentary lifts working. The land on Aspen Mountain was divided into numerous mining claims and rights to use the surface had to be secured. Frank and Fred Willoughby (owners of Midnight Mine) and Fred and John Dolinsek (residing at the base of Aspen Mountain) were property owners and members of the Aspen Ski Club. They had cleared Roch Run and built the Boat Tow, and shared Pfeifer’s vision for a skiing community. Enough snow had fallen by December 18, 1945 to open the Ski School. In March of 1946, the first Roch Cup was held and the racers climbed to the start. Friedl Pfeifer was busy identifying claims and trying to raise the money to secure the land for new runs and a lift. With little money but a focused mind, he forged ahead, reestablishing contact with G.H. Bannerman from American Steel & Wire who had constructed the lifts at Sun Valley to discuss his plans for the new Lift 1. P71 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 3 of 9 Bannerman agreed to begin acquiring the steel that would be needed, “on Pfeifer’s word that the money would be forthcoming, a show of faith that was astounding 5.” Pfeifer also called on another friend from the 10th Mountain Division, Bob Heron. Heron was a civil engineer based in Denver, who had designed temporary lift systems for the US Army. Together the men chose the appropriate route for Lift 1 and devised a plan to transform an existing mining tramway into Lift 2. Lift 1 would take skiers up the hill over Roch Run to the top of today’s Ruthie’s lift, then on to the top of the mountain from near the top of today’s Lift 6. The master plan included construction of the Herbert Bayer designed Sundeck. With planning complete, all that remained was to secure the funds. Pfeifer was concerned that the 1946-47 season might pass by with no progress, so he again approached Paepcke. Paepcke’s vision had evolved and he became convinced that skiing could entice investors to his own grand plan. Pfeifer would have to surrender control of his Aspen Skiing Company in exchange for shares in Paepcke’s new Aspen Skiing Corporation. Paepcke gave exclusive rights to Pfeifer to control the ski school and named him President of the Aspen Skiing Corporation. With this arrangement, Pfeifer handed over the “four-inch stack” of mining claims that needed to be acquired for the new ski area and promised to have the lifts running by Christmas. Articles of incorporation were filed on May 16, 1946.6 The sale of shares was designed to raise $150,000 (about $2 million dollars today) for the installation of the new lift. Paepcke announced that the towers for the lift would arrive in Aspen on September 1, with operations to begin exactly two months later. Pfeifer’s crews were on the mountain cutting the Silver Queen trail and in mid -June they moved over to clear the new lift line. It took only four days to clear the mile and a half long, 30’-wide line, saving a considerable sum of money. Frank Willoughby surveyed the routes for Lift 1 and Lift 2 and brought the electric lines over from the Mountain Utilities Corporation’s Midnight Mine. The Robert Heron Engineering Company was on site, laying 5Morten Lund and Mary Hayes. Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers. Skiing Heritage Journal, Second Issue 1997, p. 18. 6“Incorporation Articles for Tow Recorded.” Aspen Times. 16 May 1946. p. 1 out the location of each tower footing and supervising construction. The trail crew, averaging eighteen men, was headed by Percy Rideout and John Litchfield. Newt Klusmire was the foreman of the concrete crew. His rock crusher, one of the few mechanized tools, provided aggregate for the foundations. They worked six days a week from 6:30 am to 5:30pm. Anyone who wanted to work just had to show up in front of Mike Magnifico’s ski shop in time to meet the trucks. Without modern motorized tools, the work was physically demanding and slow going. They would race the snow to get all the construction completed by the deadline. The September 12, 1946 issue of the Aspen Times reported that all tower footings and the concrete for the top and bottom stations were complete. The article also made a plea for more men: “With the first freezing nights already at hand, we would like to have it everyone’s interest that the construction continue on schedule. A larger crew on the mountain would naturally be of great help, so if you have your haying and potatoes out of the way, why not look Friedl up?”7 On September 19, 1946, the Aspen Times reported that twenty-two miles of new trails had been cut during