Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20080428CITY COUNCIL AGENDA April 28, 2008 5:00 P.M. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances a) Proclamations -Aspen Sports Teams b) Presentation of Sustainability Report IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters maybe adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #34, 2008 -Contract Design Aspen Ice Garden Lockers Rooms b) Resolution #35, 2008 -Contract Diesel Emissions Control Technology c) Resolution #36, 2008 - Accepting Grants From Governor's Energy Office d) Request for Noise Variance -Jazz Aspen Rio Grande June 19 - 22 e) Minutes -April 14, 2008 VII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #14, 2008 -Supplemental Appropriations P.H. 5/12 VIII. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #11, 2008 -Clarifying Definition of Maintenance of Wheeler Opera House b) Ordinance #13, 2008 - Interfund Loan c) Resolution #37, 2008 -Annexation Lot 3 Adams Subdivision d) Ordinance #3, 2008 -Fire Station COWOP e) Resolution #38, 2008 - COWOP Eligibility - ZG Master Plan f) Ordinance #4, 2008 -Code Amendment - S/C/I g) Ordinance #9, 2008 -Extension of S/C/I Moratorium h) Ordinance #10, 2008 -Extension of Commercial Mix/Historic Interiors IX. Action Items a) Resolution #39, 2008 -Aspen Institute Appeal Ordinance #48, 2007, Interpretation X Adjournment Next Regular Meeting May 12, 2008 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. CITIZENS PETITION AND REQUEST 624 NORTH STREET - ASPEN, COLORADO - 81611 TO THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL / REQUEST FOR AN ALL-WAY STOP SIGN RE: Intersection of 5th and Gillespie Streets Dear Aspen City Council Members. PLEASE CONSIDER AN ALL-WAY STOP SIGN AT 5TH AND GILLESPIE TO SLOW DOWN TRAFFIC RACING ALONG GILLESPIE TO ROARING FORK ROAD AND THE ASPEN INSTITUTE PARKING LOT ON NTH 3RD STREET. As residents of the West End of Aspen, we have observed a tendency for local and visitor traffic to speed along Gillespie Street while traveling to and from 7th Street and Highway 82. There is considerable pedestrian and auto traffic crossing Gillespie Street at North 5th Street, to and from the Music Tent parking lot and the Aspen Institute buildings. The Cross Town Shuttle and RFTA buses also use 5th Street to cross Gillespie Street to enter or exit the Music Tent lot. We believe an all-way stop sign at 5th and Gillespie would slow down traffic and reduce the hazards to pedestrians and vehicles attempting to cross Gillespie Street or when entering and exiting the Aspen Center for Physics parking lot. Your serious consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated Respectfully Submitted: PjR~INTED/NA rME 1 SIGNA ~-~~5 ~-(n„~TuN ~ ~. i'~ - ~~~ ----l---- ~--- ADDRESS & PHONE # DATE /'ire.- ~ ~b~..,l.e 57o S'f'~ 7~I1 3 N/Od' ~__ ~' Z~ ._.,CL_~ ~ >L ~_S~!=~~' - ~ z~ x'71 y~ 3 w~ ~~~~,-- s~ w. 9aq~LZ% ,r -z8-off ,~ -x ~- o~ -- - ~1e tiara tv ai ~ , CITIZENS PETITION AND REQL"EST 624 NORTH STREET - ASPEN, COLORADO - 81611 TO THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL / A REQUEST FOR IMPROVED BUS SERVICE RE: Extended hours for the Cross Town Shuttle and/or Cemetery Lane Re-route Dear Aspen City Council Members. EXTENSION OF SERVICE HOURS FOR THE CROSS TOWN SHUTTLE AND/OR THE ROUTING THE CEMETERY LANE BUS THROUGH THE WEST END. As residents and visitors of Aspen, we who are frequent users of the Cross Town Shuttle respectfully request your consideration to extend bus service hours from 6:30 AM to !0:30 PM in order that we as citizens and guests might be able to have an opportunity to attend church, the theater and or public meetings without use of our private auto thereby reducing the amount of green house gas emissions and in keeping with [he City of Aspen's Canary Initiative. We also believe it possible to route the Cemetery Lane Bus via Power Plant Road through the West End along Smuggler-Francis-Hallam Streets via Aspen Street to the Ruby Park Terminal without any additional extension of route time or deterioration of service for the Cemetery Lane and Red Butte neighborhoods. In fact, we believe such a change would greatly improve bus service to all of the above mentioned neighborhoods and would provide year around service for the West End. Such a change would reduce .auto use to and from the West End. Your serious consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated Respectfully Submitted: PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS & PHONE # DATE (d~~ --~~--~_ c.-.1`~k'1 PS ~~~ _ ®~ ~~ ~° via MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: MEMO DATE: MEETING DATE: RE: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION APRIL 18, 2008 APRIL 28TH, COUNCIL MEETING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR ASPEN ICE GARDEN LOCKER ROOM REMODEL AND ENERGY EFFICIENT UPGRADES TO MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Request of CounciL• Staff is requesting the approval of a contract between the City of Aspen and Studio B Architects, in the amount of $40,000 for the purpose of architectural design intended to remodel the locker rooms at the Aspen Ice Garden, as well as the re-engineering of mechanical systems serving those locker rooms in order to achieve Canary Initiative Goals of making the Ice Garden boilers and air handling units more effective and energy efficient. This contract is only for design; funding for construction of this project has a place holder in the 2009 AMP budget and will be pursued further through the 2009 budget process. Previous Council Action: N/A Background: The Ice Garden has been in operation for over 40 years. While it started out as a privately owned outdoor ice rink, it has evolved to a functional indoor ice rink and one of the beloved Recreational facilities in our Community. Through the years, high quality board systems have replaced antiquated systems and chicken wire for glass. In 1994 the west end of the Ice Garden received a remodel of the warm room, skate shop, rest rooms, and office/meeting space(s). In 1998 thanks to the Parks & Recreation Bonds, over $1 million were spent on the Ice Garden replacing the concrete slab, running new pipes for the refrigeration system, and installing asub-surface heating system to prevent frost heaving of the ice surface. In addition a new roof was added to the Ice Garden, new lighting and the north wall was replaced. After all these improvements through the years, the locker rooms are areas that have been passed by. Touch up work here and there have taken place, but the lockers rooms at the Ice Garden have deteriorated to a point where showers and drains leak, floors need replacement, new lockers are needed and improvements to the air handling systems will allow the Garden to achieve Canary Initiative goals. User groups have identified these locker rooms as the most needed improvements to the Ice Garden at this time. Discussion: Currently the south wall adjacent to the alley behind the Ice Garden is leaking and in need of replacement. Engineering design work has been completed and staff has held off on this project to coincide the work with any construction related to a remodel of locker rooms in 2009. In addition plans and funding are available in 2009 to take out the ice and replace the board system at the Ice Garden. Funding is earmarked in the 2009 AMP to address the remodel of the locker rooms, the replacement of the boards, and the construction related to a new south wall along the alley. By coordinating all these projects in the Spring of 2009 we can see that the impact to users is minimized. The ARC Citizens Advisory Committee, who also oversees the Ice Garden as part of the SPARC agreement with the City, supports this project and urges Council to move forward. Financial/Budget Impacts: Funding currently exists in the AMP Budget for the architectural design of the Ice Garden improvements; Funds have a placeholder in the 2009 AMP budget to pursue the completion of the locker room remodel along with the board replacement and the south wall construction. Staff would like to coordinate all these improvements into one prof ect timeline and shutdown of the Ice Garden in the spring of 2009 and hopefully created some economy of construction costs by bidding all projects out as one package. Environmental Impacts: While staff does not know the specifics of the environmental impacts at this time, what we can identify is that the boiler systems and the air handling systems at the Ice Garden are old and most likely outdated as to current energy efficient standards. By having the mechanical systems included in the locker room remodel we should be able to achieve more functional spaces not only for changing and showering, but in regards to energy efficiency as well. Recommended Action: Staff is recommending the approval of this contract for design only of the Aspen Ice Gazden Locker Rooms. This will provide an opportunity for the users to identify what they would like to see in their facility as well as allow staff to check re-model costs against the funding identified in the 2009 AMP. Alternatives: Once the design drawings are complete, we don't need to fund all improvements in this design at once. We could phase the improvements in, so staff feels that design should move forward. If there aze no intentions to upgrade the Ice Garden in the neaz future, then this project should not move forward at all. Proposed Motion: I (Council member name) motion to approve resolution # ~ between the City of Aspen and Studio B Architects, for the expenditure of up to $40,000 for the azchitectural design of certain improvements to the locker rooms and mechanical systems of the Aspen Ice Gazden. City Manager Comments: .-` / r "" C~c.(~~a.~~ ~.e-~~ C-~-".~S-~.~' Attachments: - Agreement for Professional Services - Attachment "A" Scope of Work - Attachment "B" hourly rates RESOLUTION NO. `-~~ Series of 2008 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF LOCKER ROOMS AND MECHANICAL UPGRADES TO THE ASPEN ICE GARDEN, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND STUDIO B ARCHITECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there exists between the City of Aspen and the citizens of Aspen using the Aspen Ice Garden, a mutual interest in providing ice related recreational activities in a clean and healthy environment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the Ciry of Aspen hereby approves the contract for Architectural Design of the Aspen Ice Garden by Studio B Architects; and does hereby authorize the Mayor or City Manager to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 28th day of Anril , 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk H:uVIy Documents~Resolution.doc AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and Studio B Architects , ("Professional"). For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 2. Completion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement shall be completed no later than September 1, 2008. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional. 3, payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed Fort Thousand Dollars ($40.000.001 . Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. 4. Non-Assignability. Both parties recognize that this contract is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this. purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. 5. Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the - Page 1 P51-971.doc termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepazed by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. 6. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that s/he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Professional, to solicit or secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed [o pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. 7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work aze under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City [o its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, aze available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or aze in any manner connected with this contract, if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by PSI-971.doc Page 2 the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. 9. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workers' Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,00- 0.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services [o the City under this contract. PS1-971.doc Page 3 (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) aggregate. (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insur- ance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits aze in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by [he City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, temunated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (f) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that Ciry is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. 10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual aze kept at the City of Aspen Finance Department and aze available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. PS1-971.doc Page 4 11. Completeness of Agreemen[. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. 12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the respective persons and/or addresses listed below or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested, to: City: City Manager: Steve Barwick City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Professional: Scott Lindenau Studio B Architects 501 Rio Grande Place, Suite 104 Aspen, Colorado 81611 13. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. 14. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbeazance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbeazance or indulgence. 15. Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. I11eQa1 Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101. a. Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work PSI-971.doc Page 5 under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. b. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. c. By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has pazticipated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not employ illegal aliens. d. Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who aze not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional - Page 6 PS1-971.doc shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has no[ knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. [he City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable For actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. PS1-971.doc Page 7 17. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date hereinafter written. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] ATTESTED BY: CTfY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: By: Title: PS1-971.doc Page 8 Date: ~ ~ ~ l © g PROFESSIONAL: WITNESSED BY: ~G~'C'f ~' ~~D~AO" ,--- Title: p~l~ffC 1 ~~~~ K8~- Date: - Page 9 PS1-971.doc a r c h i t e c t- s April 8, 2008 Tim Anderson Recreation Director Parks & Recreation Department 0881 Maroon Creek Road Aspen, CO 81811 Re: PROPOSAL FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN SERVICES -ASPEN ICE GARDEN LOCKER ROOM REMODEL Dear Tim: This submittal outlines our proposal for the Aspen Ice Garden Locker Room Remodel as requested in the City of Aspen's Request for Proposals dated February 22, 2008. We have assembled the expertise of highly regarded consultants who will contribute significantly to the research and analysis of this important community asset in West Aspen. Our complementary skills include local familiarity & presence as well as broad experience throughout the state of Colorado. PROJECT TEAM Studio BArchitects - Studio B has emerged as a creative influence in the landscape of Colorado's modern built environment. Established in 1991 by Scott Lindenau, AIA, the firm's reputation for inventive design is evident in our projects for public and private clients. This successful body of work has garnered more than 25 design awards, and several projects have been featured in national and international publications. Our signature work has evolved to include larger scale projects for civic and institutional clients such as the Aspen Middle School, new fire stations for the Aspen Fire Protection District, and the expansion of Aspen's Christ Episcopal Church. As design consultant to the City of Aspen's Civic Center Master Plan, our familiarity with the public process has permitted us to successfully assist in their planning efforts. Clients appreciate our enthusiasm, commitment, accessibility and attention to detail, and their projects benefit from the clarity and thoroughness of our documentation Mechtric Engineering, INC. -Mechtric Engineering is a professional firm offering leading edge services in the fields of energy utilization, renewable energy, HVAC, plumbing, fire protection and electrical design and construction. We provide innovative services to a wide variety of clients including architects, building owners, utilities, contractors and government entities. Mechtric Engineering was established in 2002 in response to a need for a high quality engineering firm to providing mechanical, electrical and energy consulting services to the design and construction community serving the mountain construction market. Architects and Builders have consistently expressed the need for a design firm that can provide real world designs and services appropriate to the market. Our mission is to provide those services Structural Design Consultants, L.L.C -Established in 2004 by James Jackson Romeo P.E. With 15 years of experience in Colorado, Jim has extensive experience in both residential and commercial projects. Jim takes a creative, yet practical approach to structural design. He works closely with the Architect and Contractor to ensure the projects successful completion. SOl rio grande place suite 104 -aspen, CO 81611 - p 970.920.9428 - f 970.920.7822 7 ~~~(a F.x~.~ ~ "{~• SCOPE OF WORK The proposed scope of work will be limited to technical assistance, programming, and development of site and facility & program elements as outlined in Section I, Section II & Section III of the Request for Proposal 'Scope of Work.' The following items will also be included in this proposal: As-built measurements and drawings of the renovated areas. • User group meetings. • ADA code research. Three (3) conceptual locker room & bathroom renovation options for all four (4) locker rooms. • Improved locker room and bathroom lighting. • Improved storage areas. • Conceptual MEP and renewable energy narratives and/or designs. • Structural Engineering consultation and review. • Coordination of consultants. • Preliminary cost estimating of the conceptual designs. Section IV-Schematic Design, Section V-Design Development, Section VI-Construction Documents, Sections VII-Bidding & Negotiations and Section VIII-Construction Administration will be contracted separately once the final scope of work has been identified and the final budget has been established. DELIVERABLES Products submitted to the City of Aspen shall include the following: • Existing floor plans of the remodeled areas. Three (3) proposed floor plan options of locker and bathrooms. Interior elevations of the remodeled areas • Interior locker room & bathroom lighting/electrical plans. Written outline specifications for preliminary pricing. • Conceptual MEP and renewable, energy systems plans and narratives. Written structural narrative of any proposed structural changes. • Meeting minutes of all included user groups. Preliminary pricing outline. PROJECT SCHEDULE The project team is prepared to begin work immediately upon authorization. Periodic access to the Ice Garden will be needed in order to compile as-built drawing, verify existing systems and for general design purposes. FEE ESTIMATE The fee for the services noted above will be Thirty-Eight Thousand-Four Hundred Dollars ($38,400.00) The fee breakdown is outlined below. Reimbursable expenses are not included in the fee. The fee is determined as follows: Task Fee As-built measurements & drawing (Studio B) $6,000.00 Structural Assessment (Jim Romeo, PE) $800.00 Architectural Design options /Outline specifications /Lighting (Studio B) $21,400.00 MEP system renovation /Renewable energy options (Mechtric) $6,200.00 Conceptual cost analysis (Cost Estimator) $38 400 00 Total Fee ~j "11'11 EXCLUSIONS OR ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following are not included in the fee for services outlined above: Reimbursable Expenses including long distance phone calls/facsimile, printing & photocopies, postage & overnight courier service, model & photographic supplies, travel to or from outside the Roaring Fork Valley and consultant subsistence costs. These costs are estimated to be $1,400 for this phase. • Fees associated with the City of Aspen approval or permitting process. Attending City Council budget /presentation meetings. • Coordination and scheduling of the user group meetings. Fire sprinkler design. Energy Management Systems (controls). Detailed Construction Cost Estimates. Acoustical engineering. Renewable energy cost payback analysis. HOURLY RATES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES • Design Principal $185.00 • Principal $165.00 . Associate $150.00 • Project Manager $115.00 . Project Architect $100.00 • Intern $75.00 • Administrative $60.00 PROJECT RETAINER: A retainer of Five Thousand Dollars ($5, 000.00) is required to commence work. The retainer shall be applied towards the final two billing statements. This proposal is valid for thirty days. The architect does not warrant or guarantee any aspect of the project work performed by the General Contractor or any sub-contractor. Offered by: Scott Lindenau, AIA Design Principal, Studio B Architects Accepted by: Tim Anderson Recreation Director Date: ~~I~~fl~ Aspen Ice Garden Locker Room Remodel Conceptual work estimate for Studio B Architects (consultants to be additional) o As-built drawings 60 hours o site measurements o CAD drawings o verification walk through o User group meetings & preparation 24 hours 0 2 Initial meetings 0 2 review meetings o meeting minutes o presentation boards o Mechanical coordination 10 hours o site visit & walkthroughs o meetings & notes o coordination /correspondence o Conceptual option 120 hours 0 3 schemes o ADA analysis o code research o review meetings o redlines pick-up o lighting /electrical plans o Conceptual pricing 40 hours o documents & specifications o cost estimating, pricing alternates o meetings o Misc. 20 Hours o (admin., building dept. review, etc,) o Hours for conceptual phase 274 hours ~ ~(e~ Vlb MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Jannette Whitcomb DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 MEETING DATE: Apri128, 2008 RE: Contract Awazds for Diesel Emissions Control Technology - In-town bus fleet REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Environmental Health Department requests award of contract to purchase and install diesel emissions control technology (diesel particulate filters and closed crankcase ventilation systems) for six of the City of Aspen's in-town buses. The contract award is to McCoy Sales Corporation. The total of the contract is $42,423. The proposal from McCoy Sales Corporation scored the highest in the evaluation process. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved funding for this Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant project in March of 2007. BACKGROUND: In the 1980's, the City of Aspen was designated by EPA as anon-attainment area for PM10 (particulate pollution sized 10 microns or less). Since then the City adopted several measures, including expanding the second-lazgest mass transit system in Colorado, paid parking, ananti-idling ordinance, an extensive bicycle/pedestrian trail system, a ban on new wood burning fireplaces and requiring emission controls for new chaz grillers. These measures helped the City of Aspen become a maintenance azea on July 14, 2003. The City of Aspen is eligible for CMAQ funding every two yeazs from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) based on EPA's air quality designation of Aspen as a PM10 maintenance area. Part of the allotted funding for this project ($30,504) was approved by CDOT for diesel emissions control technology for Aspen's in-town bus fleet. The buses will have Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) and Closed Crankcase Ventilation systems (CCV) installed. Diesel Particulate Filters aze devices that collect particulate matter in the exhaust stream. The combination of these filters and Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel can reduce emissions of particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and cazbon monoxide by 60 to 90 percent. By cleaning up all six of Aspen's old/non-hybrid buses, the City of Aspen will have one of the cleanest bus fleets in Colorado, further the protection of the community's health, and set an example for private diesel fleet owners. DISCUSSION: The City of Aspen's air quality is significantly cleaner than it was twenty yeazs ago. However, the community continues to be challenged in maintaining and meeting future air quality standazds given the traffic and construction projects that emit tons of pollution in our air each year. The community has a growing number of diesel vehicles coming in and out of town. Given that Aspen is located in a tight mountain valley, where inversions aze a natural occurrence; our community must always be proactive and take action to prevent the degradation of our air quality. Aspen has a fit and active population; however, with continued diesel emissions the community becomes more at risk of increased illnesses related to diesel emissions. Diesel emissions aze associated with increased risk of cancer and other health effects. Currently in Pitkin County, where the City of Aspen resides, there are approximately 1,300-1,400 -asthma cases (children and adults; taken from 2006 draft American Lung Association survey) and 4.6 hospitalizations per 10,000 per year related to asthma (taken from Colorado Asthma Coalition 2000-2003 report). Cleaner buses will help protect this sensitive population and any visitors who have asthma. The main goals of this project are to reduce emissions from City of Aspen buses and protect pedestrian health. In addition, staff sees this project as part of a wide reaching Clean Diesel program. Having the buses retrofitted with DPFs will serve as a demonstration project of proven emission control technology to private diesel fleet owners. Staff slong-range plan for diesel emissions reductions in the private sector will require action from many groups in the community; the City of Aspen should take the first step. From grant projects like the city bus retrofit, private diesel fleet owners will see the benefits to retrofitting their vehicles with emissions control technology. They will see the reduction of visible emissions; understand the low maintenance costs, and have the community's appreciation of cleaner vehicles. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This contract does not reflect the total cost of this project. The contract we are asking Council to approve is for the City of Aspen's portion ~f the project, which includes funding from CDOT ($30,504) and City of Aspen ($11,919). RFTA has another agreement with McCoy to complete the funding requirements For this project. Their contribution was agreed at $5578 in March of 2007. This is a breakdown of the total Project Cost approved.i~rrby Council in Mazch, for informational purposes. 4 Buses 2 Buses Subtotal 10% cushion TOTAL City of Aspen $6341(required $5578 $11,919 $4800 $16,719 match CMA rant $30504 $30504 RFTA $5578 $5578 Pro'ecttotal $52,801 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: The environmental benefit of retrofitting the buses with DPFs is decreased pollution from the Aspen's in town bus fleet. It will provide protection to Aspen's sensitive population by decreasing emissions that trigger asthma attacks, especially in children. This project will provide an inexpensive means to improve the City's bus fleet emissions, support Council's goal in using the cleanest technology, and enhance community support of Aspen's mass transit system. In addition, by having these reductions, the health of bus riders, nearby residents, bicyclists, and pedestrians will improve. This project does not have a negative impact to the environment or the community. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends award of the diesel emissions control technology contract to McCoy Sales Corporation for the amount of $42,423. ALTERNATIVES: Other proposals were more expensive and could not provide the service and response necessary for this project. ~ITY MANAGER 3~ 5~ ~ ~, , 3 PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve resolution # ~~- RESOLUTION # (Series of 2008) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AND McCOY SALES CORPORATION SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF DIESEL EMISSIONS CONTROLS TECHNOLOGY FOR SIX CITY OF ASPEN IN-TOWN BUSES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and McCoy Sales Corporation, a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado and McCoy Sales Corporation regarding diesel emissions technology, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution ado ted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting he1dY~ l Z~ ~ Z~ Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and McCoy Sales Corporation, ("Professional"). For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Completion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to the first installation outlined in Exhibit "A" shall be completed no later than June 20, 2008. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work perfonned by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed $42,423.00. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. Non-Assignability. Both parties recognize that this contract is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepazed by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that s/he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Professional, to solicit or secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. 2 Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, aze available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which azise out of or aze in any manner connected with this contract, if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which azises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault ofhe City, its officers, or employees. 3 Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims- made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workers' Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occun•erice and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,00- 0.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) aggregate. 4 (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insur- ance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, condi- tions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certifi- cate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (f) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-]0-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Shazing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Finance Department and aze available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there aze no verbal or written representations, agreements, wan•anties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the respective persons and/or addresses listed below or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested, to: City: City Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Professional: Mike Weadley McCoy Sales Corporation Louisville, CO 80027 Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbeazance or indulgence by the City in any regazd whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwith- standing anything to the contrary contained herein, this agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. Illeeal Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101 a. Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. b. Definitions. The following terms aze defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. c. By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees aze not employ illegal aliens. d. Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with anew employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-10] et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 17. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date hereinafter written. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: sy: Title: Date: PROFESSIONAL: WITNESSED BY: By: Title: Date: 10 EXHIBIT "A" to Professional Services Agreement Scope of Work The City of Aspen and RFTA Diesel Retrofit CMAQ Project Introduction The City of Aspen, in conjunction with the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA), in this project seeks to install EPA or CARB Level 1 verified retrofit equipment (Technical Specifications) proper to the application for six (6) 2001 Neoplan AN 435E transit buses with McCoy Sales Corporation (McCoy). This project operates within the framework of a federally funded project, overseen by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and implemented at the local government level. The City of Aspen's expectation is that the Vendor be Flexible to accomplish the program goals. Project Description and Goais The intent of this project is to: • Replace the current Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOCs) with Diesel Particulate Filters (DPFs) and, • Install Closed Crankcase Ventilation (CCVs) or Filter Systems (CCFs) on all six units. The main goals of this project are to achieve the following: • Reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants (particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide with the priority being particulate matter) by 60% to 90% for the City of Aspen's in-town bus fleet in order to protect the health of the general public and vehicle operators. Provide a demonstration to private diesel fleet owners on diesel retrofit technology. Build acceptance and interest in diesel retrofit technologies. All DPFs must be listed on EPA's Verified Technoloav List (htto~//www eoa gov/otao/retrofiUretroverifiedlist.htm). CCVs/CCFs are to be listed as part of combination technology on EPA's or CARB's Verified Technology List. Program funding at this time is up to $48,000, with $42,423 from City of Aspen with assistance from CMAO funding and $5,578 from the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA). The City of Aspen contract will cover costs up to $42,423 with the project continuing via written agreement between McCoy and RFTA to complete the project. This total budget shall provide sufficient funding to allow six DPFs and six CCVs/CCFs. Background Oaeratino Conditions The vehicles for this retrofit operate on a Central Business District or CBD Duty Cycle. There are numerous stops and top speeds rarely exceed 30 MPH. Based on information downloaded from Cummins "Insite," average speed of these buses range between 9 MPH and 13 MPH. Aspen is located at 8000 feet above sea level. Winter average low temperatures hover around 6F-10F but may drop as low a -30F. Summer highs generally range around 85F-90F. The vehicles operate on relatively flat terrain, but due encounter short grades around town. Noise levels from the buses are a critical issue. Any new exhaust equipment should not result in an increase noise level. Pre and post retrofit noise testing will be done. 11 Eauioment Six (6) 2001 Neoplan AN 435E transit buses. All six buses were manufactured at the same time and no major modifications have been done since delivery. Each is equipped with a Cummins ISC 280 model engine; Family ISEXH0505CAM; Cat# 27112: Representative Serial # 46104490. Technical Specifications The equipment specifications below are for technologies designed specifically to reduce emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles. The technologies obtained through this RFP must meet or exceed the requirements of the specifications listed below. The DPF and CCV/CCF technologies may be installed in the following configurations: • EPA/CARB verified DPFs only or • EPA/CARB verified DPF with CCV/CCF CCVs/CCFs may be installed on some unverified applications to complete the combinations. For unverified combinations of devices, emissions benefit data will not only be considered for the DPF portion. Diesel Particulate Filters • Must be EPA or CARE verified; • Shall be proper technology for the application; • The DPF must be approved for use on the application by the engine manufacturer; • Unit is required to operate with on-road engines • At a minimum must operate on 1997 and newer engines; • Shall be manufactured from 16 gauge 409 stainless steel or better; • Welding shall be 409 stainless steel or better; • Applicant shall demonstrate verifiable experience with installation of device in the USA; • Vendor shall guarantee equipment to the end user for a minimum of 3 years/150,000 miles including installation related issues; • Vendor must be available to provide installation and maintenance training; • Must have replacement components readily available; and • Must respond to service requests at fleet facility within 48 hours. Closed Crankcase Filtration • Must be a component in an EPA or CARB verified combination with a DOC or DPF; • Shall be proper technology for the application; • Must be designed to handle crankcase flow rates of the Neoplan bus; • Eliminate crankcase blow-by emissions from crankcase through a closed loop system; • Minimum 400-hour filter life; • Since the blow-by flow rate of a worn engine is generally double the flow rate when an engine is new, flow testing, pressure testing or other procedures must be provided to ensure retrofitted engines are good candidates for CCV/CCF; • Vendor shall guarantee equipment to the end user for a minimum of 3 years/150,000 miles including installation related issues; • Vendor must be available to provide installation and maintenance training; • Must have replacement components readily available; and • Must respond to service requests at fleet facility within 48 hours. Product Verification (1) Emissions Benefits: Vendor shall supply the EPAICARB verified and listed emissions benefits for devices. Only emissions reductions levels listed by EPA or CARB will be considered. (2) Experience: Vendor shall demonstrate successful experience with the equipment in the USA through written studies or letters of support from fleet operators or government entities (cost home by vendor). (3) Warranty: Vendor shall supply written warranty to verify warranty coverage. 12 Servicing (1) Monitor installation, including but not limited to bracketing, welds, seals and backpressure of devices (2) Technical SupporUServicing: If technical problems are encountered after installation of devices, vendors must respond to service requests within 48 hours and diagnose the problem. Retrofit Planning McCoy will recommend the proper equipment for the application to be installed on each vehicle based upon performance, cost, availability, effect of retrofitting on the engine manufacturer's warranty and reliability. McCoy shall identify the specific components of the recommended emissions control system including emission control device, diagnostic equipment, monitoring and warning equipment and installation fixtures as appropriate. McCoy shall understand the original engine manufacturers' "recommended installation instructions" for any retrofit to be installed to ensure the warranty remains in effect. McCoy shall develop the retrofit installation plan in conjunction with the City of Aspen and RFTA. The Retrofit Plan shall include the first installation to be installed by McCoy and ECS (manufacturer) with suppoR from RFTA mechanics, by June 20, 2008. After the first installation, an "Installation Kit" will be developed in a timely fashion by McCoy and ECS for RFTA mechanics to use in the remainder five installations. Installation Invoicing and Meetings This task incorporates an ongoing set of program processes that include installation, invoicing and meetings. Installation McCoy will coordinate the installation of the retrofit equipment on the first bus with RFTA. The installation of this first bus will be conducted no later than June 20, 2008. The City of Aspen will purchase the approved retrofit equipment that includes, but is not limited to, diesel particulate filters and closed crankcase ventilation/filtration units and filters for the total amount not to exceed $42,423. RFTA and McCoy will work together to install retrofit equipment on buses. McCoy is responsible for the initial install and it may take place off-hours and on weekends depending on fleet operations as determined by RFTA. Invoicing Invoicing is allowed only once per month under CDOT guidelines. The Vendor will work with RFTA to install the first piece of equipment by no later than June 20, 2008. The Vendor will then compile the installation invoices onto the City of Aspen summary invoice template for submittal to the City of Aspen. McCoy will work with the City of Aspen and RFTA to ensure program invoicing and paperwork is timely and clear. CDOT will then review the submittals and issue payment. Once payment is received from CDOT to the City of Aspen, the City of Aspen will reimburse McCoy. Reports Upon completion of installations, if required, McCoy shall prepare a written report detailing the maintenance procedures and schedule to maintain the category of retrofitted equipment in peak operating condition to maximize emissions reductions. McCoy shall be required to respond to any maintenance calls within 48 hours to diagnose any problems with the installation or operation of the retrofit equipment. Outreach McCoy is required to be a part of outreach efforts to educate other diesel fleet owners about diesel emissions control technology. The Vendor shall provide materials and participate in outreach for a year after the installation. 13 Prooram Evaluation A program evaluation will be developed upon project completion to determine if the program goals were met. RFTA will document their use of the retrofit technology including technical successes and/or problems experienced. City of Aspen staff, RFTA and McCoy will use this data to develop a final report for CDOT and Aspen City Council and other organizations that are interested in developing retrofit programs. The following pages from McCoy's RFP application are included in this Scope of Work. 14 Section 1 -Introduction McCoy Sales Corporation (McCoy) proposes to provide the City of Aspen (Aspen) and the Roaring Fork Transit Authority (RFTA) with emission reduction diesel retrofit equipment, Diesel Particulate Fillers (DPF) and Closed Crankcase Ventilation (CCV) devices that are EPA and CARE Level 3 verified (see Technical Spec cations). The devices offered are proper to the appiicafron for six (8) 2001 Neoplan AN 435E transit buses. McCoy will be flexible in assisting in the accomplishment of the program goals. McCoy has been a distributor of heating and cooling components and systems since the 1840's. McCoy's Fluid Power Division is a full-service distributor, fabricator and service organization which has been active and growing in the State of Colorado for over twenty years. The DPF's offered by McCoy are manufactured by Engine Control Systems (ECS) and the CCV's are manufactured by the Racor Division of Parker Hannan Corporation (Racor), but marketed and supported by ECS. Proied Description and Goals McCoy's intent on this project is to: Supply DPFs, verified by EPA to reduce PM by a minimum of 90°k ,hydrocarbons by 65% and CO by 75%, to replace the current Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOCs) and, Add CCVs on all six units. Intall all supplied components, assist RFTA personnel in installations, provide instruction to RFT personnel in proper installation, dr provide whatever level of assistance may be requested by RFTA. Provide training of RFTA technicians in the proper maintenance of the retrofit equipment and offer periodic follow-up to assure effective performance of retrofit equipment. The main goals of this project are to achieve the following: Reduce emissions of criteria eir pollutants (particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide with the priority being particulate matter) by 80°h to 9096 for the City of Aspen's in-town bus fleet in order to protect the health of the general public and vehicle operators. The use of ECS products will assure meet/ng or exceeding the upper limit of this goal. Provide a demonstration to private diesel fleet owners on diesel retrofd technology. Build acceptance and interest in diesel retrofit technologies. McCoy will be pleased to assist in a flnai evaluation process to document the use and effectiveness of the retrofit technology including technical successes and/or problems experienced. McCoy is very proud of the capabilities that they can offer Aspen / RFTA: McCoy's local service -Mobile Techs available 2417 to work wherever customers' equipment is down ECS excellence In product engineering, fabrication, and on-site service- o Direct fit replacements saving install time and money o Twenty-five years experience in the most demanding retrofd and aftennarket applications o More EPA and CARB Verifications than any other emission reduction diesel retrofd supplier o Experienced fuittime Field Service Technicians for application and installation assistance o Consistently the most cost effective supplier RacoC Division of Parker Hannifin - Racor's CCV's are used by a who's-who of engine manufacturers, are covered by multiple patents, are truly "closed-loop", and are extremely cost effective. The TEAM of McCoy Sales as distributor and ECS as manufacturer, offers RFTA the highest level of experience available in Colorado today, even though we are aware that there are other csistrl~ors. operating Individually, with more experience retrofitting emission reduction devices over the last 4-5 years. We can document that McCoy/ECS can offer the following: Technologically advanced, cost effective products from ECS and Racor, McCoy's hard-working, experienced local service, ECS cost effective products, knowledgeable application engineering team, and technicelly competent on-site field service personnel. Ail together McCoy gives Aspen ! RFTA a team they can work with confidently. Together, we will provide an affective emission reduction project whose results will be apparent to the community of Aspen. Completion of the Project will be accomplished in a timely manner, will make the best use of the resources at hand, and will show clear, beneficial results -things of which the Aspen / RFTA team can be justifiably proud. Ooeretina Conditions McCoy and ECS have read and understood the operating conditions listed in the RFP. Suitability of McCoyr's Retrofit Offering The operating conditions and equipment specifications outlined above should albw for effective operation of the DPF's provided by McCoy with a recommended minimum cleaning interval of twelve (12) months. To provide sufficient assurance that sound performance would resufG data acquisition devices will need to be installed on three of the subject buses. These devices will record engine temperature profiles through a normal CBD Duty Cycle. If temperature profiling shows that sound performance would not result from the specified DPF's, ECS will be able to offer alternative technology. Section 3 Technical Soeciflcations The technologies offered by McCoy through this Proposal all meet or exceed the requirements of the specifications listed below. For unverified combinations of devices, emissions benefd data will only apply to the Diesel Particulate Filter. Diesel Particulate Fitters fDPF) McCoy's DPF offering meets or exceeds all of the listed specifications. There is one erroneous spe~cetion listed that is not applicable: "The DPF must be approved for use on the application by the engine manufacturer." Verification of retrofd devices on specific engines is provided by EPA, not the engine manufacturer. RADC has removed this specification from more recent RFP's. Verification of this change is available through Steve McCannon, Project Manager at RAOC - (303~29-5450 or email at smccennon~ragc.org. Closed Crenkcase Filtration (CCVI McCoy's CCV offering meets or exceeds ail of the listed specifications. There is the one erroneous specification that is the same as that ttsted above. McCoy's offering exceeds the following specifications: . The requirement that crankcase bbw-by emissions be eliminated through a "closed bop system" applies to McCoy's offering. A CCF manufactured by Donaldson, however, includes a pressure relief vahre insialbd between the crankcase arxi the CCF. It vents to atmosphere when pressure differential acmes the filter reaches a maximum. Obviously, the ECS CCV, which absolutely does not vent to atmosphere under any clroumstances, exceeds the "closed- loop" spec~caUon as interpreted by Donaldson. Minimum 400-hour filter life": The ECS filter life, as verfied by EPA, is 750 hours or every second oil change. . "Flow t®sting, pressure testNrg or other procedures must be pmvlded to ensure retro(rttad engines are good candidates for CCV": o This is the requirement of one CCF manufacturer, but it is not an EPA requirement, nor is it a recognized industry standard. o Paying an extra fee to a Vendor for blow-by testing is a needbss expense. o Racor, the CCV manufacturer, is aware that the bbw-by flow rate of a worn engine could be double that of a new engine. That is why Racor rates CCV's based on the new engine horsepower, but allows for the higher blow- byflow rates likely at the time of engine failure. o Racor's GCV has a proprietary pop-up indicator that will alert techniaans to change the fitter element. It woukt also indicate excess flow in the unlikely event tt should occur. Product Verification To avoid any confusion about the EPA-approved method for comparing retrofd technology emission reductions, see the following letter from the EPA to ECS' Regulatory Affairs Manager, Kevin Brown, sent May 2007 (I have emphasized important items): From: Johnson.Dennis~epamail.epa.gov Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 3:00 PM To: Brown, Kevin Cc: Blubaugh.Jim~epamail.epa.gov Subject: Verified Levels for Retrofit Technologies Dear Mr. Brown, This note is to follow-up on our conversation yesterday regarding emission reductions verified by EPA for retrofit technologies employed undor the National Clean Diesel Campaign (NCDC). As we discussed, we will be following up with guidance to all verified technology manufacturers, but in the meantime I wanted to outline the important points that should be clearly understood by all retrofit technology rnanufacturcrs, as well as fleet owners/oporatora, considering building diesel retrofit projects. I have provided similar guidance to fiPA's regional representatives working with the NCDC and in other public presentations in the past. For federally-funded (and most state-funded) competitive programs, only the EPA or ARB verified levels should be considered in evaluating the emission reduction effectiveness of technologies. If a technoloev rs _ ._. .. .. __. _ ____. ~___a a.... ,,.....heo;~l when comparing the emission reduction effectiveness. h2T to ~.otogfes ver:nea av nrca aruv wre w.~.ww level should be coasidered f my emohasisl. and only the specified engine families are considered eppropn: for a verified installation. For technologies verified by EPA, the specified levels on our Verified Technolo List may be considered for the specific technology. For competitive bid purposes, if a manufacturer has multiple technologies on EPA's list, the manufacturer should propose specific devices, or C6e a ' R !d assume the minimum level of reduction Tor the mantt~actu.~r's technolo>!v (my emphasis) options. Additionally, when acompany - otherthan the manufacturer specified on the verified technology list - proposes to supply verified retrofit products, that company should clearly specify what verified product(s) will be providod. Thts is typically described as a clear link to the verified technology list. If you have any further questions, please let me know Sincerely, Dennis Johnson Dennis Johnson, Team Leader Retrofit Technology Verification Team National Clean Diesel Campaign U.S. EPA Phone:202-343-9278 Fax:202-343-2804 12 Emistalons Baneflts: li~~ has more Verified products than anv other Retrofit Technoloav manufacturer. EPA verif~d and listed emissions benefits for DPF's, trade-named Purf/lker are below. (There are no EPA or CARE Verifications of CCV's or CCF's except in combination with Diesel Oxygen Catalysts). ~~; a ao~/ofaa/retrofit~ichlist-gfi~horAkiuritilter Engine Control System's Purifilter Venfication Letter tPDF) (2 pp, 570K, November 2003) ~ - _v.~_ _ ~~ Reductio _-- t I fl Engine _ s , ~ _ Teehnolo ~ ~ ModeVA lica6on PP ~ Sulfu r PM I NO: HC CO ~ I (PPm ~ '---- , .f arif~lter--- _..- __ . _ ~ y vy y Hi wa , Hea Heat - _ - i ~ tssive Duty, Medium Heavy-Duty; :generating ~UrbenBus; 4 cycle; model ' 15 ! 90 7S ! n/a 8S ' ese] lyeara 1994 - 2003; ~ ~ ', •! uticulate filter turbochazged or naturally ' ~ i aspirated; non-EOR engines ~ j i ~ ~ I .- - ---' t Baseline assumes an unmodified engine running on regular 2D (<500 ppm sulfur) fuel. The following operating criteria must be met in order for appropriately retrofitted engines to achieve the above emissions reductions: drm evcle (mY emPh+r.Tis)• (As there maY be significant variations from application to application, F.CS will review actual vehicle operating conditions and perform temperature data-logging pria to retrofitting a vehicle with their PM filter system to ensure wmpatibilityJ 2. The engine should be well maintained and not consume lubricating oil at a rate greater than that specified by the engine manufacturer. 3. P,CS installs aback-presstnro monitor and malfunction indicator tight on alt vehicles equipped with a Purifdter. 4. The engine must be operated with a fuel that contains a sulfur cantettt of no more than 15 ppm to achieve the reductions listed above. t -Baseline assumes an unmodified engine running on fuel with sulfur ooment of 30 ppm or less. a -Total PM mAucdon figures reflect inductions from both tailpipe end crankcase emisstons. 13 CARB Verifications are below. They are much less definitive than EPA's since they do not offer spec'rfic percentages of emission removal efficiency, but fR ail technologies into one of Three Levels based on Particulate Matter (PM) reductions. A Manufacturer may V Leve11 is for those technologies achieving at least 25 ercen or greater reduction in particulate matter. Leve12 is for those technologies achieving at least 50 percent or greater reduction in particulate matter. Level 3 is for those technologies achieving at least 85 percent or greater reduction in particulate matter. CARB Currently Verified Engine Control Systems Products Source: http:/hvvnv.arb.ca.gov/dieselNerlev/vtlcvthtm The following Information is provided as a summery of vertiled dlesN emission control strategies. Additional requiromenis speciNc to engine compatibigty are provided in the ttxecutiva OMer. The factors outlined In the Executive Ober are legal requirements of each verification; therefore, these condtiions must ba mat before determining H s particular device i8 applicable to the end-users type of engine. The Atr Resources Board recommends that you contact the mmufacturer, or their authorked distributor, prior to making any purchasing decision. Please click on the manufacturer Ilnk for sddlllonal Information. plus (+) designates these systems as compliant with 2009 N02 requirements. sue'" i+ DPF i 85% WA 19942004 on-road;CARB Load) diesel; biodlesel.` DPF i 85% N/q 1993-2008 on-road; CARB diesel: blodiesei.` ~ I X2007 or older off-road; CARB DPF 85% N/A diesel: biodiesel.` 14 Warranty: Vendor shall supply written warranty to verify warranty coverage. ;. "Engine Contro/ Systems I K'ARRANTY YVLICY I " ° "' CIS 6PA Volxreraro Rdroflr Pro~um - 4 Yems Schedule EPAt ECS offers passive diesel particulate filter wart~ty when the application has bean "approved" after submittal of a completed qualification form (ECS ISO form F7A6.A). Contact BCS for copies of the form prior m system purchase. A canpletad warranty card must be also completed and submitted within 30 days of installation. Failure m submit the wartanty card may result in warranty coverage being revoked. Each vehicle equipped with an ECS Purlfilur is m have the ECS supplied $ackpresstue Monitor Kit installed and functional. Failure m maintain a furrcdoning Eackpressure Monitor may result in wartanty claim being denied. A PurifilterTM DPF centerbody shall be categorized as "fail~l" when the tail pipe smoke opacity measures above 40% of the cngina out opacity reeding and the measurai pressure drop across the filter drops to 70% of the baseline recorded value at high idle. ECS may request the following m support warranty claims; • Fuel samples taken fmm the vehicle fuel tank • Engine oil samples • inspection of the vehcle by ECS porsooaol at ECS expanse. For ECS AZ Purifiers and Purimufflers used oitlxr alone or in oombin with the crankcase vomtilatioa filter system (CCV~), a completed watramy lard must be received within 30 days of installation. Failure m submit a fully completed warranty card may void your warranty. F.CS Pmductc verified under the US EPA Voluntary Retrofit Program are warranted for workmanship, defects of material and performance for the periods sp~ified below: For On-road applications • For vehicles with GVWR of at least 19,500 Ibs and engines rated above 250 hp - 4 years or 156,000 miles, whichever may come first • For vehicles with GV WR of at least 19,500 Ibs and engines rated 250 hp and lower - 4 years or !00,000 miles, whichever may come first • For vehicles with GVWR less than 19,500 Ibs - 4 years or 60,000 miles, whichever may come first For Off-road applications above 50 hp • 4 years or 4,200 engine hours, whichever may coma first 15 EXHIBIT "B" to Professional Services Agreement Rate Schedule Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished equipment purchased by McCoy Sales pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Such equipment, if not already in the City's possession, shall be delivered to the City per terms of this agreement, and the City shall pay McCoy Sales for such equipment at prices not to exceed those in Exhibit B. 22 Section B Cost Reauirements Pricing Form - FAUlpmerd Coat per Unk pncluding wfaaare or non-unit kerns) Type oT Coat of installation Tasdng Mbc. "'PM Coat Tots) Equipment Equlpmsrtt Cost Coat Cosy E1tecWsnsea Cost DPF SC17 $8860 5480 No Charge ~~ Tdp Charge $83.90 57300 CCV4501 3323 3100 Not req'd $423 C190011 58111 Replacement 38111 None DPF eNment CCV6521& ~8 None 526 Replaoement CCV FJarnent 'ExpMin and aemae all miscellerlwua coats: TAP cherga kidudea Food, Lodghrg, and Travel for Two (2) McCoy Techs for Two (2) Wakkrg Days (32 marl-hours) et RFTA "Describe Crow PAA Cost-Eftecflveness was cekulated. TM Coat-elfectlvenaea per Pound M PM reductlon formula used was provWad by RACC to be uestl on e retYht RFP for ekrdlar devESa. It la based on pertloulrhe malMr reducllons utiazhig only EPAfCARB verflied dale. If utlazing unverified Combhle6one of equlpmarrt (f.e., verified DPF wah umarified CCF, CCF ebna, att.). embeiom benefit date shell be considered only for Me verified tlevke. RAQC'a Formula: 71 pounds W PM X EPA Verfiled PM Retludbn Percent =Pounds Reduced Cosl per Pouts a TcAM Installed Cost I Pounds of PM Redtrestl (71 pounds MPM eguslee to 1894 -2006 model year Wis xeh 0.1 g/bhp-hr PM wIM 2~0 ftorsepoa+sr operefkrg 1,880 hours Oar Yeah 3peGfwsly for this pmpowi: ECS DPF b EPA Verified et 90% PM ReducOon D096 of 71 LM PM ~ 63.9 Lbs PM Toth Imtalled Coet (Not irrdudlnp Trip Charge) ~ 37300 37300183.9 Ltn ~ 393.90 par Lb PM Alternate to DPF k Naewsary k k unlikely. based upon the Irdortnaaon provWetl In fhe RFP. that the temperature protAe derNed from doing data acquisaiar on throe RFTA buses will prohibit the use of the DPF. Aspen ! RFTA should be aware, however, that an ettemabve is likely to be available as a CARB Level 3 Vertfletl device vAa11n 1-2 monMs - PuriF3ter Phis. I7 23 ACORD_ CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE oPID 15 °~'~`"~'°°'ri""I E9000Y-1 04 21 OB PRODUCER THIS CERTFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE Lawson 2nsuxanoe Agency, Inc. HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR 7675 W. 14th Avenue 8201 ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. Lakewood CO 80214 Phone: 303-236-4381 Fax:303-232-1694 (INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAICC p~OCOBO$3270088 ~~ LITTLETON CO 80127 INSURER B'. P1nnaC01 INSURER C'. INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN 138VED TO THE INSURED NAMED A80VE FOR THE POLICY PERI00 MDICATEO. NOTWITH6TANO WU ANV REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDRION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT W ITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAV PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMBS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BV PAID CLAIMS. T LINffS _~._ -- -~ LTR NSR TYPE OP INSURANC! POLICY NUMBER I pATE MMIDWYY DATE MWO ~ OENEMLLMBBdTY ', EACH OCCURRENCE f 1 OOO OOO A $ $ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY Ol CC 234281 11/Ol/O7 11/Ol/OB I PREMISES Ea ocarerlra) 3200,000 DLAIM6 MADE ~ OCCUR '' MED EXP IAm/one per3on) f lO OOO I ~ , ', PER60NALSADV INJURY E1, OOO,OOO ' GENERAL AGGREGATE 3 2 ODD, OOO GEML AGGREGATE LIMITAPPLIES PER ( PRODUCTS-COMWOP AGG 32,000,000_ ~, r-j PEQ ~~ LOC POLICY I AUT OMOBILE LU.BILITY '~ ~ COM81NE0 SINGLE LIMIT ! 31,000,000 ANY AUro ' Ol BA 224903 10/01/07 i 10/Ol/OB (Ee.caaem) :, A ( , ALL OWNED AUTO6 BODILY INJURY i f $ 6CHEDULED AUTOS i (Per person) ( $ HIREOAUTOS ', ~. BODILY INJURY 3 $ NON-0WNEO AUTOS ' ,I (Per BcamnU , _.._- ', ' PROPERTY DAMAGE 3 I i lpar acatlenU OARAOE WeILRY ' i AUTO ONLY-EA ACCIDENT S I """" ~ 'ANV AUTO '. ' EA ACC OTHER TWIN f it ., AUTO ONLY. AGG 1 3 IUMBRELLA WBILITY I ', EACH OCCURRENCE 3 1 OOO OOO EXCEBB $^'~ OCCUR ~ CLAIMS MADE Ol SU 233314 I I 11/01/07 . 11/01/08 ', AGGREGATE s 1 000 OOO A I , DEDUCTIBLE 3 - RETENTION 3 3 WORKERS COYPENBATION AHD _ TORY LIMIT6 ~ ER ENPLOYERT LIABILITY 3125155 06/01/07 06/01/08 E.L. EACH ACCIDENT 3100,000 8 ANV PROPRIETORNARTNER/E%ECUTIVE YEE 3 100 OOO OFFICERNAEMBER EXClUDE01 EL. DBEA6E - EA EMPLO , K eF. tle~allCe under i i E.L. ^16EA6E-POLICY LIMIT f 5OO OOO SPECIAL PROVISIONS Detow OTHER i i p ' 01 CC 234261 11/01/07 I ', 11/01/08 SUS. PROP $515,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATN)N91 LOCATKINBI VENICLEB / EXCLUSIONS ADDED BV ENDORSEMENT 19PECNLL PROVISION8 THE CITY AND THE CITY'S OFFICERS AND IDIPLOYEE3 ARE. NAMED AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS V CR I IrIt,M I ~ nvw~n SHOUlO ANY OF THE ABOVE DlBCpBED POLKXES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL 6NDEAVOM1 TO MAIL 3O DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFN:ATE MOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT PAILURE TO DO SO SNAIL CITY MANAGER IMPOSE N008LIOATK)N OR LWBIUTV OF 4NV KWD UPON THE INSURER, TTB AOENT90R CITY OF ASPEN T ~A REPRE8ENTATIWiB. - ST 130 S GA ASPEN CO 81611 AUTNOR6ED REPRESEN VE ~ Jim Lawson 'I'- ~ rnon rnoonoennM wRR ACOR025 (2007(06) /t_/ '-"--~-- ---- ---- Addendum to Warranty From: MacDonald, Ian [mailto:imc@EngineControlSystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 2:07 PM To: Mike Weadley Cc: Tadrous, Ted; Fox, Ron; Bentkowski, Henry Subject: City of Aspen and RFTA Hi Mike, Further to our conversation with the stakeholders on the RFTA CMAQ project, we have internally discussed the warranty issue as raised in that conversation. To reiterate, the topics discussed in that conversation do not relate directly to warranty in that, temperature data logging and passive regeneration are not components of our standard warranty policy. However, we do perform the data logging to gain some confidence that passive regeneration will be accomplished under normal operating conditions. Completely plugging up a filter can cause damage to the filter in violation of the warranty so these are indirectly related issues. So, in this case it is clear that the data logging performed on 3 of the buses shows that the duty cycle is not hot enough to sustain passive operation of the ECS Purifilter. As such, officials at RFTA have indicated that they have other buses which do not achieve passive regeneration of their DPFs and that when the DPFs become overloaded (as evidenced by power loss) they run the buses on a hilly, high speed route for 20+ minutes and that restores the filter to a clean. state. RFTA have indicated that they are willing to operate the target buses in the same manner after we equip them with ECS DPFs. It is reasonable to assume that the ECS DPFs will behave in a similar fashion to the existing DPF equipped buses; however, if they do not, this would not be considered a warrantable failure. We would like to make the following stipulations to our agreement to the establishment of this standard operating procedure. Firstly, we will be equipping the buses with ECS backpressure Monitor Logger units with a 2 stage warning light system. We expect that the first stage yellow warning light should serve as adequate notice to perform the SOP described in the paragraph above and that this should generally be performed prior to the second stage red light coming on. If the red light does come on, the procedure should be executed without delay. If the procedure does not achieve the desired result it should not be performed again. The filter should be removed and inspected and cleaned using the external cleaning procedure. If a warning comes on any sooner than normal after the performance of this procedure, that is likely indicative of a problem with the engine that might be masked by the DPF trapping excess soot. This should serve as an indicator that a diagnostic should be performed on the engine. We trust you will find this satisfactory and we look forward to proceeding with the Project. Best regards, Ian MacDonald, P.Eng. Yl ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kimberly Peterson, Global Warming Proj~ec~t},Mana~ger THRU: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Directoi'~ 1,/'/- 1 ) DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 ~~'C MEETING DATE: Apri128, 2008 ~~ Request to Accept Two Grants from Governor's Energy Office REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The City of Aspen is the beneficiary of two grants from the Colorado Governor's Energy Office (GEO): 1) the Insulate & Seal Program Grant; and, 2) the Energy Star Homes Program. This memo is to request that the City be allowed to accept the grants and to commit budget authority to spend money to fulfill the grant requirements. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In May 2007 Council adopted the Canary Action Plan to reduce Aspen's contribution to global warming. The Action Plan calls for the City of Aspen to actively promote the implementation of local residential energy efficiency programs. These two grants will help accomplish those objectives by facilitating energy audits and weatherization for households in Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley. At the passing of the Canary Action Plan Council gave specific directive to staff to pursue a rating system for home energy use (similar to a mpg sticker for cars). The application to the Home Energy Star grant is a direct result of that directive. DISCUSSION: Here is a summary of each of the grants: Insulate and Seal: The GEO is working with several Colorado partners and insulation contractors to support the proper installation of insulation and air-sealing measures in Colorado homes. The program aims to increase consumer awazeness of residential energy efficiency options and to actively promote the installation of additional whole-house energy savings measures through rebates. The Roaring Fork Valley has been awazded $96,000 through the GEO grant. CORE will match this with another $96,000 of REMP funds. CORE will administer the program which will provide homeowners in Aspen, Basalt and Carbondale with reimbursements of up to $300 to add insulation to their residential dwellings. This is enough to serve over 200 Aspen households. Page 1 of 3 For this grant, it is requested that the City of Aspen simply act as a "pass through agency" to accept funds from GEO and disburse them to CORE. This is necessary since GEO's rules require that a municipality rather than anon-profit organization be the recipient of State monies. Ener¢y Star Homes: GEO is working with a consortium of Roaring Fork Valley cities, led by Aspen, to implement the Energy Star New Homes program. We have received at $25,000 grant from GEO. Matching funds will be provided by other cities in varying amounts. The City of Aspen will contribute matching funds of $15,000 from the Building Department's budget which has already been approved. These funds will primarily be used to market and conduct training for home energy raters. There is an independent consultant who will serve as the grant administrator and will coordinate the receipt and disbursement of funds from all the participating jurisdictions. Her fee is included in the grant received from GEO. We are requesting that Council allow the City to commit budget authority to spend funds to implement this grant, which will be reimbursed by GEO. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The implementation of both grants will be performed by the private sector and CORE. The cost to the City will be in the form of some hours of administrative time to coordinate the receipt and disbursement of funds and contribution of matching funds. The matching funds for the Energy Star Homes program in the amount of $15,000 are already approved and enacted in the Building Department's budget per Stephen Kanipe. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Greenhouse gas emissions from buildings comprised one- third ofAspen's GHG inventory, and the average Aspen home produces 23 tons of C02 annually. The first step in bringing down building emissions is to aggressively pursue energy efficiency. By helping 200 Aspen households to properly insulate and seal their homes, we will be making a good first step in this effort. The grant monies will also help build professional capacity in our Valley to provide energy rating services. Deliverables from both grants will work towards achieving our Canary goals of reducing GHGs 30% by 2020. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the City accept both grants. It is further recommended that both revenue and appropriations be increased within the Electric Fund in the amounts described for each program. ALTERNATIVES: The original concept for these grants was for CORE to both accept and administer the grants. This option is not available because Colorado's grant requirements do not allow grants to non-profits. If a qualified entity does not accept the grant, the State funds would Page 2 of 3 be lost to Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley and would go towards other grant projects in another area of the State. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution ~_, CITY MANAGER Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION # (Series of 2008) A RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF TWO GRANTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE (STATE OF COLORADO) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID GRANT AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council two grants contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and the Governor's Energy Office, for the purpose of "Insulate Colorado Program" and Energy Star Homes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby accepts two grant agreements between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and the Governor's Energy Office regarding insulation of homes and regarding energy rating systems for homes and businesses in Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley. Dated: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held *** Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Kathryn Koch, City Clerk April 21, 2008 Vld Noise Variance Requests -Jazz Aspen June Festival -June 19 - 22 SUMMARY: Jazz Aspen June Festival at the Rio Grande Pazk June 19 to 22 is requesting a noise variance for concerts to go past 9 p.m. The second acts start at 9 p.m. and are scheduled to go for 90 minutes. The noise variance request is to allow the concerts to continue until 11 p.m. to allow for any encores. BACKGROUND: This is the sixth year of Jazz Aspen at the Rio Grande Park. Council approved noise variance requests for the past 5 years. There have been no noise complaints. I have attached the 2008 June festival schedule. Their schedule is designed to not conflict with the music festival events, which is why the late starts. Staff received noise complaints about the Honda Ski Tour concert in Rio Grande. This event was not held inside a tent and the stage was oriented toward the west end. DISCUSSION: Section 18.04.050(a)(3) of the Municipal Code allows the special event committee to approve noise variances; however, the committee feels that for large events in the core, Council should be the final review. Council has approved noise variances for 5 core parties at Cooper & Galena and apres X concerts at Wagner Park as well as Jazz Aspen for the past 5 yeazs and Dancin' in the Streets for the past 4 years. (3) Special Events or other events to which the public is invited with the following conditions: (a) The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event does not exceed 100 decibels; and (b) Amplified noise shall be created only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; and (c) Neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the site of the proposed sound source are notified. Such notification must be in writing and be done seven (7) days prior to the starting time of the event; and (d) The arrangement of loud speakers or the sound instruments must be such that it minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or orientation of the speakers or from atmospherically or geographically caused dispersal of sound beyond the property lines; and (e) All reasonable measures aze taken to baffle or reduce noise impacts on the neighbors; and (f) Event organizers agree to cooperate with the Police Department in addressing noise complaints from neighbors, which may include the termination of the event. (g) Organizers of special events governed by the City of Aspen Special Event code (14.20.030(f)) may request a variance from noise restrictions to the City of Aspen Special Event Committee. MOTION: By approving the consent calendar, Council is approving noise after 9 p.m. for Jazz Aspen at the Rio Grande Park, June 19 through 21. Attach: Jazz Aspen Schedule and Venue Map Page Seven Mitigation Plan for 2008 June Festival • Will forward complete schedule upon completion 2008 June Festival Schedule: a/o 3/28/08 MAIN STAGE @ RIO GRANDE PARK June 19 7:00 PM Bebel Gilberto Doors @ 6pm 9:00 PM Dianne Reeves June 20 8:00 PM Manhatten Transfer Doors @ 6:30pm 9:00 PM Anita Baker June 21 6:30 PM Sharon Jones & Dap-Kings 9:00 PM Brian Setzer Orchestra June 22 Noon Free Gospel - Davell Crawford 6:30 PM tbd 9:00 PM tbd FREE STAGE @ COOPER AVE. MALL June 18 3:00 PM JAS Academy Band June 19 3:00 PM JAS Academy Band 5:00 PM JAS Academy Band June 20 Noon JAS In-Schools -Student Band 2:00 PM JAS Academy Band 3:15 PM JAS Academy Band 4:30 PM JAS Academy Band 6:00 PM JAS Academy Band June 21 Noon JAS In-Schools -Student Band 2:00 PM JAS Faculty Band 3:00 PM JAS Academy Band 4:00 PM JAS Academy Band 5:00 PM JAS Academy Band June 22 Noon JAS In-Schools -Student Band 2:00 PM JAS Faculty Band 3:00 PM JAS Academy Band 4:00 PM JAS Academy Band 5:00 PM JAS Academy Band ADDITIONAL JAS "AFTE R DARK" SHOWS June 21 10:30 PM tbd @ Belly-Up 10:30 PM & Mdngt tbd @Syzygy Restaurant June 22 10:30 PM tbd @ Belly-Up 10:30 PM & Mdngt tbd @Syzygy Restaurant June 23 10:30 PM tbd @ Belly-Up Mdngt tbd @Syzygy Restaurant June 24 10:30 PM tbd @ Belly-Up 10:30 PM & Mdngt tbd @Syzygy Restaurant Page Eight Mitigation Plan for 2008 June Festival PRODUCTION TIMELINE -PRELIMINARY Mon. June 9 • Measurements for "main stage tent" -ground plates in • Production trailer in Mon. June 9 - •"Main Stage Tent" erected and skinned Sat. June 114 Sun. June 15 - •Stage, sound & lights, seating, all other structures in Thur. June 19 Tues. June 17 •Cooper Ave. Mall Stage in Thur. June 19 - •JAS June Festival Sun. June 22 Mon. June 23 - •Tear-down/Strike Fri. June 27 :~:.,~, ~,. •~, ~-.. ~1~~s~ MEMORANDUM vu a. TO: Mayor & City Council THRU: Don Taylor, Finance Director FROM: Don Pergande, Budget Manager DATE: April 21s', 2008 i RE: First Reading: Adoption of Budget Supplemental -Ordinance No.,l t' (Series 2008) this item will be discussed on Monday, April 28`", 2008 SUMMARY: Staff is requesting an amendment to the City's 2008 budget that increases the city-wide total expenditure appropriation from $104.7 to $128.2 million, (See Attachment A). Net of inter fund transfers, budget authority increases from $84.4 to $102.6 million. Interfund transfers are required appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations. Attachment E provides a detailed listing of budgeted 2008 interfund transfers. The exhibit below outlines the supplemental request's impact on the City's overall appropriation authority. The reference attachments provide itemized listings of requested supplemental budget authority. CITY OF ASPEN - 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET Description Amount Reference 2008 Adopted budget: $104,744,910 See Attachment A Total New Requests: $3,350,300 See Attachment B Total Managers Savings: $163,440 See Attachment C 50% Carry Forward Savings: $2,071,870 See Attachment C Total 100% Carry Forwards: $13,558,470 See Attachment D Technical Adjustments: $4,179,750 See Attachment F Total Supplemental Re uests: 23 503 830 TOTAL ORDINANCE: $128,248,740 See Attachment A Less Interfund Transfers: $25,694,760 See Attachment E NET APPROPRIATIONS: $102,553,980 See Attachment A As noted in the chart above, this supplemental is substantially comprised of annual carry-forward appropriations. These requests are for projects previously appropriated, and for which cash reserves are set aside. Different categories of requests include: Attachment B: "New Requests" of $3,530,300 include requests for formal appropriation of funding issues previously reviewed by Council during this fiscal year, new requests, and capital requests that have gone beyond the two year automatic re-appropriation time frame provided by the City's Asset Management process. Narrative justification of each new request is provided as part of this memorandum below. Attachment C: "Manager 10%Carry-forward Savings" of $163,440 which represent 10% of operating budget savings from all departments of the City in previous years. These one-time appropriations are allocated the City Manager's office (See Attachment C) for use in addressing mid-year issues with citywide implications. Attachment C: "Departmental 50% Carry-forward Savings" of $2,071,870, which represent 50% of previous year operating budget savings for individual departments. Departments are allocated these amounts as a reward to finding efficiencies in their operations that allow them to meet their operating goals while spending less than their total appropriations. These one-time appropriations can be spent on items related to the department's mission (See Attachment C). Attachment D: "Departmental "100% Carry-forward Requests': These requests are for operating items and capital improvement projects budgeted in 2007 that require completion in 2008. Requests total $13,558,470. This category includes the City's personal computer and workstation replacement programs -which keeps the City's computer technology new and efficient, and significant re-appropriation of ongoing capital projects. Attachment D details these requests by department. Attachment E: This attachment details all budgeted interfund transfers of the City for 2008 of $25,694,760 in total. Interfund transfers are required appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations. Attachment F: This attachment details all of the technical adjustments in 2008 of $4,179,750, in total. New Requests: In the General Fund, new requests to be reviewed by City Council, total $461,160. These requests are made up of the following: City Council- The City Council Department is requesting $35,000 in total. $10,000 is for the formal appropriations approved by Council on 4/15/08 for ACRA for the "Faces of Aspen." See memo for details. $25,000 is for the formal appropriations of the JAS Aspen 2008 contribution approved during a work session on March 18`", 2008. See memo for details. These requests will be funded from General Fund cash reserves. City Council- The City Council Department is requesting $26,250 in total. $6,250 of this request is for the senior housing and care survey. $20,000 of this request is for the costs associated with the Citizen's task force. See memo for additional details. These two requests will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Human Resources- The Human Resources Department is requesting $72,040 in total. $72,040 is for the payout for the Risk Management position who retired on March 28`h, 2008. Payout per policy is required. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. City Attorney- The City Attorney Department is requesting $40,960 in total. $40,960 is for payroll in the City Attorney's office due to staff changes. This will bring the payroll budget in line with the 2008 payroll expenses. See memo for additional details. This request will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. Finance Department- The Finance Department is requesting $75,000 in total. $75,000 is for the formal appropriation of the Finance Development use tax position that was approved during 2008 budget development. This request is funded from the use tax revenue. CommunityDeve/opment-The Community Development Department is requesting $143,100 in total. $45,000 is for the City's portion of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan. This request will be funded from General Fund cash reserves. $75,000 is for the formal appropriation of the Community Development use tax position that was approved during 2008 budget development. This request is funded from the use tax revenue. $23,100 is to study the deterioration and conservation of wooden artifacts in cemeteries. This request is 100% funded by a grant. Engineering Department- The Engineering Department is requesting $2,000, in total. ($52,000) is shifting a portion of an Engineering staff member payroll expense who currently is performing Stormwater work into the Stormwater Fund. $54,000 is for 25% of rent, utilities and cleaning activities associated with the new office space at 517 E Hopkins. See memo for more details. These requests will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Environmental Health- The Environmental Health Department is requesting $2,000 in total. $2,000 is for a variety of noise related outreach materials. See memo for additional details. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Police- The Police Department is requesting $68,810 in total. $5,810 is for the formal appropriations of the LEAF grant funding. This request is 100% offset by grant revenue. $15,000 is a request to move the bear enforcement from the Transportation Department into the Police Department. This position was funded by the General Fund by a transfer from the General Fund to the Transportation Fund. This transfer will be reduced and there will be zero net impact to the General Fund operational expenses. $48,000 is a request to appropriate funds to cash out a Police staff member leaving the City; payout is per City of Aspen's policy. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Streets Department- The Streets Department is requesting $($37,500), in total. ($37,500) is shifting a portion of the Street's staff payroll expenses that currently is performing Stormwater work into the Stormwater Fund per design. G/S Department- The GIS Department is requesting $3,500 in total. $3,500 is for a census and address update project. See memo for more details. This request is 100% offset by a County reimbursement. Special Events- The Special Events Department is requesting $20,000, in total. $20,000 of this request is to appropriate funding for the 2008 New Year's Eve Celebration; similar to the 2007 celebration. See memo for additional details. This request will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. Recreation Department- The Recreation Department is requesting $10,000, in total. $10,000 is request to open the clay tennis courts for this summer season of tennis. See memo for additional details. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Parks Operational Fund- The Parks Fund is requesting $7,400 in total. $7,400 is for a request to fund the cash out of a Parks employee leaving the City of Aspen; per City policy. This request will be funded by the cash reserves in the Parks Fund. Housing Development Fund- The Housing Development Fund is requesting $30,000 in total. $30,000 is for the formal appropriations of funds to lobby to issue tax free bonds in the Housing finance packet in 2008. The Finance Department has determined that the Housing Development Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Stormwater Fund- The Stormwater Fund is requesting $815,900 in total. $815,900 is for the formal appropriations of 2008 operational and capital budget for the Stormwater Fund. This request is 100% offset by the property tax mill levy and the development fees. See attached LRP for additional details. Parks Capital Fund- The Parks Capital Fund is requesting $500,000 in total. $500,000 is for the purchase of Lot C. See memo for additional details. The Finance Department has determined that the Parks Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Transportation and Parking Fund- The Transportation and Parking Fund is requesting $15,000 in total. ($15,000) is for the reduction in bear patrol payroll expense that is now being expensed in the Police Department. $30,000 is for the in town towing charges associated with the towing activity for 2008. This request will mainly be funded from tow fees that are in place to offset the expense. Golf Course- The Golf Course Fund is requesting $2,000 in total. $2,000 is for the purchase of benches for the golf course. This request is 100% offset by contribution funding. Truscott Fund- The Truscott Fund is requesting $211,500 in total. $180,000 is for roof repair due to excessive snow and ice this winter. This project was originally scheduled to be completed in 2009, however is being accelerated due to the severe winter weather in 2007/2008 winter season. See memo for additional details. $6,500 is for a water softening system. See memo for additional details. $25,000 is for additional snow removal in the 2008 winter season. See memo for additional details. The Finance Department has determined that the Truscott Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Asset Management Capital- The Asset Management Capital fund is requesting $1,487,340, in total. $32,040 is for the formal appropriations of Council recommended studies of the Park Ave pedestrian improvements (see memo for details). $170,000 is for Curb and Gutter work that is tied in to the Streets overlay program. (See memo for details) $25,000 is to provide negotiated exterior improvements to ISIS "notch" area. (See memo for details). $5,700 is for parking lot lighting at the new animal shelter per agreements associated with the construction and management of this building. $50,000 is funded from the Finance Department's savings for new furniture and equipment associated with the remodel. $170,000 is funding for the completion of the 151 and 2nd floor remodel. (See memo for details.) $834,600 is for the remodel of 517 E Hopkins. (See memo for additional details) $200,000 is to fully fund the Council chamber remodel project. (See memo for details.) These requests will be funded from the cash reserve in the General Fund. ORDINANCE N0.1~ (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND EXPENDITURES OF $4,067,650, AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $3,279,880, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS FUND OF $103,200, AN INCREASE IN THE WHEELER FUND OF $1,578,850, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND OF $216,480, AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND OF $5,413,880, AN INCREASE IN THE KIDS FIRST FUND OF $97,410, AN INCREASE IN THE STORMWATER FUND OF $815,900, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND OF $2,136,990, AN INCREASE IN THE WATER FUND OF $33,190, AN INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC FUND OF $593,320, AN INCREASE IN THE HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND OF $229,690, AN INCREASE IN THE TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND OF $599,860, AN INCREASE IN THE GOLF FUND OF $2,000, AN INCREASE IN THE TRUSCOTT FUND OF $4,301,670, AN INCREASE IN THE MAROLT FUND OF $24,880, AND AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND OF $8,980. WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current yeaz revenues and/or unappropriated prior yeaz fund balance available for appropriations in the following funds: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, KIDS FIRST FUND, STORMWATER, PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND, GOLF FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers must be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Secfion 1 Upon the City Manager's certification that there are cun•ent yeaz revenues and/or prior year fund balances available for appropriation in the: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, KIDS FIRST FUND, STORMWATER, PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND, GOLF FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND: the City Council hereby makes supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A. Section 2 If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR POSTED ON FIRST READING on the 28th day of April, 2008. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Mick Ireland, Mayor FINALLY ADOPTED AFTER PUBLIC HEARING on the 12th day of May, 2008. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Mick Ireland, Mayor John Worcestor, City Attorney Attachment A Total City of Aspen 2008 Appro priations by Fund Fund Name Total Expenditures 8 Transfers Out 2008 Supplemental #1 2008 Amended Expenditure Budget General Government Funds Asset Management Plan $5,390,630 _------- $4,067,650 $9,458,280 General Fund $25.458.750 $3279.880 $28.738.630 Subtotal General Gov't Funds: $30,849,380 $7,347,530 $38,196,910 Special Revenue Funds Parks and Open Space -- $9,524,200 -- $103,200 $9,627,400 Wheeler Opera House $3,388,560 $1,578,850 $4,967,410 _ Lodging Tax Fund _ $1,330,3_60 $0 _ _ $1,330,360 Parking Improvement Fund ___ _ $1,528,640 $216,480 $1,745,120 Housing Development $12,307,810 $5,413,880 $17,721,690 Early Childhood Educ. Initiative - AVCF $347,950 $0 $347,950 Kids First/Yellow Brick $1,780,940 $97,410 $1,878,350 Stormwater Fund ~ 815 900 15 900 Subtotal, Special Rev. Funds: $30,208,460 $8,225,720 $38,434,180 Debt Service Funds Debt Service Fund $4.119.480 ~ $4.119.480 Subtotal, Debt Service Funds: 54,119,480 $0 $4,119,480 Parks Capital Improvement Fund $2,854,380 $2,136,990 $4,991,370 Enterprise Funds Water Utility $10,065,220 _ $33,190 ~ $10,098,410 __ _ _ __ Electric Utility $7,418,850 __ $593,320 $8,012,170 __ _ Hydroelectric Facility $4,131,560 $229,690 __ $4,361,250 Transportation Fund $5,106,260 $599,860 _ _$5,706,120 _ _ Municipal Golf Course $1,241,320 $2,000 $1,243,320 Truscott Housing _ _ $1,723,820 $4,301,670 $6,025,490 Marolt Housing $1 166.480 24 880 $1.191.360 Subtotal, Enterprise Funds: $30,853,510 $5,784,610 $36,638,120 Internal Service Funds Health Ins. Internal Service Fund $3,662,430 $0 $3,662,430 City Employee Housing Fund _ _ $1 043 890 ~ $1,043,890 Subtotal, Internal Service Funds: $4,706,320 _ 80 $4,706,320 Trust & Agency Funds Housing Authority $1,076,700 $8,980 $1,085,680 Smuggler Mountain Fund 76 680 _ _ _ ~ _ 76 680 Subtotal, Trust 8 Agency Funds: $1,153,380 $8,980 $1,162,360 ALL FUNDS: $104,744,910 -- $23,503,830 $128,248,740 _- Less Interfund Transfers $20,358,760 $5,336,000 $25,694,760 EQUALS NET ALL FUNDS APPROPRIATIONS: $84,386,150 $18,167,830 $102,553,980 - _-_ dget -_ - - - _. _- _ ___ -.. -. -. Funding Requests All Requests are One-time unless otherwise noted. _ _ ~._ ' - - --- - Amount Subtotal by Daot rrhnent - _- New Request Descriodon- - -_ Council ' - - - iCiH Council approved an addttional $10,000 to ACRA for "Faces of 02.04324.84002 ''Aspen" an 4/15/08. This is the formal request for the appropriation - _ $10,000 '_- - - -. - 'i Staff is requesting fgrmal appropriations of the JAS Aspen 2008 • contribution approved during a work session on March 18th, 2008. I $25,000_ - - - - - Su6totel, C'ny Council' Council _ - - - -- _ 03_0.3000.• !Senior Housingand Care Survey. See memo for Details_ $6,250 The CA¢en's Budget Tesk Force was createtl in 2008. See Attached memo for costs associated with this wmmittee. Staff are requesting $20,000 to cover most of the expenses and will use Council's ~ $20,00.0 .03.03000.82999183999 depanmental savings for the remaining expenses.. Subtqlal. CiN Coundll Ifg65 -- -__ - -i RISk Manager posiion is retiring effective March 28, 2008. Payout per policy is required. Staff is requesting the appropriation of the funtling to I gp• ',make this employee payout. See attached memo for more tletails. $72,040 - - - - -- Subtotal. Human Resdurces~ The Cuy Attorney's office hasa new position whh James R. True as ~ Special Counsel which salary range exceeds the Assistant City Attorney ~. poshon. Also, the Cily Anomeys office needs to pay the former Assistant ~~ Chy Atlqmey, David Hoefer, for the pay periotls in 2006 while he was ~. employed. This amount will adequately halance the City Attomey payroll. ~ $40,960 ~~ p '.See attached mama for more details. - - -- - -- RuMOlal. CiN AnomeY:' 840,9E This Is an ongoing request Staff is requesting to formally appropriate '.the funding for the approved use tax posAion. This position was approved during 2008 hudgel development. This poshion is 100% paid by the 1.11.11000.80' 163999 ITrensponation Fund from use tax revenue. This is Subtota6 CiH Anomey~ Offsetting Offsetting rev Source Rev Source $75,000 munity Development _ - -. - - - - -- -'. This request is100%offset by grant funding. Ran Anthony, a prominent wood scientist, received a grant from the National Center for Preservation .Technology and Training (NCPTT), a subsidiary or the National Park ' ' rfacls in , to stutly the deterioretion and conservation of wooden aR ' Service , cemeteries. Ron is associated whh the preservation team selected to .work on the Aspen Grave Cemetery preservation plan to fulfill the State Histqric Fund grant, and decided to use Aspen Grove as his study area of ' '~wcotlen grave markers. The Cily of Aspen is not wnuibuting any money NCPTT is funding the entire research t s. to the research of wooden anhac which costs $23,100, through the CiH of Aspen. See attached ' project .82999 10 13.134 . , $23,100 _memo for more details. _ -- - - . _ The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP antl wst sharing agreement was approved by Council on 2125/2008. This is a request for a 25% pgnion of the estimated planning costs assodated whh the project.. 13.13200.80030. 16299.9 $45,000 _ 'See attached memo for more details. - -- -- - This is the Community Development Use Tax Posdion. This poshion was approved In the 2008 development process. This is the fortnel appropriation request. This request is 100%Nndetl from a transfer from , the Trensponation and Parking Control Fund. See attached memo far more details This is a one time appropriation. The need for this position f 2008 and may be requested to be eMended d o will be evaluated al the en $75,000 .13.13200.80' - _al that time. - - -. - - - - - - - Subtotal. Communhy Development: $143,10( $23,100 $75 000 Page 1 Aa 6. Now ReQUesb 20085upplemental Butlget ~ -- - - _ --- - - - -- - _.__. --_ _-._ -_:. - - Attachment B _- New Funding Requests All Requests are one-time unless otherwise noted ~ ', Offsettin g Otfaetting De rhnent . -~ _ - - _ Rev Sourc - r e Rev Source ~ineertng Die artmant _ _ Hew Request Descriotlo _-- _ - ~ ~ AmauM Subtotal by Daot One Tima _ On oin I Due to lack of space available in City Hall, addNOnal space is need for the - - ~ - Engineering Department. The office space is located at 517 E. Hopkins ' . i StaR is requesting funding for the fina125%of this lease. Onginelly kwas , determined that Ma Asie space was not going to be needed in 2008 and I the Ponding for this space was going to be used to pay (or the remeintler of ' .the 517 E. Hopkins lease. Since hudget development ri was determined 001.15.15000.82510 that the Asie aRCa space is needed. See attached memo far more Itlateils. ' _ I This Is an ongoing request Shifting a portion of the Engineer aloft $54,000 001.15.15005200.80• budget authoWy into the Stormwater Fund. Ona for ono reduction in '. hudget authoniy. ' Environmental Heahh Subtotal, Engineanhg DDepartment: $2,000 - '- 'This funds a variety of noise related outreach materials to inUUde items ,such as ordinance enforcement signage at bath entrances to Aspen quiet ' ' )01.25.25500.83999 , Aspen buttons, bumper stickers, hotel room tent ceMS, posters, and I ~,infortnatienal leaflets. Sea attached memo to aolice rt more details Subtmal, Environmental Heakh Departments $2.000 -.