the previous four months. The Silver Queen now extended to the top of Tourtelotte Park and the Magnifico Cut off east of Roch Run. The crews had also cut the Billy Zaugg trail, Schiller Road and the Little Annie trail down to the Highland Bavarian Lodge. On October 31, 1946, the headline in the Aspen Times exclaimed “THEYRE UP!” “Construction crews under the direction of Robert Heron of the Heron Engineering Company completed erection of the 52nd 8 and last tower of the giant chair lift that will carry the skier or sightseer from Aspen to a point on Ajax mountain that is more than 3400 feet higher in vertical elevation.” Ten more days were required to ensure all the towers were plumb and 7Leonard Woods. “Aspen Ski Lift Construction on Schedule.” Aspen Times. 12 September 1946. p. 1 8 This description refers to the total number of towers for both Lift 1 and Lift 2, exclusive of the base and top terminals. P72 IV.A. page 4 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 bolted tightly. On November 11, 1946 the Sundeck was finished. On December 14, 1946 the Aspen Skiing Corporation opened Lift 1 to local skiers at no cost. The completed Lift 1 consisted of 32 steel towers plus a terminal at each end. This was a monocable lift, where the chairs are attached directly to the drive cable. It was 8,500 feet in length and rose 2,560 feet in elevation. Powered by an electric motor stationed at the top terminal, along with a diesel backup motor, the new Lift 1 was the longest, fastest chairlift in the world. Among the other accommodations, the chairs had foot rests and a safety bar with a canvas blanket attached. Lift 2 had 17 9 towers and was 5,300’ long. It gained about 900’ in elevation to reach the newly completed Sundeck. It was designed and constructed by Bob Heron from parts available from an old mine tramway. Lift 2 was a two- cable system where one cable was fixed with the chairs hung on roller carriages. The smaller drive cable pulled the chairs along the fixed cable. It deposited its passengers just outside of the new Sundeck. Lift 2 opened on December 21st. “Promptly at 10 a. m. Miss Allene Robison, daughter of Mayor A. E. Robison christened the lift with a well-aimed blow, smashing a bottle of rare, old champagne against the uprights. Immediately the power was applied to the cable by Newt Klusmire, engineer at the power plant at the upper end and Mayor Robison swung easily into the first chair. Frank Willoughby, president of the Aspen Ski Club was seated in the second chair and Miss Robison took the third. …”10 It was estimated that 1,000 people rode the lift that day. The biggest party, however was yet to come. The Official Opening The official opening was held on January 11, 1947. “One sunny Saturday in January 1947, businessmen from Denver, Colorado Springs, Chicago, and 9 Assumed by the author based on total number reported in the Aspen Times on various occasions. 10 “Many People Enjoy Ride on Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 19 December 1946. p. 1. Washington; famous skiers; 10th Mountain Division veterans; and the governor-elect of Colorado joined Aspen townspeople at the base of Aspen Mountain for the opening of Aspen’s Lift No.1. Set in motion with the push of a button, it carried skiers a mile and a half through the air and up 2,200 feet, where, after a short hop on Lift No.2, they could enjoy the scenery from the top of the mountain, have a snack at the Sundeck, and ski down the famous Roch Run. The world’s longest chairlift at the time, and the fastest (moved 275 skiers an hour), Lift No. 1 introduced masses of people to the joys, thrills, and fears of skiing.”11 Friedl Pfeifer described the off-hill festivities: “In town, crowds of visitors strolled the streets looking at restored homes, reminders of the silver boom, and newly opened stores. The bars that were once filled with miners talking about silver and gold, were now filled with skiers eager for Aspen’s future. …. The celebration was a glimpse into the future of what was to become ASPEN. People walking the streets window shopping, music and parties, lights, the mountain open for skiing from top to bottom…Aspen was alive.”12 With the opening of the Lift, Aspen’s “Quiet Years” came to an end. Two thousand people attended the lift opening, overwhelming the town’s eight hundred residents. It had taken ten years from the first thought of an Aspen Ski Resort to arrive at this moment. “The ski resort at Aspen had its roots in some of its citizens’ struggles to revive the town they loved. In the last half of the 1930s, and the first half of the 1940s, even as the old mining Aspen slid towards virtual extinction, these citizens propelled Aspen forward on its first crucial steps to becoming a destination ski resort.”13 Friedl Pfeifer, Johnny Litchfield, Percy Rideout and the other men who constructed Lift 1 had displayed an extraordinary physical and visionary commitment to the project. 