-. -- _ $2.000 _ 101.31.xxxxx.80' ~i Payout per policy is required. Stag is requesting the appropriation o(the funding to make this employee payout. '~ ' - i01.31.31700~31200.82999~80'This is a distribution of the LEAF rant to the As - 140 9 Pen police and the 348,000 _ ' - -- - ySnawmass police Departments - - -.- _ _ $5,810' .__.-. __$5810 '.This is an ongoing request This request is to appropriate $15 000 in ' _ , existing funding in the Trensportation and Parking Control Fund for the !seasonal WiltllRe/Bear officerinto the police department butlget. This '' ,request is 100 % oRSet by redurJng the transfer of cash from the General 07 3131700 82900 !Fund to the Transportation and Parking Control Fund. See attached ' , . ,memofor more tletails. I treat De aronam -? - - - - Subtotal, Palira Department: _ $ts,ooa - -- $68,810 -- ' This is an on going request Shifting a portion of the Street's stag ~~ - )1.41.41000.80'_ ~ hudget authority into the Stormwater Fund. One br one reduction in budge tauthonty ~ ISD _ ~btotal 3ireets ~artme t ($37,500)- , n eparhnent P ($37500 -- - - ,The Census and Address Update -funding of $3,000 was re-appropriated I Trom current budget appropriations in the AACP project budget in COM DEV planning department The total project is expactetl to mat $8 500 I , wdh remaining $3,500 of the funtling coming from a County reimbursement. Stag is requesting the appropriation of $3,500 this ' 1.67.60100.80030 , request will be funded by 100 % reimbursement from the County. See I ialtached memofor more deails. - eclat Everrts - _ - $3,500 SuTitotaTStreeteDepartmem:'- -- - -_-- $3.500 $3.500 - _- . -_ This is an ongoing request Providing fun, safe and alcohol-free alternatives for families, underage guests and mher members of our I commun0y is the goal of this effort. Aspen is a world Gass resort attrecting, 1.70.71728.82999 - visitors from a wide variety of locations and those viskors expect'Yhe best" of this communky, InGuding fireworks on New Y r ea s Eve -_ -.- ___ _ _ _ _ $20.0_00_ _ CI~Mnlnl C ~. _ _. _ - _. This is an ongoing request. The Clay Courts near the Gob course require additional Gay to he added each year, new lines, and surveying to see that they are level and all lines placetl accordingly. The labor to do this is extensive as well so that we may provide the highest quality tennis wurts each summer. This request is for the preparation and maintenance 101.94.71635.80012 _ of the tennis courts each summer. See attached memo for more details. - - - - - -_ -. - - - -- __ _ - __ 570.000 - SuMotal, ARC - - - - - 'rensfere $70,000 _ - - - - - -. - - - - - _ - - - - - - - SuMmal. Transfers, - - -..- - - __ - - -. Atl a. New Repuesm Page 2 ' Attachment B _ City of Aspen _ _ - - - - i - - - 200.8 Supplemental Budget. _ - -- ---- ~ Otbetting Offsetting t ' All Requesb are one-time unless otherwise noted_ i - ~ Rev Source Rev Source - s New Funding Reques - t Descdotlon i SuMotal De Amount One_ Time On oin De rMeM - - New Rwuea - _ - - I Asset Management Capital -. - - -- Formal appropriations for Council recommended studies to develop the i pedesMan improvement plan for Park Ave, which exceeded centred 000.i5.TBD amount. See attached memo for mare details. _ 032,040 -.- - - ~FormaleppropnalionsforCurbB Gutterfunctions for safe pedesMan 000 8170 - -- 000.15.TBD 4acilRies. See attached memo for more details. -_ -_ _ , -...- ' During the negotiations associated wdh the purchase of the Isis, '' iagreemenM were entered into tc that provided for some exterior rovements to the "notch" area. See attached memo for more details. i i $25,000 - - 000.91.TBD mp i Per agreements associated with the construction antl management of the '. i, 'now animal shelter the Ctty of Aspen and Pdldn County are responsible far !capital improvements to the shelter. Two improvements have been ~, identified. Parking lot lighting upgrades are necessary and a ponion of the ~i roof that has the potential for dangerous snow slitles is being retrofn. ~ ~, ~ Artangemenls will be made wtth Pitkin County to recover appropriate 000.9tTBp lexpenses. See attached memo for more details.- - $5,700 - - - The 850,000 is to be used spe~celly for Finance FamRare and necessaryi i ,equipment upgrades es pan of the City Hall remotlN protect, and the funds will be moved from Finance's 2007 ceny forward. See attached ~, tion of d uc memo far more details. This request is 100%ottset by the re 850 000 850,000 _ 000,91.81107.86000 Finance's Departmental savings budget aulhoriry. _ -- , -- - -- / i s17o,oog I -- --- 000.91.Bt00786000 - - tt s fa H d 9Melease ga ct t~al negotation iDUe Mthe e p h re t the2 OBb d .property ware iMreted subsequent to cempehbon of 9 ' 'was a general expectation that additional funding tlunng the first i ~ supplemental appropriation would he necessary. See attachetl memo for I 000.91.TBD . 'more details. 8834,600 ~.--- -- - -0ouncil Chamber Remodel: Based on newer/up-te-date Information and an expansion of the facil'Nes provided to Grass Roots TV addttional ~, ,appropriations far the remodel project are necessary. See attached '' 000.91.TBD memo for more details. - -- - Subtotal, ASSet Management Capital FUnda 8200,000 81,487,340 850,000 un sr . 53,530,300 $3,530,300 8209,H0 8890,900 Total New Requests ob ew aquas a se ng avenue: $2,429,990 Page d Flt 9. Nax Requeab --- -- Attachment B !008 Supplemental Budget ~ - - - - law Funding Requests - ! qll Requests are one-time unless otherwise noted. Offsetting Offsetting - - Rev Source Rev SOUrn -_ - IBOal4nent - --_-. -~__-.-- -. _ ---. _-. - - New Request Description -- - - - - - arks Ope2tlons: _ - - - = - _ Amount - Subtotal by Dao - t One Time On. oin_ )0_55.55000.80' - - - Payout per policy is required. Staff is requesting the appropdation of the funding to make this employee payout. ' --. - - - -- easing Development _- --. - - Su~tofal, arks Funna:- $7,400 - -- - $~,~ -. i $30K for lobby to issue tax free bonds in the h i - - '~0.23.tbd ous ng fnance package- 12008 - ormwater - g P _-- - Subtotal, HOUSin Develo meet FUnd:. $30,000 - - SJO IH)0 . -. - ---. ~~~~~~~ Formal appropdation of the approved budget authority Por the Stormwater 'Fund For d t il ' -- - - - -- I . e a s see attached tlocuments. -- - Sutdofah Stormwamr Fund $815,900 - -- - $815,900 -- -- 340.94.82146.86000 - - _ - Purchase of Lot C-- Se a attached Memo -- - - -- -- _ ._.___ - - --. h _ -. - Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Ca hal FFUnd i _$500.000 ~ - - - _. -. ansportabon __ p $500,000 - 150_32_32000,60' _ Bear patrol was shitted into the General Fund per request by thB Police I Department. See attached memo for mare details ' - - - - - - -_ ($15 000 ~ ,Tow Fees have gone up this year. Tows in January 8 February ' ..-- tlramatically increased due to the number of snow tows $30,000 is hosed i b n $87,075 already spent this year. Any additional expense will come from ' 50.32.32000.82920 dept. savings. This is requested in both Revenue and Expense because j -all but $7,000 will be reimbursed. ' iolf. _ __-_ _-..-._ SUbtOWI, Trensportatlon FFund:, $30000 - - - $15,000 - -- ConMbutions are given to the Golf Course and used to purchase goR ' 71.73.73_' wurse benches. This is a request to appropdate $2,000 fortha purchase of the benchs. This request is 100%offset b ih $2 0 - y a , 00 in contributions. --__._ _ _-.- - $2.000 $2 000 ruscolt __ - $Ubtotal, Truscott Fund:. -- - $2,000 _ _ , - - I The root was deemed ok through 2009 by Stark roofing so It was placed I on the AMP budget as a 2009 project. Due to excessive snow and ice this ~I winter, the root aged quicker than expected. The heat tape failed in places and could not keep up wkh the snow load. Ice dams damaged the roof edges and gutters, creating leaks in nearly all of the storage units. Many shingles have been destroyed and are missing. The roo(will not last until I ' , 2009 so we are requesting the project he moved up a year to 2008 The '~ ID . i new estimate is higher due to unknown damage to the roof deck and an ~ -. -- upgrede to the heat tape. - - -. __ - - - _- - __ $180,000 Due to recent damage in the pipes of the 100 domestic boiler it was _ _ , brought tc our attention that the water is causing the pipes to corrode ~' . Pipes that are less than 2 years oltl have corrodetl to the point of " resembling Swiss cheese." Plumbers re-plumbed the pipes and ' ' D recommended a water softening system. This is the domestic hot water for _. - __ - tenants in the 100 building - - _ _. - $fi,500 _ .The Truscott maintenance crew was short staffed due to a resignation antl _ _ we experienced unforeseen amounts of snow leading us to hire temporary help with snow removal. Large stones in Decemb er and January bused the property and we neetled extra personnel to help with snow tluties .01,45042.82999 . Hauling snow from the propeny was necessary to tree up our snow storage areas, which filled to capacity by mid Janua = ry. $25,000 Suhtotal, Truscott Fund: - - - - -.,. ~~ -- - RC B. New Rpuesb PaBa 3 A City of Aspen 2008 Supplemental Budget Request 10% and 50% Carryforward Requests Department Council City Manager HR /Risk Management - 0600.0 City Manager "10%" Carryforward Savings I $0 $79,740 $240 Operating Budget 50% Carryforward Savings $13,910 $47,960 $17 400 City Clerk - $0_ , $118,890 City Attorney _$2,370 $11;840 Finance Department $0 $183,170 Community Development $1,880 $15,150 Engineering _ $570 $27,510 Building Inspection - $1,310 $7,580 Environmental Health _ _ $410 - _ $16,340 Police Department __._$5,870. _- - $234,440 Public Safety Records _ _ $740 $12,420 Streets Department _ __ $19,300' _ $333,510 Geographic Information Systems ! _ $0 _. $0 Information Systems $2,1 00 $69,100 Special Events . $0 _ $0 Aspen Recreation Center _ $3,060 $15,290 Asset Management Dept _ $1,250_ $39,520 Parks Department Fund $13,860 _ $69,280 Wheeler Opera House Fund $2,190 $127,330 Parking Garage Fund $6,360 $69,320 Kids First Fund $4,550 _ $82,060 Water Utility Fund $15,350 _ _ $247,860 Electric Utility Fund __ - $1,010 _ __ $90,230 Transportation Fund $1,280 $221,760 Totals $163,440- $2,071,870 Total Savings $2,235,310 Att.C - 10% 8 50% Savings Page 1 City Of Aspen - - I All Requests are one-time _ - - -- ATTACHMENTD 20085upplemental Budget - - -- - - ----- 100°~ Carry forward Appropriation Request : - - - Subtotal by - Offset By De artment - .- DescrlOtion ~ _ _ _. Amount Department Revenues Ciry Manager 001.05.05000.83625 'i Workstation Replacement Carry forxard - - $4,510 - - 001.0.5.0500.0.83655 'Pi7 Replacement Carry forwaM - - $10,570 - _ Subtotal, Ciry Manager:'. __ $15 080 HR / Riek Management ' , 001.06.06000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry forward - HR _ $8,640 ~ - 001.06.08000.83fi55 - -- IPC Replacement Carry forwartl-HR - - - -~ T - - - _ $5,550 ~ _ -- Subtotal, Human Resources _ ~' -- 814 790 - City Clerk , 001.07.07000.83625 IWorkstatioh Replacement Carry fonn~ard - -- - $4,190 - 001.07.07000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forward: - - - _ -_ - . - $11,300 ' _. _ _ -- Subtotal, City Clerk:, -- - $15,490 - - CltyAttomey 001 09 09000 83625 ~ Workstati R l e - - - - "- -- . . . on ep ac ment Carry forxard $4,730 ' - 001.09.09000.83655 PC Replacement Carty forward: - ~ $1,320 Subtotal, City Attorney:- ~ $5,450 Finance Dept _ 001.1111000.83625 _ - - Workstation Replacement Csny forward --- - $7,560 - - - 001.11.11000.8365_5 _ PC Replacement Carry forward: - - - --- $6,fi90 - Subtotal, Finance Department ~ - $14 250 Community Devel. , 001.13.13200.83625 001 13 13 .Workstation Replacement Carry forward - _ _ E '' M e - - $27,030 - - - . . 2W.83635 q. . ntB R pair 100%Carty forward $14,540: -- - 00113.13200.83655 PC ReplacemenfCarry forwaN: - - ~ - - - _ $15,390 - 001.13.13316.82999 _ Moratorium - - $80,000 _ - -- - - --- 001.13.13318.82999 _-_ ,Zupancis to Mill Conceptual Plan - - - - $30,920 ': - _ 001.13.73319.82999 - - West of Aspen Sub-Area Plan - -- - -- $50,000 --- -- -- -- 001.13.13351.82000 _ _ _ Zupancis Property Analysis - - - _ _ $10,000 __ - - 001.13.133fi2.82000 Civic Center Project -- - ~ - - - - _ $9,920 ~ -- - - 001.13.13400.82900and -- -- - - , _ - - - 82970 HP Video 8 Consultant- Historic Preservation Task Force ~ -- $11$,720 001.13.13410.82999 Aspen Grove Cemetery - ' $36,500 001.[3.[ 347501 _ _ Aspen Area Community Plan _ _ - - $84,210 001.13.73200.62999 - Sketch Up Modeling - - _ _ - _ - - $10,800 ~- - - - Subtotal, Community Development:'. $469 030 Engineering , 001.15.15000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry forward - - _ _ $3,110 - - -- 001._15.15000.83655. PC Replacement Carry forward '~ _ $3 740 - - Subtotal, Engineering Department: - _ _ , i _ _ $8,850 - Building Inepectlon 00121.21000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry fonJartl - -- --' - - ' $480 - - - - - 001.21.21000.83655 '~, PC Replacement Carry forxard: - - $6,430 -- - 00121.21000.82729 _ _ 'Harvard Grant-This grant was received in 2007 - - _ $10,000 ' - 001.21.2100082900 _ Energy code Analysis SConsulfant - - -- $ 10,000 _ - -- _ Subtotal, Builtling Inspection _ -- $26 910 -- - - Environmental HeaIN 001.25.25500.83625 ~ Workstation Replacement Carry forward - - - - _ - - - $4,620 _ - -- 001.25.25500.63655 ---_ _. PC ReplacamenfCarry foiward: - _ - $4,070 - - - -- - _ Subtotal, Environmental HealtF. - - - - 58 690 _ -- Police , _- . 001.3131000.63625 __ Workstation Replacement Carry forward - - - _ - -- $27,660 -- - _-- _ 001.31.31000.83635 -- -- -. __ Eq. Mnt 8 Repair 100% Carry forward _ ' - _--- - - ' $44,030 _-- - -- ---- - 001.31.31000.83655 - __ - _ _ _ PC Replacement Carry forwaN --- _- - -- - - _-_ _ -__ - $16.810 --- - --- - - Subtotal, Police DepartmenE __ _ $88,500 -_ - An D 100%C1w0 Page i _ _-_ __ ' Of ASpef1 _ All Requests are ana-time _ S Supplemen_WI Budget _ _____ Carry forward Appropriation Request artment Description Ic Safety Records _ _ 33.33000.83625 _ Workstation feplacement Carry forward __ -.. 33.33000.83655 PC Replacement Carty forward: Carty forward 3rryforwara Fit Carry forward .61000.83fi25 Workstation Replacement Carry forward Workstation Subtotal, ATTACHMENT D'~ Subtotal by Offset By ~'~ Amount Department Revenues $800 --- $1,480 _ RecoMSi $2,280 $6,670 -- - _ - __ $16,480 -- - ~~ $3,940 _. _ _. .$20.000 _ $2Q,i apartment:. 847,090 _.'. _ $2,880 $0 total, GIS. 82,880 _ - -$15,640 _ _ - _ - ___ $2,000 I $23,000 $900 __ $2,220 _ _ _ Recreatlon DepaR - 001.71.71000.83625 '.Workstation ReplacemeniCarry forv.ard _ $4,040 001.71.71000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forwaM: - $5,120 -_. __ _ _ _ - Subtotal, Recreation:. 89,160 Aspen Rao. Center - - 001.72.72000.83625- WOrkstation Replacement Carry Porv.ard _ $7,530 _ - _ - OOt72.72000.83655 _. _ PC Replacement Carry forward _ _ _. -. $2,830 _ _ _- _ _ 001.72.72700.83625 _ Workstation Replacement Carry forward $900 _ _ 001.72.72700.83655 PC Replacement Cant' fow•ardi _ - - _ _ $1,650 _ -- _ -- - - -- Subtotal, ARC: $73,710 Ice Garden _.. - 001.74.74000.83625- Workstation Replacement Carry forward _', $5,620 _ ~ 001.74.74000.63655 PC Replacement Cant' forrvard: - $4,300 _ _ _ _-- - Subtotal, Ice Gartlen( $9,920 Asset Management - _ - _ - _ - - - 001.91.05000.83625 _ f - Workstatiod Replacement Carty forxard ~ $4,140 _ OOt.9t05000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forvrard: $7,770 _ Aa D 100%CM1Vd Page 2 Clay Of Aapan All Requests are one-time ~. _ ATTACHMENT Di 2008 Supplemental B udget '~ 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request ' -~ Subtotal by Offset By Department Description Amount Department Revenues Parka 8 Open Space Fund: 100.85.55000.83625 ' Workstation Replacement Carry for4~ard $3,140 _ _ _ 100.55.55000.83655 PC Replacement Carry Porwerd _ $9,520 _ _ _ _ _ Suhtotal, Parka entl Opan Space Funtlr. $1$880 Wheeler Oparo HOUae '~. Fund: _ _ '' - _ _ 120.93.93000.83825 '~ _ Workstation Replacement Carty forward ' $2,930 120.93.93000.83635 Eq. Mnt 8 Repair 100% Carry forward $89,570 120.93.93000.83655 PC Replacement Carty forward: $27,250 T _ 120.93.93200.82000 _ _ _ _ ARTIST FEES $11,340 '. _ 120.93.93200.82115 _ CO PROMOTION SETTLEMENTS - $322,020 _ ' _ _ 120.93.93200.82140. ADVERTISING/PUBLICITY ___$159,610 _ _ 120.83.93150.82900 21ST CENTURY MASTER PLAN $249,220 120.94.82054.86000 AABC HOUSING - '' - $307,410 __ _ _ _ _ 120.94.81022.8fi000 ( _ _ _ ROOF REPAIRS T $75,000 120.94.81024.86000 ' GENERAL MAINTENANCE-BUILDING $8,420 __ _ 120.94.81102.86000 BACKSTAGE IMPROVEMENTS _ $21,200 I _ _ 120.94.82057.86000 j NETWORK SYSTEMS-IS $27,180 . _ _ 120.94.81101.88000 LOBBY DRAPES $34,730 120.84.83082.86000 _ FAUX CEILING PAINTING $52,050 _ 120.94.83085.86000 ~~ _ _ GENERAL MAINTENANCE-TECH ~ $16,030 _ _ 120.94.83091.8fi000 , ADMINISTRATION OFFICES CARPETING -- _ $9,780 120.94.83092.86000 _- ADMINISTRATION OFFICES CONSTRUCTION $35,590 Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House Fund: _ $1,/48,330 Parking Garage Funtl: _ ___ _.. _ _ __ 740.54.54000.83825 Workstation Replacement Carry forward $1,230 140.54.54000.83635 Eq. Mnt 8 Repair 100% Carry forward _ $39,090 _ _ _ _ _ 140.54.54000.83655 PC Replacement Carty fonvaM ~ $1,980 _ _ 140.94.81023.88000 PARKING GARAGE INTERIOR LIGHT REPLACEMENT ' _ $98_,500 __ _ _ Subtotal, Parking Garage Funtlr _ $140,800 Housing Development '. Fund: 150.23.23128.86000 . DEER HILL RE-USE WATER ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE $48,360 _ _ 150.23.23120.66000 ' ANNIE MITCHELL HOUSING $148,890 _ _ _ _ 150.23.23121.88000 HOUSING-BURLINGAME AH $1486,000 _ 150.23.23122.88000 _ BAR-X-TRAIL ~ _ _ $47_,3.10 _ _ '. EARLY RETIREMENT OF 20078 HOUSING GO BONDS- 150.95.31059.95491 TRANSFER TO TRUSCOTT FUND $3,922,190 $ubtohl, Housing Development Funtl: $5,852,750 Kltla Fint Day Care Funtl __ _ - .. __ _ _ __ 152.24.24000.83625 .Workstation Replacement Carryforward $800 _ _ 152.24.24000.83655 CPC Replacement Carry forward: - $0 __ _ _ 152.24.24100.82911 /ASPEN VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION GRANT $10,000 _ _ _ _ _ Subtotal, Kids Fimt Day Care Funtl: $10,800 At10 100%Clwd Page 3 City OT Aspen All Requests are one-time ATTACHMENTD 2008 Supplemental Budget 700% Carry forward Appropriation Request - __ _ _ Subtotal by Offset By Department _ Descriotlon Amount Department Revenues Parka 8 Open Space ~- Capital 340.94.81015.86000 MALL BRICKS $17,300 340.948107786000 .JAMES H. SMITHWILDLIFE BLIND ~ $10,000 340.948107986000 COMMUNITY CAMPUS TRAIL SYSTEM _ $35,000 340.94.81087.86000 ISELIN /ROTARY FIELD $17,240 340.94.81089.86000 .MALL FOUNTAINS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR $16,900 340.94.81092.66000 MOORE FIELD DRAINAGE $4,430 340.94.82004.86000 _ __ __ _ __ PEDESTRIAN TRAIL DEVELOPMENT - $17,180 _ 340.94.82047.86000 - ENTRANCE TO ASPEN IMPROVEMENTS $74,060 340.94.82048.86000 FRANCIS WHITAKER PARK IMPROVEMENTS $306,550 _ 340.94.82054.86000 CITY HOUSING/AABC _ $137,6 70 340.94.82087.86000 _ WATER RECLAMATION PROGRAM __ - _ _ $662,320 340.94.82086.86000 YELLOW SHADE PICNIC SHELTER $27,000 340.94.82098.66000 _ SMUGGLER MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN ~ $39,310 _ 340.94.82100.86000 TRUSCOTT LANDSCAPING $62,050 340.94.82143.86000 _ .PICNIC PAVILION -ARC-ROTARY FIELD $137,980 340.94.83007.86000 ANDERSON PARCEL- RANCH RENOVATION $50,000 340.94.83093.86000 _. DRILL SEEDER _. _ $22,000 Subtotal, Parka and Open Space Capital Fund:. _ _ - $1,838,990 Water Utlllty 42143.43000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carty forxaN $p -- 421.43.43000.83635 Eq. Mnt 8 Repair 100%Carty farwaM $12,560 421.43.43000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forward $4 720 REDUCTION RE-APPROPRIATED CAPITAL PROJECTS 07 TO ' 421.94.43490.86000 08 _ __ - - _ ($293,910) - Subtotal, WaterUtiiityo -$178,810 Electric Utllity 431.45.45000.63625 'Workstation Replacement Carty forward $720 -- 43145.45000.83635 Eq. Mnt 8 Repair 100 % Carry forwartl $4,320 43145.45000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forxard _ $1,480 __ THIS AMOUNT IS NEEDED TO FULLY RE-APPROPRIATE THE 431.94.43490.86000_ PROJECTS FROM 2007 TO 2008. _ $495,560 ' Suhtotal, Electric Utili ty: _ $502,080 Hydroelectnc Fund 444.94.' _ CASTLE CREEK PIPELINE ! $5,070 444.94.' CASTLE CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PLANT - - _ $25,520 _ 444.94.' MAROON CREEK HYDRO ._ $16,000 _ 444.94.' __ -_ RUEDI MAINTENANCE $178,020 _ 444.94.43505.86000 RUEDI SITE IMPROVEMENTS $5,080 subtotal, Ruedl:'. _ _ $129,890 Transportation Funtl 450.32.32000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry (orv.•aN $22,810 450.32.32000.83635 Eq. Mnt & Repair 100% Carty fow~aN _ _ $44,980 450.32.32000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forwaM $19680 450.32.32100.83035 EMISSIONS CONTROL TECHNOLOGY - $52,800 $36,080 CONSULTANT SERVICES-SPLIT SHOT B REVERSIBLE LANES - _ - _- _ 450.32.32100.82180 STUDY $56,000 CONSULTANT SERVICES -TRUSCOTTSIGNAL STUDV 8 450.32.32100.82999 IMPLEMENTATION $59,000 450.32.32100.83900 _ _ PEDESTRIAN 8 TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS _ $33,000 _ 450.94.83055.86000 RUBEY PARK FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS $35,000 450.32.32100.82185 TAXI SERVICE $20,000 Subtotal, Transportation Funtl: $343,280 Truscott Housing 491.01.45044.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry forvrartl $1,320 _- 491.01.45044.83855 PC Replacement Carry forvartl: _ $3,700 _ 491.94.82079.88000 _ _ COTTONWOOD TREE-MAINTENANCE - -- _ _ $5,320 49194.82085.86000 _ __ _ REPAINTMETAL$TAIftS/RAILS -- _ - _ -_- - $82,000 -_-- - - -- 491.94.82080.86000 COMMERCIAL LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT $6,730 491.94.82081.86000 _ _ _ _ _ EXTERIOR PAINTING _ - - -- - _ - - _ $5,000 - _ _ _ - _ 491.94,82083.88000 - __ _ _ LAUNDRY FLOOR REPLACEMENT - - _- - - -' $2,600 _ -- _ _ - 491.94.82084.86000 - ____ _ LAUNDRY HWH % PLUMBING REPLACEMENT _ . __ _ - - - - -$61,310 __-- - - Subtotal, Truacott: $187,980 An D 100% Cfwd Page 4 City Of Aspen -- All Requests are one-time __ ATTACHMENT D' 2008 Supplemental Budget _ __ ---- - --- -- _ 100 % Carry forwartl Approprlatlon Request _ _ __ _ .. - - - - - -- _ -- - -- SuMOtal by Oftset By Department Deserlption Amount Department ~' Revenues Marolt Seasonal ~. Housing _- _. __. __ 492.01.45043.83625 .Workstation Replacement Carty forward _ $1,260 _ __. - 492.01.45043.83655 PC Replacement Carry forward: _ 32,220 _ - __ 492.94.45051.86000 (BOILER PROJECT $21,400 - -- Subtotal, Marolt Seasonal Housingr. $24,880 Housing Authority OPemtlons '~, _ _ - - _ 620.23.45002.83625 I Workstation Replacement Carty forward _ _ $4,320- _ _ _ - -_ 620.23.45002.83655 PC Replacement Carry fanvard: $4,660 _ _ _ _ - _ Subtotal, Housing Authority: $8,980 Asset Management Caplhl Funo: - _ - - - 000.07.83085.6fi000 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS REMODEL $274,990 _ _ - 000.11.82060.86000 (CITY HALL-FIRST FLOOR RENOVATION _ $16,020 _ _ - 000.13.82078.86000 - SKETCH UP SOFTWARE $3,420 ' - - - 000.15.82002.86000 CURB AND GUTTER REPLACEMENT -_ $12,360 _ - _ _ 000.15.82130.86000 PARK AVE PED/TRANSPORTATION STUDY $31,550 _ - _ _ 000.31.83044.66000 RADARTRAILER $8,500 -. 000.41.81097.86000 MASON WORK _ _ $6,150 _ _ __- 000.41.81098.86000 CONCRETE/ASPHALT REPAIR - __ $40,000 _ _ 000.41.81090.86000 (EFFICIENCY MEASURES $50,000 _ __- 000.41.83005.86000 000.6161500.86000 FLEET _ - - IS-COUNTY SHARE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS $88,000 $112,270 _ _.. -_ -_ -$112,270 000.61.62057.86000 -_ l5-GENERAL FUND SYSTEMS __ $347,590 __ __ _ -__ 000.71.71005.86000 MATS FOR GYMNASTICS & CLIMBING PROGRAM $1,780 _ _ - _- _-_ 000.71.83070.66000 -__ RED BRICK ENERGY SAVING IMPROVEMENTS _ - $38,870 _ - _ _ _ 000.72.72101.86000 ARC OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS _. -_ $5,150 _- _ ___-_ 000.72.72800.86000 __ ARC UPPER LEVEL COOLING SYSTEM 326.780 _ _ _ - - 000.72.72612.86000 (UNDERWATER POOL LIGHTS _ - - -_$8,740 _-- __ __.. --- 000.72.7213.86000 - - - POOL LIGHTING _ __ $11,720 -- - ---- - 000.72.72641.66000 - BACK ENTRY CEILING REPLACEMENT _ 58,000 - --. 000.72.82082.86000 (ARC MECHANICAL RETRO FIT $12fi,200 - _ _ - - _ 000.72.72609.86000 POOL SPRAY FEATURES _ $4,780 _-- OOd.72.72546.66000 SLIDE SAFETY SHROUD - $4,450 _ _ _ _ 000.90.72601.86000 (ARC -OUT DOOR SWIMMING POOL - _ $269.010 _ - - 000.90.82078.86000 CITY'S SIDEWALK & TRAIL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS $1,031,710 - _- - CARPETING - - - - I $2,800 _- _ _ _ __ 000.91.82054.86000 _ __ '~AMP-AABC HOdsinq _ ~ $118,280 _ - 9182060.86000 000 CITY HALL ANNEX- - - $181,190 - - _ _ _ . - - -. - - - - - Su6total~, seat Management~pital: $2,830,310 Tota1100 % Carryforward Supplemental Requests: $13,558,470 $168,350 Total f0 ~ arty onward upp ementa equests: Net Revenues $13,390,120 Att 0 100% Cfxtl Paga 5 Attachment E CITY OF ASPEN 20081nterfuntl Trensfer ' Transfer From Funtl Trensfer To Funtl Amount of Trensfer PuroOae of Interfund Trensfer 000 -Asset Management 1998 Street Improvements 10 Yr IF (Wheeler Opera HOUSe $166,470 Loan _ _ Red Brick West End Project 10 yr IF Hause '. $85,000 Loan ~~. Wneeler Opera _ 1998 Street Improvements 10 Yr IF .LOan 'IOtls First Fund ' _ $181,690 _ _ Dam Service Fund _ 93 4o Transfer to Debt ServiceFund _ Subtotal, Transfers From Asset Manag, E548,400~ 001 -Generel Fund: (Annual Partial Subsidy of Food Tax $a5,240'. Refund Parks antl Open Space Funtl: _ _ _ iTransfer to fund budgeted AMP $1,361,840~,Capilal improvement pfOjecle. _ TAMP FUntl _ _ _ __ HeeOn lnsuranw wnd _ Ssl.zeoiRetired Employee Premiums ~ __ _ city Employee Housing Fund $529,260'Tfa05fer-5mployee Housing Fund _ __. _ ___ _ Wanning Program _ $72s4o 1/3 of Global ~ Funs _ __ __ _ '~ Transfer-Zupancis Property Re- _ 'Housing Development Fund _ _ __ _ _ _ $560,000 purohaSe _ 14$ 7 240 Operations Subsidy Transportation Fund __ _ _ Subtotal, Transfers from General Fund. 52,837,500 100 -Parks antl Open Space Fund: _ Trensfer to fund budgeted 340 Capital i,Perks antl Open Space Capital Fund $2,617,570. improvement projects. - _. -_T- _ __ - $13,e6o~Transfer to fund Manger's Savings 'Generel Fund __ _ _ Debl t Service Fund ~ $647,650 Parks 2005 Open Space Bonds _ Parks Portion, 2001 Sales Tax _ _ $656,110 Ravenlle BOnde _ ebt Service Funtl D _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ 2005 Parks and Open Space Revenue Bonds -refunding 1999 ~IDebt Service Fund $75,000 bonds _ - _ _ _... ', .2005 Parks and Open Space ' '. Revenue Bonds -refunding 1999 Debt Service FUnd $951,290bOndS _ _ ' Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Funtl $706,250 Opereti0ns _ .City Employee Housing Funa 21$ 4960 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund .Subtotal, Transfers from Parks antl - 'IOpan Space Fund: §8,282,890 _ 120 -Wheeler Open House Funtl ____ Ciry Employee Housing Fund $7a,91o Transfer Employee Housing Fund _- __ ._ - _ General Fund $2,190 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings _ _ _ 'Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Funtl __ _ _ 251.,950 Opereti0n6 ISUbtofal, Wheeler Opera HOUSa: §329,060 140-Parking Garage Funtl___ __ _ __. - .....~....~......,.,~m~....,. --__ .(Refunded, Originally issued in 1989 to wnstruct Rio Grande Parking Debt Service Fund $596,750 Garage General Fund $6,360 Transfer to fund Mangers Savings _ City Empicyea Housing Fund _ $21,990 Transfer_Employee Housing Fund -__ Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Fund $195,120 Operations _ Subtotal. Parkin Gara a Fund: 5912,220 Attachment E CITY OF ASPEN 2008 Intertund Trnnsfer _-_ _.__. - - 150- Housing Development Funtl Truscatt I, 2001 Housing Bonds Tmscott Housing FUntl _ $749,620 Subsidy Truscett I, 2003 Housing Bonds Tmswtt Housing Fund _ $312,630 SUbSidy _. .. _ Truscott I, 2001 B Housing Bonds - TruscottHOUSingFuntl _ $3,922,190.Called _ ~' (This is the third year of a three years I _ __ _ _ Truscoll Landscaping-340 funds _ $50,OOOIransfer fOf 180dscaping at TfUSpDtt _ APCHA Housing Office, Operations Subsidy (50% of total Subsidy, split Housing Office Operatiore Fund _ _ _ $164,150 with Pitkin County Overhead Payment -General j Government Support of Fund General Fund 52~ 2 730~.Operali008 Subtotal, Housin Oevelo ment Fund: §5,741,320 ~~ 761 - Eady Chiltlhood Education Initiative Payment to Kitls First Fund for _ _ _Kitls First Funtl 0 310 AdminiSiretion S6rviOes _ Subtotal, Earl Childhood Funtl: §20.310 752 -Day Care (Klda Flrat IVellow Bdcp Funtl _ c_ty Employee Housing Fund $3o,9ao~Transfer-Employee Housing Fund Geneal Fund _ _ SassoTransfer to fund Manger's Savings_ _ _ _ Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund 'General Fund ssssfio Operations 8ubtotel, Kids First Fund 5702,170 760 - $tormwaror Fund 'Overhead Payment - Geneal Govenment Support of Fund General Fund 580,000 O efati0ns 340 -Parka and Open §paca Capital Fund Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Fund 532,720 O erali00$ 421 -Water Utlllry Funtl Return on Investment Payment, General Fund Sale of Land to Water __ General FUntl _ _ _ $7,DOO.ooo Utili for Operations Facilities General Fund $75,350 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings Fund Capital Projects moved from the _ Hydroelectric Fund. _ _ _$e7_7,fioo Water Fund to the Hydroelectric Fund _ _ _ City Employee Housing Funtl $40 ~2c Transfer- Employee Housing Fund Parks and Open Space Funtl $150,000 Watef usage Conservation Pfogfams -_ __ . Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Fund 64g 9560 Operatl0n5 Subtotal. Water Utilit Fund 52,733,430 431 -Electric Utility Fund Franchise Fee Transfer to General General Fund $400,990 Fund - General Fund $1 O70 Transief to fund Manger's Savings _ _ __ _ _. Overhead Payment -General Government Support of Fund General Funtl $330,360 Operelipns _ c_lry Employee H°~°ing Fund $7e 730 Transfor -Employee Housing Fund _ Fund Capital Projects moved from the _ _ __Hydroelectric w__ nd _ _ _ _ $2aa,00o Water Fund to the Hydroelectric Fund _ Purchase of Hydroelectric power from ___ __ Hydroelectric FUntl $474,700 City-owned Genereting Facility Purchase of Hydroelectric power from Hydroelectric Fund _ _ __ $76,000. C_[y-Owned Ge0erating Facility General Fund $]2 640 1/3 of Global Warming Program ___ __ __ _-_ _ Electric Utility portion of Utility Billing Water Utility Fund 165 230 Services Subtotal. Electric Utilit Fund: 57,727,060 Ci Of As en tY P _ _ - _ _ _ Attachment F it 2008 Technical Atliustments - DepaRmentlFund '~ Technical Adiuatment Deacdption Amount Subtotal b De General Fund General Fund Operational payroll was overstated by 001.'.'.80' project staff. This corrects this oversight. _ ~ (5t t3,zso) Transfer to fund the project request in 2008 - ~ Transfer to AMP from Finance's Departmental Savings to fund furniture for remodel. The Finance Departmental Saving's was reduced by this $SOK to fund this request. The net effect is a zero increase in I i '.budget authority. Moved a capital project budgeted i, in the GF for $26,790 to the AMP Fund. This transfer is to keep the AMP Fund in balance. This is a 0000.95000 001.95.0 technical adjustment. 57_6,790 ' . 'This is a transferfrom the General Fund cash reserves to fund the 2008 new requests in the Asset 001 95.00000.95000 t 5t,zas,oso Fund was funding the bear patrol in the The General ~~,Transportation and Parking Control Fund. This service will now be conducted by the Police Department, therefore the transfer is no longer ' ..needed. There will be zero net impact with this (change to the General Fund's fund balance. The budget authority for this service was shifted into the i~ 001.95. 00000.95450 General Fund. _(5~s,ooo) _ _ 2upancis Property repurchase will be made in 2008 001.95.00000.95150 land 2009. Spreading the final_payment over 2 years (55as,85o) Subtotal, General Fund $686,700 Parks Fund ,Transfer to General Fund to fund City Managers ' 100.95.00000.95001 ~iSavings _ $13,860 Subtotal, Parks Fund $13,860 Wheeler Fund Transfer to General Fund to fund City Managers 120.95.00000.95001 'Savings $2,190 _- Subtotal, Parks Fund $2,190 Parking Garage Fund Transfer to General Fund to fund City Manager's 140.95.00000.95001 Savings _ _ __$6,360 - Subtotal, Parks Fund $6,360 Housing Development Fund __ _ Civic Master Plan appropriations were moved into 150.23.' future years ($250,000 Single family home lot subsidies will be paid out over .two years 2008 and 2009. This adjusts the appropriation to match the expected timing of the 150.23.' a out $331,500 ;Transfer to fund the debt service in the Truscott Fund in full. During 2008 budget development it was thought that the 2003 bonds were going to be refunded in advance. The 2003 bonds were not ~~advance refundable and were budgeted in the Truscott Fund late in development. The transfer from the Housing Development Fund to fund the last I years payment was overlooked. This corrects that 150.95_.00000.95491 oversight. _ $312_,630 Subtotal, Water Fund $268,870 Kids First Fund 'Transfer to General Fund to fund City Manager's _152.95.00000.95001 Sayings _ __$4,5.50 Subtotal, Water Fund' $4,550 Water Fund ! ; _ - _ Transfer to General Fund to fund City Manager's 421.95.00000.95.001 Savings _ $15,350 iTransferto fund approved projects moved from the ' ' 421.95.00000.95444_ Water Fund into the Hydroelectric Fund - $46,590 _ - Subtotal,WaterFund $61,940 Electric Fund ITransferto General Fund to fund City Manager's 431._95.00000.95001 __ ,Savings $1 010 - Subtotal, Water Fund _- $1,010 Transportation and Parking Control Fund - Reduction in bear patrol payroll /this is now __ 450.32.