11 Annie Gilbert Coleman. Ski Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies. University Press of Kansas, 2004, pg. 118. 12 Friedl Pfeifer. Nice Goin', Pg 147. 13 Lund, M. and Hayes, M. Skiing Heritage Journal, Second Issue 1997, Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers, page 14. P73 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 5 of 9 After the Opening Lift 1 sparked a boom. Dilapidated Victorian Aspen was reborn to meet the needs of the new ski tourist. With the lift complete, trail construction continued in anticipation of the 1950 FIS World Championships, where Aspen sealed its international reputation. Lift 1 and Roch Run were integral parts of bringing the event to Aspen and of its success. “Aspen Mountain’s Lift No.1, a huge cultural event organized by Walter Paepcke in the summer of 1949, and the World Alpine Championships, hosted for the first time in the United States at Aspen in 1950, won national media attention for the town and its young ski resort. Skiers from Denver, Chicago, Sun Valley and New York showed up to see what Aspen was like for themselves. With its organization, technology, management, and out-of-state customers, Aspen’s ski area outgrew every prewar resort except for Sun Valley.”14 After twenty-five years of transporting skiers up the mountain, Lift 1 ceased operation on April 11, 1971. Most of the towers were removed to make way for Lift 1A, which, in combination with the Ruthie’s chair replaced Lift 1. A portion of Lift 1 below the new Lift 1A, consisting of three towers and the base terminal, remain in their original location. Standing in the Lift 1 loading area, one still gets the sense of the majesty of boarding the world’s longest lift and rising up, beyond view, to the top of the mountain. A Brief History of the Ski Lift Early in the history of recreational skiing, it quickly became clear that the need to hike uphill was a hindrance to the growth of skiing as an industry. The first mechanized ski lift in North America was a rope tow installed in 1930-31 at Big Hill in Canada. Rope tows dominated the 1930s, with 113 in use by the end of the decade. They were easy to build and could be driven by any number of jerry rigged car engines. However , they were discouraging to use. In Davos, Switzerland, an engineer named Ernst Constan invented the J-bar. Dartmouth College hired American 14 Annie Gilbert Coleman. Ski Style. p. 122. 15Morten Lund and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. p. 24. Steel & Wire to install a Constan designed J-bar lift on its ski hill in 1935-36. This was a turning point for both Constan and American Steel & Wire, as they were now in the ski lift business. The overhead single cable lift design was a significant improvement and became the basis for all lifts to come. Averell Harriman understood that he needed a comfortable, easy to master lift to attract the wealthy class of skier he had in mind for Sun Valley. Looking to his company, the Union Pacific Railroad, he formed a group of engineers to redesign the ski lift. James Curran was an engineer with the company with experience designing lifts for the United Fruit Company, which needed to lift great bunches of bananas onto their ships. He envisioned the same design could be used for people by simply replacing the large hook with a chair. This provided for comfort as well as the ability to span steeper, rockier terrain, a problem not found in Eastern resorts where surface lifts predominated. Harriman chose to install the design on Proctor Hill (704’ long) and a second shorter version on Dollar Mountain. American Steel & Wire was contracted to build the lifts and the first aerial chair lifts began operating in 1936. Sun Valley’s lifts began to inspire a rush of chairlift construction across America. In 1942, there were eighteen documented chairlifts in the country.15 American Steel & Wire had built half of them. World War II delayed further development until the 1946 season, when steel again became available for non-military uses. The next two years saw the construction of ten more chairlifts, including Aspen’s Lift 1 and Lift 2.16 After 1947, double chairs would rise to prominence. The Aerial Ski Tramway received its patent (#2,152,235) on March 28, 1939. The men listed on the patent are Gordon H. Bannerman, James M. Curran, Glen H. Trout, and the American Steel & Wire Company of New Jersey. “This invention is an aerial ski tramway intended to convey skiers from the bottom of snowy hills to the top so that they can ski back down again. One of the objects is to transport the skiers back up the hill in a manner involving as little effort on the part of the skiers as is possible. Another object is to carry the skiers in an absolutely safe manner so that regardless 16 Morten Lund and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. p. 24. P74 IV.A. page 6 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 of their peculiarities it is practically impossible for them to be injured”17 Lift 1 Lift 1 has a very open, straightforward structure that reveals the simplicity of the original design and drive components. While simple in construction, the top and bottom terminals had to be designed to withstand the dynamic forces of the 1-1/8” cable that traveled 8,500 feet in distance, rising 2,560 feet in elevation and back down again. The design needed to provide tensioning for the cable, prevent dangerous backsliding, and allow people to ski on and off the chair. These technical challenges were all solved in a straightforward, economical manner. Popular Mechanics featured the lift on the cover of its January 1948 issue, noting it as a major engineering feat. The towers were prefabricated by American Steel & Wire of steel angle (’L’ shaped) components, making up both the vertical corners of each tower and the diagonal struts that create vertical truss configuration. The majority of the height of each tower was riveted in the shop and shipped to the site, where the top frame and sheave wheels were bolted on. Each tower was lifted into place by hand and bolted to a concrete base. Of the original towers, three free-standing towers and the base terminal remain. The base terminal construction is similar to the towers, with additional welded steel tube and channel members to account for the significantly larger structural loads on the frame. The steel frame supports a 10’-diameter bullwheel and a rolling steel carriage that allows for the main 1-1/8” cable to be tensioned by the large concrete counterweight at the northernmost end of the terminal. The counterweight tower extends several feet above the bullwheel and several feet below the height of the chair loading area. This provides a wide range of travel for tensioning the extremely long cable. The original ticket office and operator shack adjacent to the lift have been lost. The steel structures are in remarkably good condition and are complete assemblies, with the exception of the cable, stored off-site with the remaining chairs. Some areas of peeling paint reveal the original orange color. The board 17Library of Congress, Historic American Engineering Record, US patent Office, by way of Mad River Glen, Single Chair Ski Lift, HAER #VT-38. formed concretework shows some deterioration, not unusual in the freeze-thaw climate conditions. The bull wheel is rusty but appears in good condition. There are several wood components at the chair guide structure that are missing or seriously deteriorated. This is also not unusual considering age and climate and lack of long term maintenance. The sheave wheels on the towers remain and appear to be in good condition. Lift 1 was the sixth property in Aspen to receive historic designation from the City (Ordinance #37, Series of 1974). At the time, the Historic Preservation Commission recommended designation, finding that the lift was vital to Aspen’s heritage. Conclusion It took enormous physical effort to build Lift 1. Crews cut the lift lines and trails with axes. The lift components, installed before helicopters were available for such use, were brought to Aspen by train and hauled up the mountain by truck, then set in place by hand. The cable had to be pulled into place and the chairs installed on the cable on site. The entire effort is a testament to the sheer force of will involved in bringing Aspen to the forefront of the ski industry. Many of the men who accomplished this feat remained active in the Ski Corporation, running and servicing the lifts and expanding the trails. Friedl Pfeifer went on to develop Buttermilk. Bob Heron, who got his ski lift start with Lift 1 and Lift 2, would go on to design the Berthoud Pass double chair in the fall of 1947, the second double chair in North America. Three other single chairlifts survive in North America. Two are operational, one at Mad River Glen in Vermont (1948) and one at Mt. Eyak (originally from Sun Valley c1939) in Alaska. The Ruud Mountain lift (1936) in Sun Valley is actively preserved but is not functional. Mad River Glen’s lift operated into early 2000, at which time the cooperative that owns the area raised funds to completely refurbish it and see it listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Reopened in 2007, it is now the fastest fixed grip lift in the US. Though closely related in time and character, Lift 1 differs from the Mad River Glen lift in a couple of interesting areas. Lift 1 was driven P75 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 7 of 9 by an electric motor at the top terminal, instead of the bottom drive diesel at Mad River. By now many of the men who visualized and built Aspen Mountain have passed and the city is losing that direct connection to its origin story. It is easy in an age of modern machinery and modern lifts to take for granted what was achieved by these men. Lift 1 is a powerful reminder of where it all began. To stand at the loading area and let your eye follow the lift line up the mountain engages the imagination and drives the question ‘Who did this and how did they do it?’ It is critical to preserve these touchstones so that future generations will also be able to look up in wonder and understand what those of the past achieved. P76 IV.A. page 8 of 9 Aspen’s Lift 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books • Alphabetical order Allen, E. John B. From Skisport to Skiing: One Hundred Years of an American Sport, 1840-1940. University Of Massachusetts Press, 1996. Coleman, Annie Gilbert. Ski Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies. University Press of Kansas, 2004. Flower, Raymond. The History of Skiing and Other Winter Sports. Angus & Robertson, London Editions Ltd., 1976 Huntford, Roland. Two Planks and a Passion: The Dramatic History of Skiing. Continuum, 2011. Philpott, William. Vacationland: Tourism and Environment in the Colorado High Country. University of Washington Press, 2014. Pfeifer, Friedl. Nice Goin': My Life on Skis. Pictorial Histories Publishing Co., 1993. Shelton, Peter. Aspen Skiing: the First Fifty Years, 1947-1997: Aspen's Long Love Affair with Skiing, Mountains & Memories, Snow & Skiers. Western Eye Press, 1996. ---------------------- Periodicals • By date Cookman, A.O., Jr. “Skiers Awaken a Bonanza Town.” Popular Mechanics. January 1948. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. Lund, M. and Mary Hayes. “Skiing Comes to Aspen: Visionaries and Teachers.” Skiing Heritage. Second Issue 1997. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. Lund, M.and Kirby Gilbert. “A History of North American Lifts.” Skiing Heritage, September 2003. Google Books Web. 4 May 2018. ---------------------- Newspapers • By date “Ski Lift Details Revealed This Week.” Aspen Times. 7 March 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Incorporation Articles for Tow Recorded.” Aspen Times. 16 May 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Work Started On Lift Right-of-Way.” Aspen Times. 13 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Construction of Ski Lift to Start Next Monday.” Aspen Times. 20 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Ski Lift Foundations Work in Progress.” Aspen Times. 27 June 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Aspen Ski Lift Construction on Schedule.” Aspen Times. 12 September 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. P77 IV.A. Aspen’s Lift 1 page 9 of 9 Woods, Leonard. “Team Cuts 22 Miles of New Ski Trails.” Aspen Times. 19 September 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “THEYRE UP!”. Aspen Times. 31 October 31 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Sundeck Finished.” Aspen Times. 7 November 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Aspen Ski Club Will Celebrate Opening of Aspen Ski Lift.” Aspen Times. 5 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. Woods, Leonard. “Aspen Ski Club to Celebrate Opening of Longest Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 12 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Many People Enjoy Ride on Chair Lift.” Aspen Times. 19 December 1946. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Gvernor-Elect Lee Knous To Dedicate Ski Lift Saturday A. M.” Aspen Times. 9 January 1947. coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. 4 May 2018. “Friedl Pfeifer Dies.” Aspen Times. 27 February 1995. Smith, B.G. “Aspen Pioneer Roch dies at 96. Aspen Times. 21 November 2002. aspentimes.com 4 May 2018 ---------------------- Websites The History of Skiing in Colorado, www.coloradoskihistory.com/History.html. www.skiresort.info www.coloradoskihistory.com/History wikipedia.org. Andre Roch. (With link to Brent Gardener Smith authored Obituary in Aspen Times.) www.aspenhalloffame.org/inductee/friedl-pfeifer www.skiinghistory.org/history/timeline www.skimuseum.net www.skilifts.org ---------------------- National Register Nomination Forms Hibbard, D. Proctor Mountain Ski Lift. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form, April 1978. Papazian, L. Mad River Glen Ski Area Historic District,.National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form July 2012. Eflin, R. Historic Resources of Aspen, Multiple Resource Area Amendment- Ski Development Resources of Aspen. National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Draft Nomination Form, September 1989. Library of Congress, Historic American Engineering Record, US patent Office, by way of Mad River Glen, Single Chair Ski Lift, HAER #VT-38 P78 IV.A. G GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS Lift One Lodge 06.12.18 Copyright © 2018. All rights reserved.P79IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |2 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Town of Aspen P80IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |3 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Town of Aspen ENTITLEMENT OVERVIEW 10 • HFF HFF • 11 MARKET OVERVIEW HFF • 11 Aspen is arguably the most prestigious mountain resort market in the world, yet its appeal is not only winter driven. As the saying goes, “you come for the winters and stay for the summers.” Unlike most other mountain communities, Aspen’s summers are vibrant with residents and visitors flocking to the area to enjoy luxury shopping, unique cultural events, renowned dining, diverse performing arts, numerous festivals, endless outdoor activities and the amazingly enjoyable weather. Among Aspen’s numerous attractions are the Aspen Institute, Aspen Music Festival, Aspen Food and Wine Classic and many, many others. This complement to the lively winter season is a key distinguishing factor as to why Aspen is one of the most desirable destinations around the globe for domestic and international vacationers, as well as seasonal and year-round residents. Aspen is consistently the leader from a lodging RevPAR and for-sale real estate perspective when compared to the other local and regional Rocky Mountain communities. Aspen is unique in that is tends to recover quicker than other local and regional markets. Aspen has seen residential market growth, particularly at the highest end, and will continue to experience continued recovery at a fast pace given the unique and prestigious nature of the community. The recent completion of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport runway expansion will serve to provide more consistent airlift and heavier commercial passenger loads throughout the year. Though access, by ground or air (commercial or private), has been strong historically, the runway expansion is a positive for Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley going forward. ENTITLEMENT OVERVIEW 34 • HFF HFF • 35 I NTERNATIONALLY-RECOGNIz ED S KI R ESORT With an annual snowfall of 300 inches and four separate ski mountains encompassing over 5,300 acres of terrain, Aspen is renowned for its world-famous ski slopes featuring an unrivaled experience in downhill skiing at Aspen Mountain, Aspen Highlands, Snowmass and Buttermilk. Each of the four distinct ski areas is accessible with one lift ticket and convenient transportation options linking the four mountains. Aspen Skiing Company operates all four mountains, as well as the award-winning Ski & Snowboard Schools of Snowmass/ Aspen. The Aspen area has seen over $138 million invested in on-mountain improvements, including 11 new lifts, three new restaurants, the Treehouse Kids’ Adventure Center, an industry-leading, $17 million children’s center and additional terrain. ASPEN OVERVIEW Aspen Mountain Snowmass Aspen Highlands Buttermilk Location White river national Forest, the mountain rises up from downtown aspen. White river national Forest, adjacent to snowmass Village and 9 miles from downtown aspen. Within the White river national Forest, 3 miles from downtown aspen. Within the White river national Forest, 3 miles from aspen, 6 miles from snowmass. Dates november 22, 2012 - april 14, 2013 november 22, 2012 - april 14, 2013 december 8, 2012 - april 21, 2013 december 15, 2012 - april 7, 2013 Lifts 8 21 5 8 Terrain 675 acres 3,332 acres 1,028 acres 470 acres Base Elevation 7,945 ft / 2,422 m 8,104 ft. / 2.473 m 8,040 ft / 2,451 m 7,870 ft. / 2,399 m Summit Elevation 11,212 ft / 3,418 m 12,510 ft / 3,813 m 11,675 ft / 3,559 m 9,900 ft / 3,018 mP81 IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |4 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Precedents: Architectural Elements P82IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |5 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Precedents: Landscaping P83IV.A. Lift One Lodge Material Palette Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. 6 LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |P84IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |7 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Approved PUD Plan c Guerin Glass Architects, P.C. 2015NTSP85 IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |8 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge Approved SE Plan Circulation Schematic | Option 7April 13, 2018GRAPHIC SCALECONTOUR INTERVAL: 1'CITY OF ASPENLift 1A Assessment040'20'80'P86IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |9 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge New Site Plan EAST DEAN STREETGILBERT STREETSOUTH A S P E N S T R E E T JUAN STREETEAST DURANT STREETSOUTH M O N A R C H S T R E E T SUMMIT STREET1 2 3 5 6 7 6 8 4 1 Relocated Lift 1 2 Historic Lift 3 Museum/Skier Services 4 Museum/Skier Services (Pool Shed) 5 Steakhouse Restaurant 6 Lodge 7 Free-Market Resi 8 Gorsuch HausP87 IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |10 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge New Site Plan EAST DEAN STREETGILBERT STREETSOUTH A S P E N S T R E E T JUAN STREETEAST DURANT STREETSOUTH M O N A R C H S T R E E T SUMMIT STREETMultiple Access Points 1 2 3 5 6 7 6 8 4 1 Relocated Lift 1 2 Historic Lift 3 Museum/Skier Services 4 Museum/Skier Services (Pool Shed) 5 Steakhouse Restaurant 6 Lodge 7 Free-Market Resi 8 Gorsuch HausP88 IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |11 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. EAST DEAN STREETGILBERT STREETSOUTH A S P E N S T R E E TJUAN STREETEAST DURANT STREETSOUTH M O N A R C H S T R E E T SUMMIT STREETLift One Lodge Traffic Circulation and Access 1 Public Parking Access 2 Skier Drop Off 3 Accessible Drop Off (on grade with lift) 4 Lift One Lodge Reception (no subgrade access) 5 East Building Drop Off 1 2 4 3 5P89 IV.A. LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |12 Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. Lift One Lodge New Plan LODGE LODGE FREE-MARKET RESI NEW LIFT 1 STEAKHOUSE TICKETING COURTYARDMUSEUM & SKIER SERVICES OPTIONAL COMMERCIALEAST DEAN STREETGILBERT STREETSOUTH ASPEN STREETDrop-offHISTORIC LIFT Services and Parking 0 SCALE: 1” = 40’-0” 20’40’80’ Drop-off Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. 12 LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC |P90IV.A. Copyright © 2018 Guerin Glass Architects, PC. 13 LIFT ONE LODGE - GUERIN GLASS ARCHITECTS, PC | Lift One Lodge Approved PUD Plan Overlay Diagram Approved PUD Plan StructuresP91 IV.A. Skier’s Chalet Steakhouse was built in 1953, providing slopeside lodging and dining next to Lift 1, the only access point to Aspen Mountain. Owner Howard Awrey also operated the Sundeck restaurant at the time. A Canadian, Awrey chose to build a chalet, borrowing from the European imagery of a ski town. In 1965, the business expanded with the construction of the Skier’s Chalet Lodge, a classic design with a shallow pitched gable roof, deep overhanging eaves and balconies, decorative cutouts, and wood and stucco materials. Awrey operated his popular businesses for some 50 years. P92 IV.A. EXHIBIT a � / Lift 1 A Gorsuch Project 1) Lift 1 A: I think that Lift 1A should be built all of the way down to Dean St. That alignment will attract far more people to the 1 A area than the lift where it begins now. 2) Historic lift towers: I think that the historic lift towers should be moved to the Marolt museum property, where they can be used for teaching the history of Aspen. If they are left at or near where they are, most skiers will pass them each day without knowledge of their history, asking themselves why dilapidated ski lifts were left on the hill. 3) Gorsuch Project: This is the information on current net-zero design. ZGF are the architects who designed the Rocky Mountain Institute building in Basalt. They have designed 10 other commercial properties for Colorado's climate and elevation. ZGF has a total of 164 LEED projects. "10 of these projects have achieved or are pursuing performance standards that exceed the ambitions of LEED Platinum to be net-zero energy, net-zero water, and utilize site and material impact-neutral design." Building size is from 15,600 SF to 383,000 SF (the largest of its kind). The Gorsuch Project has the ability to be a State of the Art net-zero development in Aspen. As the highest, most visible commercial building at the base of Aspen Mountain, the Gorsuch Project can lead the city into the future by creating the most desirable &sustainable accommodations in Aspen, using current cost-effective net-zero technology. I have no financial interest or incentive to choose ZGF or another net-zero capable company, if there is one. My intent is to show that cost-effective net-zero sustainable commercial building design can be the standard in the present. Net-zero plus and Powerhouse designs (giving back more energy than consuming) are also moving quickly into the current market, and I have information on both if requested. With the intellect and environmental focus of the citizens of Aspen, net-zero residential and commercial construction can become the norm in Aspen, NOW. Sincerely, Patrick Saga] EXHIBIT D D Lift 1 Corridor Work Session June 20, 2018 HPC: I have been an advocate for the reasonable preservation of Lift 1 in the face of the City of Aspen's 47 years of neglect since the City acquired this resource in 1971. Under the City's ownership, this most important of local historic resources has not only failed to be restored and celebrated but has been allowed to fall into a state of complete disrepair with the last piece of neglect being the removal of the badly deteriorated chairs. I have appeared before City Council on numerous occasions in the last decade to plea for the restoration and celebration of this historic resource. My pleas have been met with little interest from City staff, Council or the public. I enjoyed 3 seasons of use of the old Lift 1 and I have ridden the Mad River Glen lift of similar design. My passion for Lift 1 incudes having two fully restored chairs prominently placed in my back yard. IL i • s i _ a R .1 i-- LAM t �y v L—- I have closely followed the Lift 1 Lodge/Gorsuch House and Lift 1 placement discussion. As you may know, the Lift 1 Lodge approvals/proposal includes the relocation of one or both of the Skier's Chalet buildings on the site. In my view, this is a reasonable accommodation, preservation and use of the historic resources.The SE Group's proposal, as supported by the various applicants, contemplates placing the base of the new Lift 1 A immediately above the Lift 1 bull wheel infrastructure with no room for any towers, cables, or the reasonable placement of the single chairs. Additionally,the new Lift 1A structure would dwarf the historic resource and completely block the ability to cast one's eye's up the slope from the historic loading area and envision the old lift line.This would be poor preservation and celebration of this historic artifact. As a skier and community member, I support a lowered, relocated Lift 1A. Indeed, I believe further attempts should be made to bring the base of a new lift closer still to Dean Street. In order to accommodate the currently proposed or a lowered location Lift 1A, I would fully support relocating the historic Lift 1 bull wheel and related infrastructure. It appears Lift 1 Lodge is proposing ("New Site Plan", page 9) lowering the Lift 1 infrastructure closer to Dean Street which would separate the historic resource from the new lift and allow for a historic tower to be installed above the Lift 1 bull wheel. The view up the hill from the relocated bull wheel would be much better.This would be a much better celebration of the historic resource and therefor I support this solution. Alternatively, I would support moving the Lift 1 base west and north towards the intersection of Aspen Street and Dean (eliminating the constructed turn around facility as proposed by the Park's department) which would also allow room for the Lift 1 bull wheel structure and a tower parallel to Aspen Street (assuming the Skier's Chalet/Affordable Housing were to remain in the currently approved location). Thank you for your consideration. Mike Maple 1250 Mountain View Drive Aspen, CO I