*.80* budgeted in the Police Department. _ ($15,000) _ '..Transfer to General Fund to fund City Manager's 450.9.5.00000.95001 _ Savings $1,280 During 2008 budget development there were 10 ~ I different versions of the LRP for Transportation and '. the Parking Control Fund. These were all formula driven and in the end these plans were used to adopt the 2008 Resolution budgeted authority amount. The formulas and the actual hard numbers developed in ' the Eden Financial System had a variance of $33,540 or .009% of the total budget authority. This 450.32.*.* ---- 'will correct the oversight. $33,540 - Subtotal, trans ortation and Parkin Control Fund - - $19,820 Truscott Housing 491.98 31059.* ___ Early retirement of the 2001 B Housing GO bonds $3,922,190 Subtotal, Truscott Housin Fund $3,922,190 AMP Reduction in 2008 adopted capital plan -Reduced the Rio Grande Recycle Center ($150,000). Shifted the maintenance expenditures for the City owned housing to the new City Employee Housing Fund; Water Place housing repaint ($80,000), Cemetery Lane maintenance ($15,000), Water Place Furnace OOO.xx.xxxxx.xxxxx _._ _($25,000). ($_270,_000) Subtotal, AMP fund $270,000 Total Technical Adiustment All Funds: $4,179,750 $4,179,750 THE CITY OF ASPEN Back Up Documentation For: Memos Detail Descriptions for Requests ASPEN C H A M B E R RESORT ASSOCIATION To: Thru: From: Date: Re: MEMORANDUM City Council Randy Ready, City of Aspen Debbie Braun, president, ACRA April 91, 2008 U~ ~~ ivl 1" r~~~ p~,/ I` U" y - U JIv~^~Y 1'..I~1, I > v ` ~~~~ C'~U SS Request for amendment to the Economic Development service j agreement F-aeP> ~-sF ya5~s~-, ,: '` BACKGROUND: Our contract for economic development service became effective on January 1, 2006, and shall terminate on December 31, 2011. The payment for the contract in 2006 was $248,000 with increases annually to account for inflation, by a percentage that is consistent with the percentage by which appropriations to City of Aspen General Fund. In 2008, the contract for economic development is budgeted at $252, 810. The ACRA is requesting a financial contractual amendment to the existing contract for an additional $~p;006 per year based on expanding service for the community. ~~o ~~ , ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUEST FOR NEW SCOPE OF WORK The last year, the ACRA, Pitkin County, Aspen Skiing Company and Town of Snowmass Village, along with many business partners, embarked on a community-wide guest service initiative called Faces of Aspen/Snowmass. This long-term commitment provides guest service resources to our business community. In the first year, we've been able to conduct research with our local businesses, spoke with over 1000 visitors and hired a mystery shopping company to benchmark the current state of service in our community. We were successful in this effort and have achieved a "benchmark" of service for our local communities. We also provided resources like our "How to Aspen/Snowmass" booklet, which was distributed to over 5000 employees in the community. (The City gave booklets out to your employees.) This booklet will also be printed in the Spanish language if we can reach our funding goals. Our one-day guest service training programs, and on-line web program support-are invaluable tools for educating and training our workforce; we also partner with other organizations like the Aspen Historical Society, the Aspen Club and Spa and many local businesses in support of Aspen 101 and our annual guest service training summit. C9DOCUmenrs and Setdn~s\dbtaun\Deskmp\ACILA contrec[ amendment.doc We successfully coordinate a Rewards and Recognition program - "the Star Program". Any employee from the Aspen/Snowmass area ran be recognized for providing outstanding service. We have "Stars of the MomenY', "Stars of the Month", and "Stars of the Season". Local businesses are big supporters by providing gifts and prizes throughout the winter and summer seasons. And finally, renewed focus on service recovery. The ACRA provides an outlet for consumers to supply feedback on their experience -good or bad, and we'll work to help solve any issues that might have occurred during their stay in our area. This multi-tiered approach to guest service needs many partners to be truly sustainable. We have big plans for the next couple years and we know this effort could be enhanced by the City of Aspen's participation. Our focus for the 2007-2008 year is to increase guest service operations at the Pitkin County Airport and promote community-wide guest service. We will continue to cultivate and promote the Faces of Aspen/Snowmass program with your support in the coming years. Thank you for your consideration. CdDocumentt end Settings\dbraw\DesktopWCRA contract amendmentdoc 2 as jazz aspen snowmass MEMORANDUM TO: Randy Ready cc. Kathryn Koch (City) City of Aspen Marc Breslin (JAS) FR: Joe Lang Cindy Kahn (JAS) Director -Jazz Aspen snowmass DT: February 7, 2008 RE: Additional Funding Request - `08 June Festival- Free Music Stage on Cooper Mall OVERVIEW: ~ This document serves as a formal request to the City of Aspen for $25,000 to help off-set the estimated $50,000 cost for the execution of the FREE Music Stage on Cooper Mall during the days of the June Jazz Aspen snowmass (JAS) Festival- June 19 - 22. This was an oversight on our part that was not included in our supplemental budget request last year. The Free Stage on Cooper Mall has proved to be an great compliment to the June Festival providing free entertainment and ambiance to the commercial core during the days of the festival, and has provided a forum where we can feature the student musicians from throughout the Valley that are participating in our June Summer Camp housed in Carbondale during that week (Middle and High School students from Glenwood Springs to Aspen). When JAS moved the June Festival to Rio Grande Park in downtown Aspen (from snowmass) in 2003, the concept on the Free Stage on Cooper Mall was to bring vibrancy to the commercial core without having the impact of a large rock n' roll production. This has proven successful with jazz music being the centerpiece with minimum amplification, and this year will see the inclusion of our JAS Academy bands. For the first time (in 2008), we are moving our JAS Academy program to coincide with the June Festival. The JAS Academy (think graduate program for distinguished college age musicians) is the only full scholarship program in the country where we select four bands to come out to Aspen/Snowmass for an intensive week-long series of performances, workshops, seminars and sectionals from a series of JazzMasters including our Creative Director, renowned bassist Christian McBride. This program has lived in snowmass in mid-July over the last eleven years, and we are excited to gain more exposure by moving it to Aspen during our June festival. The Cooper Mall Free Stage will prove to be a great showcase of these bands. The City has graciously provided underwriting for the '03, '04 & 'OS Cooper Stage, and we would like to offer the City underwriting exposure if these funds can be provided for this year's event. Page Two City ofAspen -JAS 2/7/08 After five years of the Jazz Aspen Snowmass June Festival in Aspen, I am confident that we have established a great relationship with the City and al] participating departments. We are excited to continue this relationship for many years to come, and look to the City ofAspen to assist in keeping this event at the "world-class" level that we all have come to expect. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Please contact me if you need any additional information at 704-9312, or a-mail at tuniblewd(ir~sonris net. the City otllspen City IlmorneV~ Clfice MEMORANDUM TO; Mayor and City Council FROM: Tara L. O'Bradovich, Paralegal THRU: John P. Worcester, City Attorney THRU: Stephen H. Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: February 5, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The purpose of this memorandum is to request additional funding for the City Attorney payroll. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council previously approved funding for the services of James R. True throughout 2007. This request seeks to preserve and continue the services of Mr. True, now employed with the City Attorney's office as Special Counsel on the City of Aspen payroll. DISCUSSION: Assistant City Attorney David Hoefer is no longer employed with the City of Aspen. This supplemental request seeks to ensure adequate payroll in the City Attorney budget for the pay periods in January and February 2008 in which he was employed with the City of Aspen. The City Attorney's office has a new position with James R. True as Special Counsel. The Special Counsel salary range exceeds that of Assistant City Attorney. This request seeks to ensure adequate payroll in the City Attorney budget. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: At the time of hiring Mr. True, City Council approved his salary, and this supplement seeks to preserve that balance in the City Attorney budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: N/A G \2008 Budget Develonment\lst sunolemental of 2008\2008 Citv Attornev Reuuests\09 suon207.doc Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of additional funding in the amount of $40,963 for City Attorney payroll. ALTERNATIVES: If Council chooses not to approve staffs request or recommendation, Council could approve a different denomination. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance # .. . CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACIIl~NTS: G:\2008 Budee[ Development\lst supplemental of 2008\2008 City Attomev Reaues[s\09 suno207 doc Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: CJ Oliver, Environmental Health Specialist DATE OF MEMO: March 7, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE• 2008 Supplemental Budget Request -Operation Quiet Aspen REQiJEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recently received a request from the city manager to implement a public education campaign regarding motorcycle noise in Aspen. In order to put such a campaign into effect, Environmental Health is asking for aone-time supplemental increase of $2000. This request for funding is being made now as staff received the city manager's direction after the 2008 budget development period had ended. BACKGROUND: This is for the addition of an educational component to the program. Enforcement has already been funded. DISCUSSION: Aspen has a noise ordinance outlining acceptable levels, times, and zones for noise. The ordinance was intended to find balance between the desire for reasonable peace and quiet, and the desire to enjoy a variety of activities. In the last year, some members of the public have come forward with the desire to give this ordinance more publicity. These citizens have subsequently developed a campaign, going by the moniker "Operation Quiet Aspen", to help create more visibility for the noise ordinance. The group's suggested publicity materials are: ^ ordinance enforcement signage at both entrances to Aspen ^ buttons with logo representing a quiet Aspen ^ bumper stickers hotel room tent cards • posters ^ informational leaflets ^ bulletins on Grassroots TV City staff will install the entrance signs, develop Grassroots bulletins, and develop other materials. We anticipate that distribution of buttons, bumper stickers, and similar materials will be done thru "Operation Quiet Aspen". One of our biggest challenges is to make sure we Page 1 of 2 focus on outreach that motorcycle riders will see, and avoid methods not likely to reach the target audience. Staff appreciates suggestions from the public on ways to get the word out, and we have also been directed by the city manager to use discretion and approach `Operation Quiet Aspen" in a way that is not only effective at informing a fair and balanced target audience, but maintains a welcoming atmosphere for all guests and residents. We want to be mindful of the challenge of balancing multiple community needs. Ideally, by giving Aspen's noise ordinance more exposure, citizens, workers, and guests will become more conscientious about the noise they create, and how to report a situation that infringes on their right to reasonable peace and quiet. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: In order to ensure our campaign has a noticeable effect on Aspen's perceived noise levels, we recommend a targeted effort costing an additional $2000. We anticipate that this will be a one-time expense. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Staff will attempt to reduce the impact that publicity material may have on the environment by using recycled and recyclable materials, or durable materials when appropriate. Information will also be disseminated digitally which will have little environmental impact. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve cone-time supplemental increase of $2000 for a noise ordinance educational blitz. ALTERNATIVES: Council could reduce expenditures (use just free advertising and in-house printing), could spend more, or could ac[ on a complaint basis only. PROPOSED MOTION: Staff recommends Council approve aone-time supplemental request for increased motorcycle noise education. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACIIMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Rebecca Hodgson Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager February 22, 2008 Apri114, 2008 Supplemental Appropriations REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council approve supplemental appropriations in the amount of $6,250 for the Senior Housing and Care Survey and $20,000 for the Citizen budget Task Force expenses. BACKGROUND: On December ] 0, 2007, Council approved sharing the cost of the senior survey with Pitkin County, Aspen Valley Hospital, and Aspen Valley Medical Foundation. The cost per entity is $6,250. The Citizen Budget Task Force was initiated by Mayor Ireland in 2007. Applications were accepted in 2008, and the Task Force held their first meeting on February 6, 2008. DISCUSSION: Senior Housing and Care Survev Although Council approved sharing the costs of the senior survey in 2007, the city was invoiced in 2008. The invoice was paid, however Council's operating budget has been reduced by $6,250. The expense was not included in the 2008 Council Budget because it was approved after the 2008 budget process had been completed. Citizen Budget Task Force The Citizen Budget Task Force was to be funded with Council's 2007 savings carry forward. The amount carried forward to 2008 is $13,971. The estimated expenses are: Professional Services: Paul Menter $18,860 Budget Books $ 2,600 Meals $ 4,680 Misc fees e.g.-copies, office supplies $ 500 Total 26 64 Page ~ of z Staff requests a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $20,000 to cover the Task Force expenses and to leave money in Council's savings should it be needed in the future. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: None ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: None RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of supplemental appropriations in the amount of $26,250 for the senior survey and the Citizen Budget Task Force. ALTERNATIVES: The expenses related to the senior survey and Citizen Budget Task Force will negafively impact Council's operafing budget thus reducing monies for traveUtraining, conferences, professional services, the annual report published in the Times, office supplies, materials, and meals. PROPOSED MOTION: This should be a brief statement for a Council member to read such as "I move to approve the supplemental request for the senior survey and Citizen Budget Task Force." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: A - BOCC Senior Survey project description B -Citizen Budget Task Force Estimated Expenses C - 2007 Eden End of Year Report Page 2 of 2 i i /~ 1~ ~~ee ~q°'ee 1~ pp 99++ fig/ ~~ft:~Z?.~.~g~'~~t. .Q.. f..Q°"~°' ~t~c;~"1 ®~spr ~tl'®V ~TNOi®~ t. ~ ~"k..~ L'r}~:f ~t~~~ Peso r red Yes_No_x_FD initial R 2007 FRa.fECT NAME: STAFF RESPOIvSCBLE: FREPARER OF €}OCtltt Futy© CFtP.NGES ~Rew Life Allarket Research program cost subtotal Current Revenue Budget Changes 0 Expenditure Adjusted Changes Budget 6,250 6,250 _ 6,250 6,250 ONE TIME: $6260.00 ON GQEN~~-~ '~, P~(},~jECT DESCh €PTEC)N ,~tyD t3r~,CE~GR(.7'I.~t~D': include discussion about what objective is advanced or proolem solved by ih~s project. The senior council has pursued a full spectrum of care options for Pifkin County seniors for over ten years, through many obstac{es. In early 2006 a new steering committee was formed by senior council officer Ken Canfield with key representatives from the city, hospital, medical foundation and county. A survey of senior care and housing needs was commissioned, with the four entities sharing equally in the cost, and completed in early 2007. Resulfs . indicate both need and support for a continuum of care for seniors of diverse income and asset levels. The committee spent several months contacting and interviewing professional consuRants in the field of Continuin C etirement Communities CC .None of these entities 'clicked' with the steering committee. ermg committee chairman en Can geld changed tactics and contacted firms specializing in CCRC management and development, based on committee research and recommendations from the survey consultant. Frank Mandy and Mary McMullin of New L'Ife Management and Development emerged as the unanimous choice of the steering committee, which has re`~Y expanded to 12 members including local experts infields related to a project of this type. A copy of the New L"rfe proposal is available in the "READ" box in the Commissioners office. The requested funding commitment of $6;250 represents the first of three welt-defined phases, a market feasibility study. At the end of this phase the steering committee will know if the project has high potential of success or not, and a community decision will be made whether and how to proceed with development. Ft1N~ING RE$Ol1 RCES: Please indicate d pmjacl can be funding from additional revenues from grants or increased fees. Is project funded from dedicated funding so om the general fund? The st ~ g committ 's again requesting that the city, hospital, medical foundation and county .share equally in t e ~ti ated $25,000>~ost rPhase~et research, which means a contributio~Lef'$~,250 per erttltq~ KYi 'Marsh of alley~'Medlcal Foundation (ANNE) offered temporary use of their non-profit status to receive funds, I !s and provide financial oversight A separate non-profit will be formed 'rf the project goes forward, per a unanimous decision of the steering committee supported by New L'rfe's experienced recommendation. This project has no dedicated funding other than that provided by the four entities above. The previous county commitment for the survey was made with BOCC discretionary funds. Future fundraising efforts will be developed pending positive results of the Phase I mafi<et research. This groundwork is deemed essential by the steering committee before proceeding with any financing or development scenarios. Agreement to Proceed: New Life Market Research for CCRC Nan Sundeen, Marty Ames nn~.+,i n.,,o~ .::LTEI~t~£xT€~fE Al~lxLYS{~ -This section should include a discussion of the potential future cost savings over a period cf time', are there ramifications of delaying the projeG, is privatization an alternafive for the project. The decision to support development of a CCRC in the upper valley is a values question. CCRC's abound in larger metropolitan areas where population and resource demographics drive business decisions. Smaller communiEies must make a conscious decision to provide `cradle to grave' health and care options to their citizens. The steering committee and senior services believe that the county is overdue for a full range of long term care and housing options. There is a cost to the community when longtime residents are forced to leave to obtain care. It is well-known that delays in starting projects result in increased costs. The senior council has experienced several frustrating delays over the past ten years, yet they are still determined to accomplish this goal. Ltt~i~ '{'(~ STATErsIC COALS: (Please explain hove this project enhances the County's Strategic goals). Consider rf project should Nava component of community involvement in order to obtain communKy support or education for the projact, This project has links with several Strategic Plan goals, most specifically under Safe and Healthy Community. The action plan for this goal includes 1) assessment of citizen expectations for levels and types of services (senior housing and care needs survey) and 2) comprehensive services to large numbers of aging seniors. There is also a link to Community Involvement in engaging citizen input, honoring and respecting opportunities, balancing and protecting community visions and mandates. The goal of Growth states the need to maintain community and monitor growth rates. The senior population is growing the fastest of any segment of our population. Finally, under Organizafional Excellence there is a stated commftment to housing, spec~calty workforce housing. In the September 2007 Housing Summit, there was a general sense of commfinent to the original intent of the housing program to maintain housing privileges to retired employees. With the aging of the workforce, some in this population are already developing needs for greater care services and options, yet without those options they will remain where they are. BRIEF QESCRIPTlON OF THE Qf2GANlZATEONAL OfJEPACTS: Consider other costs that projectmay add to the budget including technology neetls and staffing support, equipment, software, training, equipment, space and mileage or vehicles. If addAional equipment is required, discuss impacts to future budget cyclas. With the exception of the BOCC contribution to the Senior Housing and Care Needs Survey in 2006, all ongoing impacts of this project have been absorbed within the senior services department's mandate to support goals of the senior council. This is primarily staff time and support, using normal existing office technology. it is not the intention of the steering committee that any local governmental entity (city, hospital or county) will take on full responsibility for this project. The steering committee envisions a separate non-profit working with an experienced professional developer on awell-researched and well-conceived project. DATE OF CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL BY BOCC: Roxute form to F@rta[~ece for rerr@ew, pr@or to go@aag to fo9Eas~ae~2e arad/or BOCC ;T~@@~S P.4,GE D®ES NOT OS® @N T@iE BOCC p~&OP~ET} Bfl~DGET YEAR 2®07 DATE ENTERED PR®~@ECT: A~reertverut to €~raceer9: New L@fe ilflaeket @~esearch COt~NTY MANAGER Date lent requires funding not included in this MOI, then it uses fund balance. It you nave more revenues fund balance is increased. if revenues and expenditures equal, then put $0 in the box below. Increase / Use Of fund Balance - $ ,~. ~Yt~~1- ~~ "-" l~ Professional Services 3D hours per month x 8 months x $73 per hour 2008 Budget Books Meals 26 x $100 26 x $15 x 12 meetings Miscellaneous copies, office supplies, ect. Total Estimated Expenses $18,860 $2,600 $4,680 $5D0 $26,640 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen Ellsperman, Director of Parks ~/ THRU: Jeff Woods, Manager of Parks and Recreation DATE OF MEMO: Apri12, 2008 RE: Parks Department Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Parks and Recreation Department has a supplemental request for the 2008 supplemental budget process, which is a human resource item that is mandated by City of Aspen policy. If approved, the 2007 Parks Department supplemental requests would add $7,395 to the 100 Parks and Open Space Fund budget as a one-time appropriation. The 100 Fund can easily absorb the cost of this supplemental request. DISCUSSION: 100 Parks Department Fund Supplemental Request Christopher Stull Pay Out Amount: $7,395 Christopher Stull resigned from the Parks Department on March 14, 2008. City of Aspen policy mandates that a departing employee be paid out all remaining wages and accrued benefits. This is a one-time request for appropriation of $7,395 to reimburse the 100 Parks and Open Space Fund for these wages and accrued benefits. Page I of I MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: Wood Conservation Research Supplemental Funding Request DATE: March 7, 2008 SUMMARY: Ron Anthony, a prominent wood scientist, received a grant from the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training (NCPTT), a subsidiary of the National Park Service, to study the deterioration and conservation of wooden artifacts in cemeteries. Ron is associated with the preservation team selected to work on the Aspen Grove Cemetery preservation plan to fulfill the State Historic Fund grant, and decided to use Aspen Grove as his study area of wooden grave markers. The City of Aspen is not contributing any money to the research of wooden artifacts. NCPTT is funding the entire research project, which costs $23,100, through the City of Aspen. City Council is asked to reallocate the $23,100 in funds that we will receive from NCPTT to Ron Anthony of Anthony and Associates for his research. i MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council COPY: Finance Department FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 2008 Supplemental Budget Request -Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan DATE: March 10, 2008 SUMMARY: The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP eligibility request was approved by City Council on February 25th. Council also, by motion, approved a cost sharing agreement and a supplemental budget request for the City's 25% portion of planning costs. The expected shared costs are currently approximated in the chart to the right: In addition, Community Development staff will need to be supplemented to handle this project. No additional capacity within the department exists and a project assistant will be necessary. Costs of a project assistant can partially be covered by department savings and budgets for other projects. Staff requests $10,000 for a project assistant. Other costs for services may require additional funding. Those additional funding requests will be brought forward as needed. Meeting Facilitator $35,000 Note Taker $4,500 Financial Advisor $12,000 Site Survey $4,000 Plan renderings + options $15,000 Site Modeling + options $8,000 Geotechnical & Soil Analysis $10,000 Traffic Analysis $30,000 Plats and Agreements + recordation $15,000 Meeting Food $1,500 Printing $2,000 25% Share: REQUEST: $45,000 from the General Fund allocated to the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan project. This is a one-time cost. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Trish Aragon, P.E. City Engineer THRU: Bentley Henderson, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: March 19, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: Engineering Department Operation Budget Supplemental Request SUMMARY: Staff is asking for the sum of $54,000 for the 2008 Engineering Department in the form of a supplemental request. This addition to the Engineering General Fund will be used to cover costs associated with expenses incurred for rent, utilities, and cleaning of the new office space at 517 East Hopkins Avenue. DISCUSSION: Due to the lack of space available at City Hall, additional office leased space is needed for the Department. The office space is located at 517 E. Hopkins. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Engineering's portion of the additional cost for the space is estimated to total $54,000. The given sum will cover rent, utilities and cleaning costs through December 2008. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Richard Pryor THRU: Steve Barwick DATE OF MEMO: 3-11-2008 MEETING DATE: 4-14-2008 RE: Temporary WildlifeBear Officer REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This is a request to appropriate $15,000 in existing funding for the seasonal WildlifeBeaz officer into the police department budget, from the Pazking department budget. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has approved funding in previous yeazs and this year for this position. DISCUSSION: In Previous yeazs the City has experienced wildlife conflicts particulazly with beazs. Many of these conflicts aze related to unsecure refuse containers. Due to the increase in conflicts, an additional temporary position was created for the duration of the summer months. The funding and management responsibility for this position was originally placed with the pazking department. After meetings with all involved departments last yeaz, a recommendation was made to move this position into the police department under the community safety division. The reasons for this move aze as follows: • Improved information shazing sharing. The community safety division expects to be able to keep more consistent records of contacts in the police records management system. • Reduced points of contact for public. Having fewer departments with hands on this problem should provide for improved communication with the public, and more unified messages being presented. • Improved cross training. The temporary officer will have more opportunity for other wildlife related cross training, and so can be of broader use to the community. • Clearer chain of command. The involvement of multiple departments in addressing a particular problem can lead to questions regarding responsibilities and accountability. The transition of this position to the community safety division will help clarify that chain of command. Page 1 of 2 FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Transfer of $15,000 in funding from the parking department to the police department does not create any increase in cost for the City of Aspen. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This program will cause small increase emissions when driving however the employee will utilize a bicycle as part of their patrol. The police department is reseazching alternative transportation options for this position including the lease or purchase of an electric vehicle, the use of bicycles, or the use of existing fleet vehicles. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The transfer of funding for the wildlife position from the parking department to the police department. ALTERNATIVES: • Use of existing staff to enforce wildlife ordinance. This is unrealistic given the increase in bear interactions over the years, and the established need for a dedicated resource. • Status quo with funding & management remaining as is. Communications issues discussed above could occur. PROPOSED MOTION: CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Mary Lackner, GIS THRU: City Manager's Office DATE OF MEMO: February 4, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: Census and Local Address Update Supplemental Appropriation SUMMARY: The US Census Bureau is preparing for the 2010 census and is partnering with local governments to update local address information. LUCA (Local Update of Census Addresses) is the program that the City has chosen to participate in. The Census Bureau delivered the material in early January and it is due on April 4t". This is a very short turnaround for a project that is anticipated to take four weeks. A temporary employee will be hired to assist GIS staff to complete this project in the City and County which is estimated to cost a total of $6500. City Community Development has agreed to fund the City's $3000 portion of the project, and Council is being asked to reallocate this money to the project. The remaining $3500 increase in appropriations will be offset 100% by the County reimbursement. No revenues are anticipated, however, the direct benefits from accurate census counts are very important for apportioning congressional seats, distribution of federal and state funds to local governments and obtaining current community data. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: No previous Council action has been taken on this project. BACKGROUND: GIS has undertaken a comprehensive addressing project over the past two years and have been working closely with Community Development to keep this data current for building, planning and 911 assistance. GIS will be integrating voter and utility billing records and comparing this to Census household addresses to update the census data. This is the first census where local governments have been asked to provide updated road and address data in a digital format. This will improve accuracy of the census in 2010. No federal funds are available for local governments to do this work. DISCUSSION: This project will result in a more accurate census count in 2010 which will provide Aspen with better community data. This will assist in the preparation of grant proposals, community planning, and annual reports. Cost breakdown: $6500 labor. All other resources including office space, computer and software licensing are available for the project. This is a one-time request. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The $3500 supplemental budget authority is 100% offset by the County contribution. The City's $3000 portion is from existing budget authority in the Community Development's AACP budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: No environmental impacts are anticipated. RECOMMENDATION: GIS recommends that Council approves the reallocation of funds from Community Development to GIS for $3000, as well as approving the supplemental request of $3500 of additional budget authority for the County's contribution. ALTERNATIVES: The City has several options: 1. Choose not to participate in the address update project. 2. Reassign current staff away from regular duties to work on this project. This would result in revenue loss as customer service is a direct revenue source for the City. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve the reallocation of $3000 from Community Development to GIS to complete the local update of census address project and the supplemental request for $3500 additional budget authority." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Nancy Lesley, Director of Special Events and Marketing Richard Pryor, Aspen Police Chief THRU: Jeff Woods, Manager, Parks and Recreation Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: March 7, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: Fireworks on New Year's Eve REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting on going funding for New Year's Eve fireworks to be shot off Aspen Mountain. After two successful New Year's Eve's, staff feels they have created a fun and safe environment in downtown Aspen. The first New Year's Eve celebration included ground fireworks. Last year's celebration included fireworks shot off Aspen Mountain, (due to the generosity of an anonymous donor) which was such an added benefit to town that staff feels it should be a on going addition to the celebration. During the week leading up to New Year's Eve, the police get stopped on the street and asked what time the fireworks get shot off. Aspen is known for doing things first class and we are meeting our guests and our community's expectations. Staff feels that the enhancement of fireworks on Aspen Mountain also allows families to come and enjoy the "ringing in of the New Year" at an earlier hour. Staff witnessed this first hand as immediately after the first round of fireworks were finished, all busses leaving town were full of families heading home, after "celebrating" New Year's Eve. It also gives all other revelers the finale of a midnight celebration. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Funding has included ground fireworks in 2006. BACKGROUND: In November of 2006 staff created and implemented some New Year's Eve activities in Wagner Park to mitigate issues on the corner of Cooper Avenue and Galena Street. Staff feels the last two years have been extremely successful events. The number of arrests by police officers was down by more than half (from 36 to 15 in 2007). The Page 1 of 3 most obvious success was on the corner of Cooper and Galena itself, as security staff were the only ones congregating on that corner. By having activities in Wagner Park (bonfire, deejay), and having fireworks shot off Aspen mountain at two different times over the course of the night, the crowd was dispersed in such a way that the security and police officers could move into the crowd freely and at will. This enabled positive interaction between the crowd and the police. In the past, the crowd at Cooper and Galena was so tightly packed that the officers could only walk along the periphery of the gathering. Working closely with RFTA paying for all down valley riders after lOpm; providing signage that was taller than the crowd; utilizing security and bullhorns; increased lighting; all contributed to enabling the members of the crowd to reach their correct bus in a manner more efficient and friendlier than previous years. The hiring of security staff contributed greatly to the success of that night. Each security member, as well as the APD, wore brightly-colored vests that were easily identifiable in the crowd. This created a sense that both Wagner Park and the Mall were very safe places to enjoy the evening. DISCUSSION: Providing fun, safe and alcohol-free alternatives for families, underage guests, and other members of our community is the goal of this effort. At the same time, an understated approach has been our philosophy so as not to draw in huge crowds from throughout the valley but to maintain a family atmosphere. Police officers on the street receive annual requests and questions from tourists asking when/where the fireworks are. It is an expectation of many visitors that a fireworks display rings in the New Year. Fireworks provide for a focal point for revelries and channel energy positively. While fireworks are a considerable expense, Aspen is a world class resort attracting visitors from a wide variety of locations. Those visitors expect "the best" of this community. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The cost of shooting off fireworks twice on New Year's Eve would be approximately $20,000. The first show at 8:30pm would be 15 to 20 minutes and the second show at midnight would be 5 to 10 minutes. This is currently not in the New Year's Eve budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Creating events that draw people to Aspen raises the issue of increased traffic and pollution. However, RFTA and the City of Aspen word very hard and successfully to make sure as many people as possible come to the New Year's event by bus instead of Page 2 of 3 by car. In fact, the city's special events are a model for other events in encouraging transit use. While fireworks emit small amounts of heavy metals that go into the air and then settle onto soil and rivers, the snowpack at the time of this event will dilute levels even further. Amounts of heavy metals from this source are dwarfed by amounts from other sources like vehicles. This request is not expected to have significant environmental impacts. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff would like council to approve continual funding for fireworks. CITY MANAGER COMM Page 3 of 3 TENNIS COURT PREPARATION Labor: 2 Employees at $20.OOlhr. X 160 hours = $6,400 1 Employee at $20.OOlhr. X 80 hours = $1,600 Replacement Material (Clay) $1,520 Misc. Lines, hardware $250 Total Preparation Costs for 6 clay courts $9,770 Two Employees spend 4 weeks removing about 1/2" of old material They roll and compact the existing material Turn on the irrigation, take care of any repairs They then apply the new material Then roll the new material Shoot and apply lines Roll again with new lines Dependant upon weather, rolling must take place for about two more weeks to adequatley finish playable compaction. R R 'i, ~ 18 $h'91~ ~ I G $ 7~1$~1$ ,» i~ ~ it R 2 RI -', $$~«I~ ~ I i-~$71~ ~ tltl q 8~ iI ~ 3 ~. I S. '.4{~~ R J : g ~RI$ `l ~~~ I~ ~ !~~o R ~, R R ~. RBI 4. ~,A 4 I.A I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 »I ~ 1 ~!~11~ $~~`~Y E "rI 1 ~ '~I III ~ III h aI I aC Ia i~'» I ~ ' ~ 1 I. I ~ I l I n~~,RNR~SI R'. ' 187$»;~$~»i~ i« $3»».A~B $$,~~~' ' I $~$'~ A. ~ i# Y i I i~ 1 ~ ~18 3 $R IR~B"l ^~&851.488 SS~~~I ~ A. '~ »~ r $ 8 SI, ~ ~. I i1 $ R ~'~' i I !Y ~, ~». 'm' ~ s~~~'', Igaa s~~~n'~ 1~ ~""1"I~ I$la' ~~i ~» Y: ~ i I ~ ,~ I I I »I ~~ ~ ~I ~ 1 i~8 »I I ~,g»I I»A89 ~» I$ 1~~~ lay ~x '$ I ~ ~ x1 $, I I ~$,', N s ~ I~ L -~ - Q, ~ , ~~ 8 8~ $ $ ~& I~{III ~""» ~~ ~$ ^Rg.. ~. j518.. $ Y~~ ~ R i~ ~ $r~ R~$13 IH I$x 1 -I~ I ~ '1$I$ 7 a is~Im ~ ~ ~$~ ~~7',-;$s7»II~' ' $ I» ~, i I„ ~ I~~ ~ a '~ ~°s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x 7 7 ~ a ICI" ~ ~ ~ ~» »i ~~ I x 1 »» ~ • 1 ~ I I i I I I I~I ~ 1~x^',~s ~a~ $ ~~$~IN I ~ ~»!1~a „~ ~i~'I$ I$ T»x » »:xR~1I~ ~~ ~ °~ RI ISM ~ Y~ ~ i ~ ~~ ~ » ~ I$: » i ~ i ~ _1 ~ ~ $~$'~ A~ ~&i 8 AI9 I "I~, ~~~g~$~~ $I$ . y 'AS $',3'$'.$83»» ~. ~ ~~ .R~ '~"»' ~ R F~ »I~~' "~ 8. ~ p go' »:.~ ~ »V » S 3~3' `~` I~,,~~~ ~'~ ^. '~.~ i ~«i I » 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ l S ! 3 ~ .'. $ I S ~R8»f ig3 91 - i ' ~~ w3 8',$SI $'~. R " I S &..43»»$$ $~~ e '. I $ ~ I I ~~ ~~ ~~ ' ~,3 ~ $ :, r 8 I^,, sl~'. i ~ ~«., » ~ . ,. ~ .T.~SY ~~ .~`~&'~ S ~ I ~~ I R . ~$. i I '1 i 1 I~ 1 1 ii 1 i L ~. ~~ 8 ~ ' ~$ ' 1 I~, IgN »I~ ~, 5 »4 `~ :»~ 7 »I I i & 313.,$».I»13333§I$'~, I i~$ R n '~ 3 ~ S ~,$ 5~ » »I # I 1 ~ ~ ~ i L ~ ~ I» » ~ ~~a ~ ~ $ 8 ~8 »I~ i ' ~ 3«< ~ ~~»II7,- » ~ . _ ~ ss $x' ~$s ~~~', ~ I ~~ ~ ~a a 3 ~ ,,, w ~ ', 8 8 $, ~ i~ ~ . I R 7 I» A. ~+ '~ , ~. $ wig I~ ~$ » I»I u ~ ~ » I S, I I I , I i ' T I W ~ 8'317 __ - & 31 ~°~ ~d `~Y3 '~ $ J'~»~ ~i . 8 '4$$ ~$»» S ~ $$ ~ ',~ ! ' ~~~~ I $ ~, ~ ~Im $ $ ~. I'R , !`~~'~» 71 ~'~ ~~»I 1»~8 3 N '' i I ',, ~ 1 3 S S~ ~, c R I . x. » I ~ ~ I i ~ g ~~,:i~~1'»I ~ 1 ~'R: »I .. 'e 8p»I ,: ~»I~ - 77 ~$»»8 48»~~. p~{~ ~ $ $ " ~s » ~ _ a~ J^. _ ~ ~ ~ ». 3»°333»°- _.8 g » S r » », , S 7 ~~ ~ _ ~- ~ ~ ~ , ... gg ~~ ° ~3~^~ ~8R$$m »Sl» __ $ »,S'.91 ~~$»I m. ~ o ~~5 ~3~~ ~ ~$~» $331: 8 33.»i»$»»»331$ »I» 8. °Ra8 . . » 9 m » '. 7- m OD y @. O G I & - N G'. C u a U 9 d ~ m =~ T g T a e a x N ~ `~ N 9 C 0~ ~m g €ri. ~ ~ 6 g O3Q ~ $ Q j mE I R ~ Yc W C ~ a ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ I~N~ N ~ y NN S ' y~y We Li C C L 3 etY S W ~. y i 6 G LL.. e24 Y'C',O ~1~ ~ ESI ~+ 4 + '' ~~'. B U~ q ~ mV ~ LL y LL » ~ u ' ~ O aR K € m N. m ffi E SI N LL ~ H ~ ~ £ O S E ~ ~N W'. E C E E ~ ~ p2j A ~ ZNR ~.EN F m O ~ E E m 5 Q L ~ g C I n UF6 WS N^ 3[33[0 ~y~ '',e8 ~€'N Um $ °2,± 4 E$ ~~c$ i ~ y 9 L q' E3 ~ 3 .% .., rca E ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ E E"'. w~ 2'~ w ` E ESoB. m ° 8 ~e z ~. . K Q . ~ 8 w m g 3 u „ E _ €, " ' o ~.u Nw~ ° a xu Ni P~.m" J. ° ~aa`9'.xumw ,'n $. ~ s ~.° e 3°~3. off„ m,3p ~ , p m Rm~ ~ o.N ~°"~,'a ~ i ~. '~i. b $a.a snp ~~ . E z. g Q pq ~ w C 8 gQg $ ~~ n e g gR uS m~~~ W S ~ ~ , ~., b c m,ye N ~ ~ i Ng 5 Ey O~~N F ~ OF. W U ~ p m , 0 ~ E5N F F WO g n m~NN m~N~ m0m$ W OI WO NN . 'd /1 m 3 d LLZ Om0 ~ . 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen Ellsperman, Parks and Open Space Director THRU: Jeff Woods, Manager of Parks and Recreation DATE OF MEMO: Apri12, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 14, 2008 ~: "Lot C" Neighborhood Park Property Acquisition REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The City Open Space and Trails Boazd and Staff is requesting that City Council approve a contract for the purchase of "Lot C," located directly adjacent to the Burlingame Housing Project, for the future development of a neighborhood park for the amount of $500,000. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: - December, 2006: City Council and the Open Space and Trails Boazd attended a publically-noticed site visit to the property and gave Staff direction that the pazcel of property would be an important asset to the community as a neighborhood pazk. Council duected staff to continue ongoing negotiations to purchase the parcel. - Mazch, 2007: At a regularly scheduled City Council meeting and a site visit to the property, staff presented an update on the process and negotiations of acquiring the parcel of property. Council provided direction to Staff that the parcel of property still remained a high priority for acquisition and that a neighborhood park in this portion of the community also remained a high priority. BACKGROUND: The Open Space and Trails Boazd and the Parks and Recreation Department initiated negotiations in October of 2006 with representatives and the owners of the Baz / X Subdivision. These negotiations were designed to obtain easement access for a public trail across their property to be known as the "Old Stage Trail" and to possibly acquire afour- acre parcel of property known as "Lot C," which was originally designed to be a cultural arts facility in the original approval of the subdivision (Exhibit A). The intent of acquiring this pazcel of property was to provide a much needed neighborhood pazk for the residents of the Page 1 adjacent Burlingame Housing Project and the community as a whole. The trail easement was granted to the City of Aspen in 2006 and the "Old Stage Trail" was planned, designed, and completed in 2007. With City Council direction, the Open Space and Trails Board and the Parks and Recreation Department have continued to negotiate the acquisition of the "Lot C" pazcel with the Bar / X Subdivision owners and representatives. The ownership group agreed to review a proposal from the City of Aspen which included typical design elements of a neighborhood park and landscaping improvements to the site (Exhibit C). The ownership group had been in the very beginning stages of discussions with local non-profits about a potential cultural arts facility on the pazcel of land, but agreed strongly with the concept of neighborhood park at this location and agreed to move forward with the process that they required internally as an ownership group, in concert with the newly formed Baz / X Homeowners Association, to sell this parcel of land. With the assistance of the City Attorney's Office, a "Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate" and a "Bazgain Sale and Deed" were completed that included specific provisions that protect the City of Aspen and the Homeowners Association interests (Exhibit B). Some of the specific provisions in these documents include the following: - The parcel of land is to be protected in perpetuity as a neighborhood park. The Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT), as a third pazty, will hold a conservation easement on the pazcel to ensure this protection. - The neighborhood pazk facility will be in concert with the "Schematic Landscape Plan" attached to the sale deed documents. The Pazks and Recreation Department provided the design for this plan and feels that it works well on this property for the community (Exhibit C). - The City of Aspen will only commence work on the future neighborhood park facility after reviewing the plans with the Homeowners Association and the owner of the adjacent F-1 lot for their approval. This approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. - Prior to commencing work, the City of Aspen will preserve and relocate existing vegetation on the property. - The City of Aspen will install a fence of a three strand design on the south and east boundaries of the property. - The Bar / X Subdivision will provide all necessary irrigation water to serve the facility. - The purchase price of the property will be $500,000. as a portion of the Bazgain Sale and Deed. 2of4 DISCUSSION: City Council, the Open Space and Trails Board and the Parks and Recreation Department all believe that the residents of the Burlingame Housing Project and the residents of the community as a whole require a park setting in close proximity to their homes and living spaces. Currently, no neighborhood park setting has been designed into the project and the acquisition of Lot C would provide this added recreational and quality of life element. Negotiations for this purchase and development of this parcel of land have gone through extensive discussions and review from many individuals and entities including the Open Space and Trails Boazd, City Attorney's Office, the Parks and Recreation Department, and the owners and representatives of the Baz / X Subdivision. The contract documents attached to this memorandum represent the result of this review and negotiation process and the entities involved believe that the neighborhood pazk project is fairly represented. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The purchase price of $500,000 was negotiated at length with the current property owner and is based upon their Financial investment situation for the subdivision. The_Open Space and Trails Boazd voted unanimously that this was a fair bargain sale price for the property based upon the extensive negotiations and information exchange. The Open Space and Trail Boazd felt strongly that it would be impossible to purchase a four acre property for a neighborhood pazk for anywhere neaz the $500,000 price in the community. In the March, 2007, City Council Meeting, the Council directed staff to acquire this pazcel of property utilizing Pazks and Open Space Funds. In addition, there was discussion about whether it would be appropriate for the Housing Fund to pay for the estimated park development costs of $300,000. If the Council decides to approve the purchase of the pazcel of property, the Pazks and Recreation Department will initiate a full planning and design process for the neighborhood pazk and a discussion about which City of Aspen Fund would be most appropriate to pay for the park development costs would be entertained at that time. As confirmed with the Finance Department, the Parks and Open Space Fund is in a healthy financial situation and will be able to absorb this cost of property acquisition. There will be some future maintenance costs associated with a new park development that would be typical of the maintenance of any park facility, and the Pazks and Open Space Fund is also financially able to absorb these costs, which will become defined as the final design for the facility is completed. The current schematic design includes a small playground, open turf area, and pond improvements which are typical of most neighborhood parks in the community, so it is not anticipated that these maintenance costs would be high. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: In addition to the recreational qualities that this facility would provide, there is also significant ability to include this property in stormwater management activities by including pazk design elements in passive stormwater detention and filtering management objectives. The proposed design also minimizes disturbance of native vegetation and topography, allowing the pazcel to remain for the most pazt an ecological connection to adjacent open space. This facility is proposed to be a neighborhood facility, not Page 3 of 4 a destination location, so vehicle trips and parking at the facility is not planned. The maintenance of the neighborhood park will include activities such as turf maintenance and native area maintenance, but it is not expected to be a significant fuel drain or emission source. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Open Space and Trails Board and the Parks and Recreation Department Staff are recommending that Council approve the Contract to Purchase the "Lot C" parcel for $500,000. ALTERNATIVES: The Parks and Recreation Department has researched other locations for a possible neighborhood park within or adjacent to the Burlingame Housing Project. Based upon the design and layout of the parcel, there are no other opportunities within the project or directly adjacent to the project. The City of Aspen did retain the right to build a park facility of some type on a parcel of land called the Amcor Parcel, which is currently protected by AVLT as a part of the entire approval process for the project. This parcel of land is not duectly adjacent to the housing project and would not serve well as an accessible neighborhood park as it would involve disturbance of the open space and ecological values of this particular area and therefore it is not a suitable alternative. The other alternative would be to not move forward with the acquisition and development of a neighborhood park facility in this location. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve the "Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate" for the purchase of the "Lot C" Parcel for the amount of $500,000. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Property Location Map Exhibit B Contract and Sale Deed Exhibit C Schematic Landscape Plan Design Exhibit D -Resolution Page 4 of 4 ;~,. -~rf .~, ~4 .~ 'I ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~, i, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ E~: ~ °~ ~ : ~ ~ ~~ ~„ ~~. ~ ~~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~- v ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ `1 ! _ .~+ ~~ ti~~ ~` ~ ~~ 0 1 ~~ x B W Q N z 7 '. a~ r~ ~~ ~~ Z WI N D z g J t- i~ ~~ e ~. a i 9 ,_ L Z L C t~ 0 ~~ s~ ~~ 0 :a C ^. G~ CL C~ u C v s v V W °~y ~~: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kai Ramsey THRU: Tom McCabe DATE OF MEMO: 3/11/08 MEETING DATE: RE: Truscott 100 Roof REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Truscott is requesting that Council approve funding for the replacement of the roof over the 100 building. DISCUSSION: The roof over the main span of the 100 building is in need of repair and replacement. Initially, the roof was deemed ok through 2009 by Stark Roofing. After a huge snow year, the roof aged quicker than expected. Inadequate heat tapes (may failed) and large snow accumulations created ice dams that damaged many areas along the roof edge. Shingles are missing and leaks have started to form in the storage lockers on the decks of many tenants. The heat tape and gutters are damaged and are in need of replacement as well. Truscott is requesting the funding for this project be moved from 2009 to 2008. We are requesting more money to cover urilmown damage to the roof deck and replacement of heat tape and gutters. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Currently $119,000 has been budgeted in 2009. We are now requesting $180,000 to cover additional expenses be budgeted in 2008. The Truscott fund is healthy and can accommodate this request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that Council approve the supplemental request to fund the replacement of the Truscott roof. ALTERNATIVES: If Council does not want to approve the staff recommendation, more damage to the building due to leaks will occur creating more expenses. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve the supplemental request for the roof replacement at Truscott." Page 1 of 2 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACIEI4ENTS: Notes: • Please use page numbers on all memos and attachments, especially for work sessions • The memo should be as long as it needs to be -but remember, you're not writing a novel. Use attachments for more detailed information, ordinances and resolutions, etc. • Attachments: All attachments to the memo should be referenced somewhere in the body of the memo. All attachments should be titled as `Attachment", "Exhibit" or "Schedule° with a letter following: Attachments: A -Exhibit One -Map ... B -Property Description C -Chart of Costs D -Resolution #97-1 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kai Ramsey THRU: Tom McCabe DATE OF MEMO: 3/11/08 MEETING DATE: RE: Truscott 100 Water Softener REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Truscott is requesting funding for a water softener system for the 100 building. DISCUSSION: Recently a leak in the boiler room in the 100 building at Truscott has revealed major damage to pipes that had been installed two years ago. The damaged pipes are on the domestic hot water line which supplies hot hater to 50 apartments. The damage to the inner pipe resembled "Swiss cheese." Bishop plumbing replaced over 40 feet of damaged pipes. Bishop had not seen pipes damaged to this extent in any previous experience. The plumber recommended a water softening system to reduce the hardness of the water. The other recommendation was to have an electrician check for electrolysis. The electrician confirmed there was no electrolysis.. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: From previous estimates, the cost to install a new softening system will be around $6500. The Truscott fund is healthy and could accommodate this request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that Council approve the request to fund a water softening system for the 100 building at Truscott. PROPOSED MOTION: I approve to move supplemental funding for the water softening system at Truscott. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 1 of 2 ATTACI~NTS: Notes: • Please use page numbers on al[ memos and attachments, especially for work sessions • The memo should be as long as it needs to be -but remember, you're not writing a novel. Use attachments for more detailed information, ordinances and resolutions, etc. • Attachments: All attachments to the memo should be referenced somewhere in the body of the memo. All attachments should be titled as Attachment", "Exhibit" or "Schedule" with a letter following: Attachments: A -Exhibit One -Map ... B -Property Description C -Chan of Cosrs D -Resolution #97-1 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kai Ramsey THRU: Tom McCabe DATE OF MEMO: 3/11/08 MEETING DATE: RE; Truscott Snow Removal REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Truscott is requesting Council approve the supplemental request for snow removal. DISCUSSION: Due to a very snowy winter, Truscott staff was stretched to their limits and additional assistance was needed to fulfill snow removal duties. The maintenance crew was understaffed for the majority of the winter due to trainings, illness, relentless snow storms, and ultimately a resignation. Temporary help was hired through Aspen Work Force to assist in snow shoveling, ice removal, and roof work. Without these services, the staff at Truscott would have lost more personnel and never would have caught up. We avoided a catastrophe because the temporary help was able to shovel the roofs on multiple occasions. Snow had to be hauled from the property because our snow storage areas reached capacity by the beginning of January. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: It is estimated to cost about $25,000 to cover the temporary help and hauling of snow from the property. The Truscott fund is healthy and can accommodate this request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that Council approve this supplemental request for snow removal at Truscott. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move that Council approve the supplemental request for snow removal at Truscott." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 1 of 2 ATTACfIMENTS: Notes: • Please use page numbers on all memos and attachments, especially for work sessions • The memo should be as long as it needs to be -but remember, you're not writing a novel. Use attachments for more detailed information, ordinances and resolutions, etc. • Attachments: All attachments to the memo should be referenced somewhere in the body of the memo. All attachments should be titled as Attachment", "Exhibit" or "Schedule" with a letter following: Attachments: A -Exhibit One -Map ... B -Properly Description C -Chan of Costs D -Resolution #97-1 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: Mayor and City Council Bentley Henderson Steve Barwick DATE OF MEMO: 03-12-08 MEETING DATE: 4-15-08 RE: Supplemental Request -Isis notch construction REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Supplemental funding is being requested to facilitate the completion of Isis Theater "notch" improvements. It is staff s expectation that these improvements will cost roughly $ ~S v(~O BACKGROUND: During the negotiations for the purchase of the Isis, the City entered into an additional agreement that obligated the City to bring about some improvements to the notch azea of the Isis specifically as they relate to some landscaping and limited privacy measures. The design process was initiated with direction from the HPC, utilizing the same designer that has done the design for the new fire station. The HPC requested that any changes to the notch be consistent with the work that will be undertaken by the fire district in the construction of the new fire station. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The funds being requested are for one time expenditure to include design, development of construction drawings, and ultimately construction of the chosen alternative. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of a one time supplemental appropriation o $3A;9dD to accommodate this work ~'as n~ are approving this item. PROPOSED MOTION: This request is a component of the larger ls` supplemental request for 2008. Notwithstanding an exclusion of this project, by approving the supplemental package you CITY MANAGER Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sheila Babbie THRU: Bentley Henderson DATE OF MEMO: February 27, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 14th, 2008 RE: Completion of City Hall Carpet Replacement REQUEST OF COUNCIL: One time request of $20,000 to fund the completion of the City Hall carpet replacement, which was started in 2007. Areas designated for replacement include the remainder of first floor, and minimal carpet fixes and replacement in Environmental Health/HR, and Engineering on the second floor. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Part of the 2007 Asset Management Plan, Council approved City Hall carpet replacement. BACKGROUND: Carpet is periodically replaced in City Hall based on wear and tear. A number of years have passed since the last carpet replacement, and this is the regularly scheduled Asset Management replacement program. DISCUSSION: There is a remodel of designated offices in City Hall starting in March of 2008. We were aware of the upcoming remodel in 2007 and therefore held off on recarpeting these particular areas. The remaining carpet budget authority from 2007 is insufficient to complete the replacement, and the limited budget for the upcoming remodel is unable to include the remaining offices. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: One time request of $20,000 to fund the completion of the City Hall carpet replacement, which was started in 2007. We are using carpet squares to allow for smaller sections of replacement from wear and tear in future years. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City will be replacing the current carpet with recycled carpet squares. Not only does this meet our "green initiative", it will also reduce future carpet replacement costs by only having to replace high traffic areas. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: A one-time increase of $20,000 to the Asset Management fund's 2008 budget authority. ALTERNATIVES: No replacement of old/worn carpet. If the replacement does not occur during the remodel, the expense and time to do it in the future will be significantly higher. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sheila Babbie THRU: Bentley Henderson DATE OF MEMO: March 1, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 14th, 2008 RE: Completion of City Hall Remodel REQUEST OF COUNCIL: One time request of $150,000 to fund the completion of the City Hall remodel, including sections of the first and second floor. Areas designated for remodel include the remainder of first floor (all areas including common areas except the section of the Finance Department which was remodeled in 2007), and the Engineering Department, Environmental Health/HR Department, and the hallway of the second floor of City Hall. Council approved $300,000 to complete this remodel during the 2007 budget process, which was then decreased to $100,000 during the 2008 budget process due to reallocation of Asset funds, including the 517 E. Hopkins remodel. However, without the one time funding request (which is still less than the original funding approved by Council in 2007), the remodel will not be able to be completed as needed. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Part of the 2007 Asset Management Plan, Council approved City Hall remodel funding of $300,000, which was reallocated to other Asset projects in the 2008 budget approval process. BACKGROUND: Initially, $300,000 was approved by Council for the first and second floor remodel of designated offices in City Hall. When the City acquired the Hopkins Annex rental space, the $300,000 was reassigned to that remodel project and other Asset projects. Only $100,000 was replaced in the budget in 2008 as a replacement budget. DISCUSSION: There is a remodel of designated offices on the first and second floors of City Hall starting in March of 2008. Page I of 2 FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: One time request of $150,000 to fund the completion of the City Hall remodel of designated areas on the first and second floors. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: As part of the City Hall remodel, several green initiatives will be included, such as recycled carpet squares and energy efficient lighting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: A one-time increase of $150,000 to the Asset Management fund's 2008 budget authority. ALTERNATIVES: Minimal remodel of City Hall which will not include any second floor improvements, or the IT Department upgrades currently slated in the project. CITY MANAGER COMME Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Bentley Henderson, Assistant City Manager Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: March 12, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: Park Avenue Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian Plan Supplemental Request SUMMARY: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $32,043 for the design of a Park Avenue Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian Plan. BACKGROUND: According to Ordinance No. 25 (series of 2004) sidewalk, curb and gutter shall be provided across the Pazk Avenue frontage of 308 and 310 Pazk Avenue. The challenge is that the paved road surface is approximately 18 to 21 feet wide (minimum 24 feet is recommended) and is located on the edge of the right of way (ROVE. As a result, there is not enough room to install the sidewalk as intended by the ordinance. Council then directed staff at the January 22, 2007 council meeting, to commission a study to develop a pedestrian improvement plan for the Pazk Avenue neighborhood. The goal of the study is to provide recommendations for pedestrian alignments along Park Avenue. DISCUSSION: The review committee selected JR Engineering LLC based on the quality and detail of their proposal. JR Engineering was retained to provide a Traffic Study and Transportation Plan of the Pazk Avenue Neighborhood. The total contract amount as well as staff time has exceeded the original budget for the project FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Originally additional funding required for the Pazk Avenue Traffic and Pedestrian Study was to be taken from the TABOR funds for Sidewalk Improvements. From Council direction given in the November 26`s 2007 council meeting, these funds are not available for this project. Staff intends to use original funding budgeted for this project and is requesting supplemental funding to cover additional project expenses. Funding Pedestrian Improvements- Pazk Avenue(Acct# 000.15.82130) $31,552.00 Sunnlemental $32 043 00 Total $63,595.00 Expenditures JR Engineering LLC Proposal $43,595.00 Staff $20 000.00 Total $63,595.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $32,043 for the design of a Pazk Avenue Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian Plan. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Bentley Henderson, Assistant City Manager Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: Mazch 21, 2008 MEETING DATE: RE: 2008 Concrete Replacement Supplemental SUMMARY: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $170,000 for the construction of curb and gutter on Garmisch from Durant to Main Street. BACKGROUND: Curb and gutter functions throughout the City of Aspen to convey Stormwater and provide safe pedestrian facilities. The concrete has deteriorated along Garmisch. Much of this infrastructure is failing and is unsafe. DISCUSSION: The scope of the curb and gutter replacement is dependant on the scope of pavement replacement (mill and overlay). As the streets deteriorate the City replaces the pavement. Along with the pavement replacement, deteriorated curb and gutter is also replaced. It has been three years since City has replaced any pavement. As a result, many areas have accelerated in their deterioration. The concrete project was originally estimated a year ago since that time the curb and gutter was inventoried and found to be deteriorating quicker than originally estimated. As a result the lineal feet of curb and gutter was increased for this year to fully replace all deteriorated concrete prior to the pavement replacement project. The entire 2008 Concrete Replacement Project includes two parts: 1. Replacement of curb and gutter and ADA ramps along Hopkins from Spring Street to Garmisch; replacing curb and gutter and ADA ramps along Monarch Stteet from Hyman to Main Street; various ADA ramp replacements in the downtown area; and sidewalk installation on Hyman Ave from 15` to 2"d Street. This part of the contract is fully funded. 2. Concrete replacement for Garmisch from Durant to Main Street. This portion of the project needs a supplemental ui the amount of $170,000 to be fully funded. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding Sunnlemental Request 170 000 TOTAL $170,000 Expenditures ROW C&G Construction $160,000 Contineencv $ 10 000 TOTAL $170,000 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $170,000 for the construction of curb and gutter along Garmisch from Durant to Main Street. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, & Bentley Henderson THRU: Steve Barwick DATE OF MEMO: 03-12-08 MEETING DATE: 4-IS-08 RE: Supplemental Budget Request -City Council Chambers Remodel REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting $200,000 supplemental funding for the City Council Chambers remodel. BACKGROUND: In eazly 2006 staff was chazged with taking the steps necessary to improve the form and function of the City Council chambers. Staff was directed to enhance both the televised and "in room" audio, visual, and presentation experience. The construction bids are now 2 years old and did not include upgraded Grass Roots equipment or improved lighting. DISCUSSION: Based upon almost 2 years of work, staff has come to the realization that original cost expectations were low, and not complete. The additional funding identified above is necessary to accomplish the goals set forth by the City Council To date staff has executed contracts with both the AV provider and a general contractor. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The funds being requested are for one time expenditure which includes design, development of construction drawings, a minor remodel, installation of an extensive audio visual upgrade, and construction of new furniture. 2005 ricin 2008 ricin $110,000 const. estimate $221,000 contract rice with amendments $125,000 audio visual estimate $165,000 contract rice with ass roots addendum $15,000 furniture estimate $65,000 u dated furniture ricin The items identified in the 'OS column were merely estimates utilized to establish a working budget. The original budget estimate/appropriation for the project was $275,000, based on the number presented. As we began to move toward fixed costs it became evident that using 3 year old pricing was not going to be representative of actual costs. Page 1 of 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Given the current state of the City Council chambers with regard to the lighting, heating and ventilation, the modifications anticipated will provide for a significant improvement not only to the functionality of the room but to its overall environmental impact. Further, environmental sustainability has been a guiding principle for all of the materials contemplated for the remodel from the furniture, to the wall coverings, right down to the carpet. This effort has had some budgetary impacts. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of a one time supplemental appropriation of $200,000 to accommodate this work. PROPOSED MOTION: This request is a component of the larger 15` supplemental request for 2008. Notwithstanding an exclusion of this project, by approving the supplemental package you are approving this item. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bentley Henderson THRU: Steve Barwick DATE OF MEMO: 03-12-08 MEETING DATE: 4-15-08 RE; Supplemental Budget Request -City Hall Annex Remodel REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting $834,600 in supplemental funding for, the 517 E. Hopkins remodel. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In the fall of 2007 the City Council authorized staff to enter into a lease agreement for approximately 5200 square feet of space located in the garden level of the above referenced property. BACKGROUND: At the outset of this project there had already been significant progress made on the City's annual budget, therefore precluding staff from including this work in the 2008 budget. Work on the remodel was initiated utilizing budget appropriations from other city projects that had either been postponed or completed with excess budget authority available. The primary source was an appropriation that had originally been dedicated to a first floor City Hall remodel. DISCUSSION: The remodel project is essentially complete, and based on the scope of the remodel, supplemental appropriations are necessary. In general, the remodel project has provided for 25 new work spaces able to accommodate 31(+) employees. Included are two conference rooms and work spaces available for the public. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The funds being requested are for one time expenditure which includes design, and of construction of 25 cubicle style office spaces, two conference rooms, restrooms, installation of optical fiber networking, and built-in work stations. During the lease negotiation process a provision was included that provided for the recapture of some "non- tenant" improvements to the structure. Staff will be tracking those and pursuing that recapture. Original estimates were approximations given the uncertainty as to what would "turn up" in the way of unknowns during and once demolition was completed. Page 1 of 2 Recovery Est. const amt Actual Difference Estimate $675,000 $1014,601 $340,000 $225,000 08 carry 07 budget 07 expended forward 08 suppl. $289,000 $80,000 $181,000 $834,000 Further, given the somewhat uncertain future as it relates to permanent office space, most of the finishes in the City Hall Annex were installed with some level of portability built-in. If you have had a chance to visit the facility you will find that the network cabling and the majority of the electrical distribution work was surface mounted to facilitate its removal. Additionally, the cubicles themselves could be relocated as needed. The desire for re-use has ultimately had an impact on the cost of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Essentially, every portion of this project has been accomplished utilizing environmentally sensitive products. Framing has been done with timberstrand lumber, desktops aze made from fmished particle board, and the walls of the cubicles aze made form homosote. Further, the carpeting is high content recycled carpet, and the light fixtures embody some of the highest environmental standazds available. Granted, while these products represent a significant expenditure increase to the project, they also exemplify the City's commitment to Environmental Stewardship. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of a one time supplemental appropriation of $834,600 to accommodate this work. Ultimately, once we have completed all of the remodel efforts, we should be able to dispose of at least one of the other rental properties that we presently use with an anticipated annual savings in excess of $50,000. PROPOSED MOTION: This request is a component of the lazger 1 s` supplemental request for 2008. Notwithstanding an exclusion of this project, by approving the supplemental package you are approving this item. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council COPY: Don Taylor, Finance Director FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director gE: 2008 Supplemental Budget Request (~ QMQS Research - RPI Consulting Contract Amendmdent DATE: Apri128, 2008 SUMMARY: The Community Development Department recently reviewed the scope of work for Gabe Preston of RPI Consulting with City Council. Mr. Preston is reseazching the City's growth history by category of land use, including scrape and replace activity. This reseazch will be part of the Existing Conditions report for the Aspen Area Community Plan. At City Council's request, additional services detailing trends in construction activity will be added to the contract. Mr. Preston had originally estimated this additional work at $28,209.50. Including some additional correlation work with voter registration and property tax information, staff expects this estimate to increase. Staff is requesting an additional appropriation of $35,000 to cover this contract amendment. ComDev staff will work with the Finance Department to include this additional request in the second reading of the supplemental budget. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM ~'' TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Steve Barwick, City Manager Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager FROM: Gram Slaton, Wheeler Executive Director DATE: Apri17, 2008 RE: Clarification of the definition of "Maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House" SUMMARY: We are seeking Council approval of the attached Ordinance, amending section 23.48.060 (c) of the municipal code, by clarifying the definition of the term "maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House" as it relates to the Wheeler Opera House Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund (RETT) and clarifying appropriate expenditures from said fund. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In a work session on July 6, 2004, Wheeler staff was asked to develop the definition of "maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House". Towards the end of 2004, action on approving these changes were suspended indefinitely. On January 29, 2008, Wheeler staff, the City Manager's office, and the City of Aspen Attomey met with City Council to discuss possible legal limitations of the RETT for funding of the City's grant program for arts not-for-profits. Subsequent to that meeting, Wheeler staff received direction to review the 2004 language for modification and later submission to City Council for its input and possible approval. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: In 2004, meetings were held that included Wheeler staff, the City Manager's office, and the City of Aspen Attorney, as well as the Wheeler Board for comment and review. At that time, consideration was given regarding dictionary definitions, voter intentions, and how "maintenance" was interpreted from the inception of the RETT. In 2006, Wheeler Executive Director Gram Slaton was asked by the City Manager's office to review non-RETT revenue sources from Wheeler operations that could support an increase in funding activity for the arts grants program. Starting from a conservative reading of the RETT ballot language, Slaton found that there were very limited revenue streams available and advised City staff appropriately. As the stream of available funds began to reach its ceiling after several years of growth in arts funding, Slaton worked with City staff and the Arts Grants Review Committee to investigate ways that would meet the arts groups' needs while remaining within the pool of available funds. In the fall of 2007, several possibilities were raised, as well as concerns about the direction of arts grants funding that the Arts Grants Review Committee felt should be taken before City Council for future direction. By clarifying certain areas in the RETT ballot language, the original intent of the provision for arts funding can be maintained, as well as more clearly define the revenue streams from Wheeler operations that are appropriate for non-RETT funding of the arts grants program. Approval of this ordinance would define "maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House" as "those activities, operations or physical improvements or additions necessary to ensure a performing arts venue that provides arts programming opportunities to the citizens of the community and an endowment fund in perpetuity." FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There is no change in the Wheeler operating budget with this clarification of the definition of the word "maintenance." RECOMMENDATION: The Wheeler staff and Board recommend support of the attached ordinance and the clarification of terms. ALTERNATIVES: CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~ ~~~~' ORDINANCE NO. 11 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING SECTIONS 23.48.060 (c) AND (g) TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD "MAINTENANCE"AS IT RELATES TO THE WHEELER OPERA HOUSE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND (RETT) AND CLARIFYING APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FROM SAID FUND. WHEREAS, the electorate of the City of Aspen approved adoption of Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1979, imposing a % of 1% real estate transfer tax for the purpose of renovation, reconstruction and maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House or for the payment of interest on bonds issued for such purposes and for the purpose of supporting the visual and performing arts (limited to $100,000.00 per year); and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen renovated and restored the Wheeler Opera House in 1984 for the purpose of establishing and providing the community with an active performing arts facility whose mission is: to preserve the historical and cultural integrity of the Wheeler Opera House; to nurture artistic diversity; to provide educational opportunities; to provide local accessibility to the arts; and to provide excellence in performance and production for community members and visitors. To that end, a professional staff maintains the operations and physical facility; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has used RETT funds and earned revenues to maintain the operations and physical facility since the 1984 renovation; and WHEREAS, in 1997 the electorate of the City of Aspen authorized the expiration date of the real estate transfer tax to be extended to December 31, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council established a separate fund (Endowment Fund) for the future financing of the Wheeler Opera House and into which a certain portion of annual net revenues in excess of the budgeted operating and capital expenses and operating reserve shall be deposited; and WHEREAS, the City Council also established expenditure and investment parameters for said Endowment Fund in order to establish a secure funding source for the Wheeler Opera House and local non-profit arts organizations considering first the operations and capital improvements of the Wheeler Opera House and secondly to support local arts non-profit organizations; and WHEREAS, Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th Edition, 1993) defines maintenance as both "the state of being maintained: support," and "the upkeep of property or equipment;" and WHEREAS, it is the goal and intention of the City Council to clarify the definition of "maintenance" as it relates to the use of RETT funds and to define available revenue sources for additional arts funding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 Wheeler Opera House real estate transfer tax. Section 23.48.060(c) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (c) Application of funds. All funds received by the City of Aspen pursuant to this section 23.48.060 shall be deposited in the Wheeler Opera House real estate transfer tax special revenue fund, which fund is hereby created. The account shall be subject to appropriation by the City Council of the City of Aspen only for the purpose of renovation, reconstruction and maintenance of the Wheeler Opera House or for the payment of principal and interest on bonds issued for such purposes and for the purpose of supporting the visual and performing arts. However, the City Council shall not appropriate in excess of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) of real estate transfer tax funds in any single calendar year for the purpose of supporting the visual and performing arts without obtaining the approval of sixty (60) percent of the electors voting at a regulaz or special election on the same.. The City Council, pursuant to ordinance, and without an election, may borrow money, issue bonds, or otherwise extend the credit of the city for renovation and reconstruction of the Wheeler Opera House provided that the bonds or other obligations shall be made payable from the funds derived from this chapter. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply: "Maintenance" shall be defaned as those activities, operations, or physical improvements or additions necessary to ensure a performing arts venue that provides arts programming opportunities to the citizens of the community and an endowment fund in perpetuity. Funds available 'for the purpose of supporting the visual and performing arts" in addition to the ~1OQ000 of real estate transfer tax funds shall include all revenues generated by the operation of the Wheeler Opera House to include gross revenues generated from lease agreements for space within the Wheeler Opera House, gross theater rental revenue, gross ticket processing fee and ticketing services revenue, and gross artist concessions revenue. Section 2. Section 23.48.060(g) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (g) Administration. The Director of Finance shall administer this section 23.48.060 and shall prepare such forms and adopt such regulations consistent with this chapter, as he or she deems necessary to implement the same. The Arts and Non Profit Grant Review Committee for the City of Aspen shall submit a report to the City Council on an annual basis describing funding activities for the past year and the available funds for the support of the visual and performing arts for the next ftscal year. This section 23.48.060 shall be administered in accordance with chapters 23.04 through 23.28 of this title, to the extent that they do not conflict with the provisions of this section, for all taxes due or paid after November 1, 2000. Section 3 This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 28`h day of April in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 14`h day of April, 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Page 1 of 2 Kathryn Koch From: Marilyn R Marks [marilyn@aspenoffice.com] Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:10 AM To: Dwayne Romero forward; J.E. DeVilbiss; Jack Johnson forward; Mick Ireland forward; Steve Skadron forward Cc: Kathryn Koch; Steve Barwick; John Worcester Subject: Ordinance #11 consideration at 4.28 08 meeting To City Council: This is a request that you address the following questions in your deliberations on Ordinance #11 relating to the potential expansion of the definition of "maintenance" for the Wheeler Fund. Thank you very much for your consideration. Please let me know if the questions need clarification. Marilyn Marks 429 7535 Questions regarding Ordinance # 11 Please discuss during Public Hearing: 1. What types of expenditures are envisioned under the proposed expanded definition of "maintenance", which may be interpreted as prohibited or unclear under the current language? (i.e. -how will this affect spending compazed to past practices?) Will there be a dollar limit for any single expenditure or project under this new definition? 3. The original language of the voter approval did not appear to contemplate new construction ,campus expansion, or additions to the physical plant of the Wheeler. Are additions and new building construction to be considered as "maintenance" under the new definition? 4. Does the expansion of the definition of "maintenance" beyond its typical vernaculaz understanding and use create a potential legal issue regazding appropriate expenditures under this voter approved measure? 4/28/2008 Page 2 of 2 5. If there is a question about whether significant physical plant expansion expenditures were authorized by the voters under the current language, will you consider asking the voters rather than changing the language unilaterally? 6. The proposed expansion of the "funds available" definition to such a broad scope of gross revenues, seems in direct contrast to the intent of the voter approved language of limiting the funds to RETT funds and $100,000. What is the intent and expected effect of expanding this definition by significant amounts? 7. Has Council received a written opinion from outside counsel on the appropriateness of this proposal, and any legal risk inherent in expanding the definitions? If not, will you consider this? The endowment fund is a valuable public asset and should be protected from significant legal risk. 4/28/2008 m vn~ b THE Cl'fY OF ASPEN Memorandum To: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council ,,,/ From: Don Taylor, Director of Finance and Administratve Services ~ hl Cc: Steve Barwick, CiTy Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Date: April 21, 2008 Re: 2nd Reading, Ordinance No. 13, BMC West/Affordable Housing Financing Strategy; Wheeler Inter-fund Loan. SUMMARY: In December of 2007 the City closed on the acquisition of the BMC parcel for future affordable housing use. The acquisition cost was approximately 18 million dollars. The Housing fund (fund 150) did not have the available resources to make the acquisition and a financing strategy needed to be utilized in order to make the acquisition. An appropriate financing was never put into place and aninter-fund loan needs to be authorized in order to complete the short term financing. The plan was to do a short term financing to complete the acquisition and then refinance in November of 2008 by seeking authorization to issue long term bonds from voters at the general election. BACKGROUND: The Director of Finance and Administrative services at the time provided a memo to the Manager and Council providing some options for fmancing the parcel. The options included using aninter-fund loan, and also suggests a repurchase agreement line of credit. The repurchase agreement is not actually a line of credit but is a liquidity action. Securities with a longer term were pledged to Compass Bank (the repurchase agreement provider) in exchange for the cash required to make the BMC purchase. In order to complete the financing aninter-fund loan from the Wheeler Opera House Endowment fund needs to be made. The endowment fund had a balance at the end of 2007 in the amount of $24,453,000. The Housing Development Fund had $ 10,250,000 in available fund balance prior to the BMC purchase, so only $8,000,000 needs to be borrowed to close out 2007. As new projects in the housing fund aze initiated in 2008, additional inter- fund loans maybe required for another $8,000,000. April 23, 2008 The Wheeler Endowment fund will be paid interest on the loan equal to the amount it was currently earning on its invested balances. The loan would then be repaid from the bond proceeds (permanent financing) if the issuance is approved in November. ANALYSIS: Short term borrowing from a third party that has a term beyond the end of the fiscal year was not an option unless there is voter and Council approval. The State constitution requires that multiyeaz obligations be approved by the voters and any debt must be approved by the City Council as required in its charter. An inter-fund loan is the only option. If the bond issue does not pass the City has a couple of options for creating a permanent financing for the BMC parcel. One is to reprioritize Housing Development Fund projects in 2009 and 2010 so as to allow for the Wheeler Endowment Fund to be paid back. The attached Exhibit Ishows apro-forma for repayment of the Wheeler loan based on this scenario. The loan could be paid back as quickly as two yeazs under this scenario, or it could be stretched out longer if other housing activities need to be addressed in the interim. A second option would be to use a lease purchase agreement or certificates of Participation (COPS) in the amount of $18,000,000 to finance the next housing project. The BMC parcel would be substitute collateral in this structure. There aze some hurdles with this approach as it would be difficult to structure a lease under the revenue stream created by the existing taxes and their sunsets. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that an inter-fund loan from the Wheeler Opera House Endowment fund be approved for 2007 in the amount of $8,000,000. Interest will be paid on the loan in the amount that it would have earned on its invested cash. This is estimated at 4.61 %. The Wheeler Endowment fund will be held harmless during this inter-fund loan transaction. ao O O O O ~ O'. CD 0 M O I O W GOO COO fA t90 G~V a °G 001 W 'CO'f '~ h r' ap I y~ o HT. dlO G I 01 t0 ' aNO ~ ~ ~ I ^ O O N N I O 1047 O N I fA 6 3 ~ N N , ~ N.000 CD ~ ~ OI IIO N S N 10 ln0 I 01 N N ~ 7 C E109 (O IM 10 W ~ ~ r 0) p N N IM N V I ~ O .fA NI V ;N H N lfl ~ I W' . ~ I W H ~ ~ N . O H K I ham.. p Vf N I I N ~ I I ~, ~ O C O O ~ ~ ~- r -~ a h OO'~ O O O 0 tD bl ~ ' CD IN 0 I O N NI N CD ~I M '.r. ~ O,O OIO ~ O 10 1 o I n r , ' I r ~ V 10 ., co co In ao' ~I. 0 0 0 ~ I '~~ 0 o ~o1 01 ri ~ ~' 0M i o m a IOC VIN i IMO r ar0 ~ Of I C EA O O 00 D ') ~ f 0 O ~ 1 0 I ., ' ~I V f9~ IW N I ~I 'bi NCI. ~~ ~I. M ~ N , ~ I tV I I I N W CD r O H t ~ I , I V! 'H i . I F U ~ OOO OI O I X10 01 V O 10 01 'N 0) M P' O O OIO IMP O O O fA V V O ~ 1~1 ~ M M N IOD OI 01 O V1 ~ n. I W ~ ~ hO.O f191 O~ M. (OO V O I O o O 10 o M DO VV IN i I A I O H r r 0 O O O N10 10 M t0 O O o a0 0. G O M M I OI 10 '01 I ' ~ d > O CO N I 5`0') tD 001. IIM IN.IVO~ ~ ~ '~~ ,C D. ' O 10 i~''~ rW NI fA I CO CD ~ ~ W h. ' li wl ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ y . ~, '.M ~ I X01 o ~ ~ M~ ~ COh i h ' o m W . i I ie> t p ~ w'. I ~ I , .~ ' N I ~ I I 9 ~ CW II f!'N ~ ~tOl~lO I ~.~ '' ' V I~ N V O10 I<OO O M ~ ~I rl~ I~a00 'OCO ~ r N ''N M r O(A' ~ ~ I ~ O ~ . ~ p ' IV i0~ V i ~ N V tDM I f O ( 0 ~ r V = y I I C 'V O Ir O V. n' M.10 ~~ ~ !-I~, 'O I, O ISM O N CD 'W O O ~~n ~l ~r ^ ONE , r r '. a0 a0 - 40 l ~ iW C O CD Nl. 0 M' ~M a' _ IQIh~ a0 O N IV NN fA N o ~ ~ ` ~ W . ~~i~ ~' fA M H N I~ w I ~ ~ ' ~ FA i i IN I ~ I I n I , I , I N i I ~ I _ ~, _ i ~, I __ _ L. - I ~, . I I y d V _ i I I I I I I I I C , i I ''. , Id I ~ I ~ ~' I O I ~ - ! N ~ N~ .. .,.. O I I LL , , . O y , i y I` I d I~ N W I ~ i0 Id , ~ ~ = ' ' ' ~ ' I ' d ~ c I c.o Q p O I, m of y C E yt W v /My W I C G d I d C m LL I} ' 0i y d i . ~) I ~ I, N O N '~. I '~ N w ~, 7 F~ Ca aE 9 IC II lD N 00 Q C . 0. I C: a d d C: c F I Q 9 ' y d N~ I y C d G d LL m q > N L > d 'IG d (A _. 7' y W o c C ~ d m fD ._.L ~ N d I - ,. 0. O y C I ~ . C I ~ W ! N I d ~ J ~ if0 (n ~ ~' LL C ~ ~N W m J m C I c~ O IE 1 0 ILL ~ ++ d 1 d y L+v C C d d C: I x 7 m O ~,> ~ « l a v ''~O,L LL L x~ C n 1C r ~ C W - O p ir' d O C y Q d'I m L w ~' l ~ d I O~ H '. O y N t ,~ ~ C ~. d (Q d d W d d ' ~~ On N ~ '. d N' ~ d ~~, E , _' V w ` .. Z. Oily Of d > I Q~ ~~' c 0 d O~ O 17 O y O E' d KIN > N L d 0~ ~I O m O, ~" ~ d 1 m N~ ~ d N LL d d d N l e N y y ~} ' y W I O C1 0~ Q d ,O I O~ ~ O) . I V R C Q 3 'O dl a m c c m >Inr ~.,> d w I~ '.d C c~=p=a o'y. d ~ a .c 0 10 c d '.y ~ LL w- V I , ' 0 o d ~ l d > O d V d d ~ 0 > d I ~ ' d d d .. d p EEEEa > E m ~'''~ ' ~ 0 y ~ c = ~ y,~ ai dE a i d E ~~°a i1 1 I~ ~ o i~ 1a o m 0'~ ~ m ~ ~ o = ',~ W ~.- Em~~ ~ eF-yme wU m 1 ?o1 ~ c p d y ~ I ON 'O ~ _ ~ dtt~UL.O 'A0~7 Q 'I ' d O ~ >'O) d ~NN lc L am" d C I CDL c'md C . R ~i0 O 0~7~~ 0 O ~.W f N F O ~'C Q ~ } j~ r dd m a 7 d O!m5~ 0 O Omm00 F-,F ~ H '~mmmm ~ ~~, - ~. ORDINANCE NO. 13 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE WHEELER FUND OF $8,000,000. WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current year revenues and/or unappropriated prior year fund balance available for appropriations in the following funds: WHEELER FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers must be approved. WHEREAS, this supplemental appropriation is an interfund loan from the Wheeler Fund to the Housing Fund, and the loan will be paid along with interest that would have been earned on invested cash. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 Upon the City Manager's certification that there are current year revenues and/or prior year fund balances available for appropriation in the: WHEELER FUND: the City Council hereby makes supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A. Section 2 If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. Section 3 A public hearing on the ordinance will be held on the 28`h day of April, 2008, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado and public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR POSTED ON FIRST READING on the 14Th day of APRIL, 2008. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Mick Ireland, Mayor _ ~_- ~.._ Total City of Aspe n 2007 Approp rlaiions uy r-u r~~ 2007 Amended Expenditure 2007 Amended Budget After # 3 2007 Expenditure Fund Name Supplemental Supplemental #4 Bud et General Government Funds 770 119 $18 p $ $18,119,770 Asset Management Plan , , $31 201 660 $0 $31 201 660 General Fund Subtotal General Gov't Funds: $49,321,430 $0 $49,321,430 S ecial Revenue Funds 160 802 $10 $0 $10,802,160 Parks and Open Space , , 080 974 $4 $8,000,000 $12,974,080 Wheeler Opera House , , 390 266 $1 $0 $1,266,390 Lodging Tax Fund Parking Improvement Fund , , $2,111,060 $0 0 $2,111,060 970 791 $53 Housing Development $53,791,970 $ , , Early Childhood Educ. Initiative - 320 $517 $0 $517,320 AVCF Kids First /Yellow Brick , $1 769 240 220 232 $75 ~ $8,000,000 $1 769 240 $83,232,220 Subtotal, Special Rev. Funds: , , Debt Service Funds $4 083 020 0 4 083 020 Debt Service Fund Subtotal, Debt Service Funds: $4,083,020 $0 $4,083,020 Parks Capital Improvement Fund $4,700,320 $0 $4,700,320 Enterprise Funds 550 951 $9 $0 $9,951,550 Water Utility Electric Utility , , $6,936,040 $0 0 $6,936,040 910 $12 Stormwater Fund $12,910 340 $648 $ $0 , $648,340 Ruedi Hydroelectric Facility , 680 941 $3 $0 $3,941,680 Transportation Fund , , 780 234 $1 $0 $1,234,780 Municipal Golf Course , , 080 117 $2 $0 $2,117,080 Truscott Housing , , $1 171 950 ~0 $1 171 950 Marolt Housing Subtotal, Enter rise Funds: $26,014,330 $0 $26,014,330 Health Ins. Internal Service Fund $3,162,500 $ 0 $3,162,500 Trust 8 A enc Funds 20 022 $1 0 $ 0 $1,022,200 , , Housing Authority 7$ 3.78 Smuggler Mountain Fund 0 ~ $ 7~~ 095,980 0 $1 ubtotal, rust 8 Agency unds: $1,095,98 0 , ALL FUNDS: $163,609,800 $8,000,000 $171,609,800 Less Interfund Transfers $26,345,410 $8,000,000 $34,345,410 EQUALS NET ALL FUNDS APPROPRIATIONS: $137,264,390 $0 $137,264,390 April 21, 2008 Paul W. Menter 612 West Main St Aspen, Colorado 81611 Mr. Don Taylor, Finance Director City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Subject: Proposed Interfund Loan for Ordinance 13, BMC West /Affordable Housing Financing Strategy Dear Mr. Taylor, I read with interest your memo to Council dated April 7, 2008 (attached) regarding the above captioned subject. I was also informed that this issue became the subject of some concern at the council meeting of April 14"'. I did not attend this meeting and therefore do not know first-hand the detailed subject matter discussed, however, given the newness of the financing strategy employed, 1 believe complete transparency regarding its use is important, as I know you do as well. As you no doubt are aware by now, the City has used the repurchase agreement on previous occasions to meet cash flow needs as an akemative to selling secur~ies, but has never used this strategy aver the end of a fiscal year. I had not thought about the BMC West purchase recently since tt occured in December aril actualy was made about two weeks after my departure from the City. My understanding from our meeting on this issue a few weeks ago, and from the attached memo, is that you have determined an interfund loan is necessary to complete the internal financing component of the BMC West purchase. As you explain in your memo, the repurchase agreement provided the cash for the purchase, but it did not designate the source of those dollars from within the City's operating funds. Because the Housing fund had $10.25 million in available fund balance at the time that can be applied to the purchase, only the difference, about $8 million, needs to came from another fund; hence the need for the recommended interfund loan. I have one concern regarding the paragraph on the second page under "Analysis".One interpretation of this paragraph as written is that the repurchase agreement itself constitutes an illegal multi-year obligation. As you know, the City completed a thorough due diligence process on the legality of repurchase agreements, and received an opinion letter from Bond Counsel (Kutak Rock) providing a legal opinion that repurchase agreements do not constitute multiple fiscal year obligations and therefore do not violate Article 10, Section 20 of the Colorado Constkution. I believe it is important that this issue be clarified to Council aril the community, and have copied this letter to Kathryn Koch to serve as my written input into the public hearing on this item at the upcoming Council meeting of April 28"'. I do appreciate your coming to see me regarding this issue in advance of its presentation to Counal. I am happy to attend the meeting on the 28w (uncompensated of course) to provide additional testimony to this issue, or be of assistance in any other way you may deem appropriate to assist the City in receiving the necessary approvals for this important acquisition. Sincerery, ~F ~ ~ aul W. Menter Cc: Steve Barwick, City Manager Kathryn Koch, City Clerk v~~~c ffiemoraildum TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor and Members of Council John P. Worcester April 28, 2008 ~~ the City of Aspen CiN Alrorney~ Olhce Lot C -Adams Subdivision Annexation -Resolution No. Series of 2008 This matter is before you for a public hearing to determine compliance with certain provisions of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965 as part of the statutory required process for annexing unincorporated property into the City. Attached for your consideration and review is a draft resolution to be adopted following the public hearing. If Council determines at the public hearing that compliance with these provisions exists, then Council can consider an ordinance to annex. That ordinance will be presented to you for first reading at a future date. The proposed ordinance will not come back to you for second reading until the land use process is complete and Council is ready to consider all the land use approvals sought through that process. As with all ordinances, a public hearing will be scheduled as part of second reading of the annexation ordinance. The appropriate time for interested citizens to offer comments on issues, other than compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act, regarding the annexation of the parcel to the City would be during the second reading of the annexation ordinance. The public hearing scheduled to consider this resolution, therefore, be limited to the sole issue of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Municipal Annexation Act. At Council's regular meeting on March 24, 2008, Resolution No. 24, Series of 2008, was adopted. That resolution found substantial compliance with Section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S. (the technical requirements for a petition for annexation); established April 28, 2008, as the date for a public hearing to determine compliance with Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., (described below); and authorized the institution of zoning procedures for land in the area proposed to be annexed. Because 100% of the property owners have consented to the proposed annexations, annexation elections aze not required. However, at the public hearing, Council must make a determination that the proposed annexation is in compliance with Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105 of the state annexation statutes. Section 31-12-104, C.R.S., sets forth specific eligibility requirements that Council must find and determine at the scheduled hearing. These eligibility requirements are incorporated within the proposed resolution. Staff at the hearing will present the facts that support the determination of compliance. In addition, Section 31-12-105, C.R.S. imposes a set of limitations on every annexation. It is these limitations that Council must also consider at the public hearing. I have also attached a copy of a proposed resolution that you may adopt as Council's written findings and determinations following the public hearing. The proposed resolution summarizes the limitations of Section 31-12-105 in the form of factual statements that will need to be established at the public hearing. REQUESTED ACTION: A motion to adopt Resolution No. ~, Series of 2008. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: cc: City Manager Community Development Director City Engineer City Clerk 1PW-saved: 4/2I/2008-500-G:\john\word\mcmos\Lot 3 -Adams Subdivision Reso 2.doc RESOLUTION NO. (Series of 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COMMONLY KNOWN AS "LOT 3 -ADAMS SUBDIVISION." WHEREAS, on February 12, 2008, one hundred percent (100%) of the owners of property proposed to be annexed did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a Petition for Annexation of territory to the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2008, the City Council did adopt Resolution No. 24, Series of 2008, finding substantial compliance with Section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S.; establishing April 28, 2008, as the date for a public hearing to determine compliance with Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12- 105, C.R.S.; and authorizing publication of said hearing; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Apri128, 2008; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt its findings and determinations following said hearing in the form of a resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That having heard and considered the testimony, comments, exhibits and arguments of all persons appearing at the public hearing, the City Council of the City of Aspen makes the following findings and determinations in accordance with the Colorado Municipal Annexation Act, as amended: 1. The City Clerk, in accordance with Resolution No. 24, Series of 2008, did give public notice pursuant to Section 31-12-108, C.R.S., of the public hearing, by causing to be published once a week for four consecutive weeks in The Aspen Times, a newspaper of general circulation in Pitkin County, the first publication being at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of the public hearing. In addition, the City Council did send to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, to the County Attorney of Pitkin County, and to the Aspen School District, a copy of the aforesaid resolution and petition. 2. That the property proposed to be annexed consists of unincorporated azea which has more than one sixth boundary contiguity with the City of Aspen. 3. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen; that said area is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said azea is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen. The basis of compliance with the foregoing is the finding by City Council that the area to be annexed exceeds the one-sixth contiguity requirement and: a. None of the owners of the area proposed to be annexed have expressed an intention, under oath, to devote over 50% of the land to agricultural use for a period of not less than five years; and, b. It is physically practicable to extend to the azea proposed to be annexed those urban services which the City of Aspen provides in common to all of its citizens on the same terms and conditions as such services are made to such citizens. 4. The property proposed to be annexed was not divided into sepazate parts or pazcels from any other tract or parcel of real estate without the written consent of the landowners thereof to establish the boundaries of the property described in the annexation petition. (One hundred percent of the owners of the proposed area to be annexed have consented to the annexation.) 5. The owners of the property proposed to be annexed have consented in writing to the annexation. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31-12-105(b) is not applicable. 6. There is no other annexation proceeding, other than the one under consideration herein, which has been commenced either in the City of Aspen or any other municipality which affects the property proposed to be annexed. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31-12-105(c) is not applicable. 7. Annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would not result in the detachment of any area from any school district and the attachment of the same to another school district. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31-12-105(d) is not applicable. z 8. Annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would not have the effect of extending the boundary of the City of Aspen more than three miles in any direction. Accordingly, the limitations set forth at Section 31-12-105(e) relating to the extension of municipal boundaries by more than three miles in any one year is not applicable. 9. The annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would be consistent with the "Annexation Element to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan". Accordingly, the requirement set forth at Section 31-12-105(e) relating to the requirement that a "plan" be adopted for the property proposed to be annexed has been met. 10. In establishing the boundaries of the area to be annexed, no portion of a platted street or alley is proposed to be annexed or the entire width of the alley or street is proposed to be annexed. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31-12-105(f) has been met. 11. The City of Aspen does not intend to deny reasonable access to landowners, owner of an easement, or the owner of a franchise adjoining any street, alley, or highway, upon annexation. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31-12-105(f) has been met. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor 3 I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JP W-saved: 4/21/2008-964-G:\john\word\resos\Lot 3 Adams Subd. Reso 2.doc 4 Vll~d MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development ~~~~ FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~G' DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 28, 2008 RE: Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Ordinance - Public Hearing, Second Reading Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2008 APPLICANT: Aspen Fire Protection District REPRESENTATIVE: Leslie Lamont OWNER: City of Aspen LOCATION: 420 and 422 East Hopkins (Fire Station and Thrift Shop) 540 East Main St. (Zupancis Property) CURRENT ZONING: 420 and 422 East Hopkins: Commercial Core 540 East Main: Commercial Core and Service/Commercial/Industrial. PROPOSED LAND USE: 420 and 422 East Hopkins: Redevelop Fire Station (Essential Public Facility) and Thrift Shop (Retail) 540 East Main: Temporary shelter for fire engine SUMMARY: Applicant requests approval of Ordinance No. 3, as the final step in a COWOP process that was initiated in January 2006. On Dec. 18, 2007, the Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force voted unanimously to recommend this Ordinance to City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance, which establishes the dimensional standards, programming and architecture of the redevelopment of the Fire Station and The Thrift Shop. It also allows for the use of the Zupancis Property for the temporary location of a fire engine shelter while redevelopment at the Hopkins Street site is underway. A rendering of the new Fire Station. REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to grant approval of a COWOP- based Ordinance for the redevelopment of the Fire Station and The Thrift Shop, while allowing the use of the Zupancis Property for a temporary fire engine shelter to be used during the construction at Hopkins Street. BACKGROUND: The redevelopment of the Aspen Fire Station and The Thrift Shop has been proceeding through two land use reviews since Januazy 2006, namely a COWOP review and a Historic Preservation Commission review. The Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP project was determined eligible for the City's Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) land use review process pursuant to Resolution No. 4, Series of 2006, approved by City Council on January 9, 2006. The scope of the COWOP project was a redevelopment of the Hopkins Street Fire Station and The Thrift Shop. On March 13, 2006, City Council approved Resolution No. 15, endorsing the COWOP Task Force Team's conceptual use program, site plan and building, massing and form plan for the Fire Station and Thrift Shop site. In May 2006, an election of voters within the Aspen Fire Protection District (AFPD) was held, approving a bond issuance to fund the construction of a new substation at North 40 in Pitkin County, and for the ultimate redevelopment of the Hopkins St. Fire Station. After the May 2006 election, the COWOP Task Force Team suspended meetings while the AFPD focused on the design and construction of a new substation at the North 40 site, the completion of which is necessary prior to any redevelopment of the Hopkins Street Fire Station. In November 2007, with the North 40 substation substantially completed, the AFPD turned its attention back to the COWOP land use review for the Hopkins Street Fire Station. On Dec. 3, 2007, the City Council approved Resolution No. 99 to include the Zupancis Property as additional lands under the Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP so the AFPD can use that property for a temporary shelter to house a fire engine while the Hopkins Street redevelopment is taking place. On Dec. 18, 2007, the Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force unanimously recommended that City Council approve an Ordinance that establishes the site plan, building massing and form, programming and architecture for the redevelopment of the Fire Station and Thrift Shop. The motion to approve with conditions, approved 14-0 by the COWOP Task Force, is incorporated in Section 1 of the Ordinance. 2 MAIN ISSUES: Under Resolution No. 15, Series of 2006, City Council approved the site plan, as well as the conceptual building massing and form for the new Fire Station and Thrift Shop. The main task remaining was azchitectural treatment. While the COWOP Task Force meetings were suspended for the balance of 2006 and most of 2007, the Aspen Fire Protection District worked through various architectural treatments, while closely involving volunteer firefighters in the effort. Once there was internal agreement on the architecture, the COWOP Task Force was reconvened on December 18, 2007, when it unanimously approved the proposal by a vote of 14-0, and recommended Council approval. On Jan. 23, 2008, the Historic Preservation Commission voted 6-0 to grant Final Approval to the project. (Please see Attachment D for an explanation behind the architectural treatment, and Attachment E for two [2] visual renderings -these exhibits were included in the staff memo of February 4, 2008; Public Heazing, First Reading.) COWOP LAND USE REVIEW STANDARDS: Resolution No. 4, Series of 2006 identified the Standazds of Review by which the project will be reviewed. They are: / Planned Unit Development (PUD); / Growth Management, to the extent determined necessary during project review; / Subdivision, to the extent determined necessary during project review; / The Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP); / The Civic Master Plan. Staff finds the project complies with the Standards of Review for PUD and Growth Management, and is consistent with the AACP and the Civic Master Plan. It was determined during review that Subdivision standards were not applicable for this project as the lease-holding interests will be unchanged. Staff findings with regard to Standazds of Review for PUD and Growth Management are attached to this memo as Exhibit A and Exhibit B. A finding of consistency with the AACP is incorporated in the staff findings for PUD in Exhibit A, and findings of consistency with the Civic Master Plan are attached to this memo as Exhibit C. Staff is unsure why Resolution No. 4 did not require the project to be reviewed according to underlying Commercial Core Zone District requirements, and believes this was an oversight. However, the proposal not only complies with Commercial Core Zone District requirements as they existed when the application was made in January 2006, but also as updated in May 2007. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REVIEW: The COWOP land use review process requires applicants to comply with the procedures established in Section 26.415, Development Involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or which Occur in an "H" Historic Overlay District. The Historic Preservation Commission granted Conceptual Approval for the project in 2006, but this approval lapsed in 2007. As a result, the proposal was required to comply 3 with the Commercial Design Standazds adopted in May 2007 as part of the HPC final approval process. The HPC found the proposal complied with the Commercial Design Standazds, and established several conditions acceptable to the applicant, as outlined below. On January 23, 2008, the Historic Preservation Commission voted 6 - 0 to approve Major Development and Commercial Design Review for the Fire Station and Thrift Shop redevelopment. The following is an excerpt from the January 23 staff memo, followed by a list of conditions established as part of HPC Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008 (see Attachment I for a complete copy of HPC Resolution No. 2, provided in staff memo of Februazy 4, 2008). "Staff finds that the project meets all relevant guidelines for Final and will be a significant improvement over the existing Fire Station and a great contribution to the downtown. The only aspect of the project that has not generated discussion previously is the proposed PV panels on the roof. Staff does not believe these will be visible from the street, however that must be verified with additional graphics and the panels should be moved back towards the alley as far as possible. We do have some concern with these panels in terms of the City roofscape when viewed from above. More information about the plans fora "green roof' must be provided." Conditions adopted by the HPC as part of Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008: 1. The aluminum storefront used on the Firestation stmcture will be cleaz anodized aluminum. On the Thrift Shop, the metal is to have a gray tone. 2. The East wall of the Thrift Shop requires restudy to create articulation/visual interest, to be reviewed by Staff and Monitor. 3. The Commercial Design Standard which would require an airlock for the Thrift Shop is waived because it is not necessary for this small retail space. 4. HPC supports the installation of a green roof on the building. 5. The PV panels on the Firestation aze to be moved to the lower roof section, along the alley, as reviewed by HPC on January 23, 3008. 6. The azchitects have represented the materials for the structure, but may make amendments to the textures selected for the precast concrete. Information is to be submitted for review by Staff and Monitor. There is particulazly concern that the alley elevation be handled cazefully so that the wall is not monolithic. 7. The paving/landscaping installed across the frontage of the site is to be as represented at the January 23, 2008 meeting and coordinated with proposed alterations to the Isis addition. 8. HPC staff and monitor must approve any changes with regard to the type and location of exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 9. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 4 10. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 11. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 12. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval aze known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff believes the COWOP land use review process was a comprehensive and appropriate tool to review this development, including representatives of relevant review agencies, neighbors and citizens. The redevelopment proposal reflects a substantial improvement to the operational function of the AFPD and The Thrift Shop, and is also a substantial improvement to the aesthetics of the Fire Station and Thrift Shop. The addition of a museum inside the proposed Fire Station will be an outstanding public amenity, for locals and visitors alike. Staff believes the use of the Zupancis Property for a temporary fire engine shelter to be used for emergency response to incidents in the downtown azea while construction is taking place at the Hopkins Street site is an appropriate use of public property. The AFPD had previously reviewed the Zupancis Property as the location for a Fire Station, and although this site was ultimately rejected, its immediate access onto Main Street was found to be a positive element of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approve the Ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2008, approving the redevelopment of the Aspen Fire Station and Thrift Shop, and allowing for the use of the Zupancis Property, with conditions, finding that the applicable standards of review have been met." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Staff Findings: Planned Unit Development Review Standards ExxtBIT B -Staff Findings: Growth Management Review Standards ExHIBIT C -Staff Findings: Consistency with the Civic Master Plan 5 ORDINANCE NO. 3 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING FINAL LAND USE APPROVALS AND GRANTING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR THE ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS STATION AND THE THRIFT SHOP COWOP PROJECT ON A PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN, LOTS O, P, Q, AND, R, BLOCK 87, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN AND 540 EAST MAIN STREET, A METES AND BOUNDS PARCEL, EAST ASPEN ADDITION, BLOCK 19 CITY OF ASPEN WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, pursuant to Resolution 4, Series of 2006, determined eligible for the City's development for the Convenience and Welfaze of the Public (COWOP) review process the redevelopment of certain real property (hereinafter the "Project") owned by the Aspen Fire Protection District and the City of Aspen, and successors and assigns, for the purpose of providing a new and expanded Fire District Headquarters and Thrifr Shop; and, WHEREAS, the Project includes the Fire Station Headquarters and the Thrift Shop. The City of Aspen owns the four lots and the Aspen Fire Protection District leases those lots from the City and owns the building. The Thrift Shop subleases from the Fire District and owns their own building; and, WHEREAS, the Project also includes 540 East Main Street (known as the Zupancis property) where a temporary shelter for one first-due response fire engine will be located while the Headquarters Station is being redeveloped; and, WHEREAS, the Project's design/development team was represented by Darryl Grob, the Fire District Chief, Nancy Gensch, Thrift Shop Boazd, Gilbert Sanchez and Joseph Speazs of Studio B Architects, Leslie Lamont of Lamont Planning Services, Inc., Dick Fenton of Fenton Construction and John Kelleher an owner's representative; and, WHEREAS, the Fire District and the Thrift Shop, as a condition of their long term lease with the City of Aspen, seek final development approval from the City Council to construct and complete the Project subject to the COWOP process and the development approvals described herein; and, WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review process, Section 26.500 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, was created and adopted by the City of Aspen to allow the planning of projects of significant community interest, when determined necessary by the City Council according to said Section, to involve an iterative process considering input from neighbors, property owners, public officials, members of the public, and other parties of interest assembled as a formal reviewing authority of the City of Aspen Task Force Team providing recommendations directly to City Council; and, Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 1 of 10 WHEREAS, the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team was comprised of Thrifr Shop and Fire District representatives, neighbors, representatives of the City of Aspen Community Development Department, representatives of the City of Aspen City Council, representatives of the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, representatives of the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, representatives of emergency services of Pitkin County, and members of the citizenry. The City of Aspen Community Development Director served as the chair of the Task Force Team, in compliance with the requirements of Section 26.500 of the Aspen Land Use Code. The composition of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team was approved by the City of Aspen City Council, pursuant to Resolution No. 4, Series of 2006, as amended by Resolution No. 99, Series of 2007; and provided the project with a broad range of expertise and awazeness of community issues; and, WHEREAS, the COWOP review process enabled the planning and design of the Project to reflect essential community goals and values, taking into consideration various opinions and expressed points-of--view from neighbors, land owners, citizens, and technical expertise from vazious professional staff of essential City, County, and quasi- municipal districts; and, WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review procedure does not and has not lessened any public heazing, public noticing, or any critical analysis or scrutiny of the project as would otherwise be required; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team met five (5) times to consider the Project; to identify the goals, objectives, and physical, financial, legal, and public policy issues and pazameters of the project; and, to guide the programming, planning, and design of the project on the following dates: January 12, 2006; January 19, 2006; Januazy 26, 2006; Februazy 23, 2006; and, December 18, 2007; and, WHEREAS, Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team meetings were open to the public. Notice of the meetings in 2006 and the meeting in 2007 were published in The Aspen Times newspaper. Meeting summazies were produced and adopted by the Task Force; and, WHEREAS, the Project design/development team met with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) five (5) times on the following dates: January 11, 2006, January 25, 2006, Februazy 22, 2006, November 14, 2007, and January 23, 2008 to review the Project because the Headquarters is within the Commercial Core Historic District; and, WHEREAS, the HPC granted Final HPC approval to the Project at their January 23, 2008 meeting pursuant to Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008; and, WHEREAS, the HPC granted a waiver to exceed the maximum 60' length of continuous element/roof height to 76' for this project; and, Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 2 of 10 WHEREAS, on March 13, 2006 City Council reviewed the progress of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Project during a duly noticed public hearing and unanimously endorsed the direction of the planning and recommendations of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team, pursuant to City Council Resolution 15, Series of 2006; and, WHEREAS, voters approved a bond issue election in May 2, 2006, to fund a two part Fire District improvement program of which redevelopment of the Headquarters is one part; and, WHEREAS, on December 3, 2007, the Aspen City Council approved a temporary use permit for a temporary shelter for the first-due response fire engine at 540 East Main Street Pursuant to Resolution No. 99, Series of 2007 and City Council appointed new task force members to the Fire District COWOP Task Force Team; and, WHEREAS, redevelopment of the Fire Station Headquarters and the Thrift Shop will increase the squaze footage of each entity thereby enhancing their programs and operations and facilitate an overdue upgrade to the facilities; and, WHEREAS, the enhanced Headquarters will provide improved office space, a lazger garage for the storage and maintenance of emergency vehicles, improved public space for community meetings and emergency management operations, and a museum for the display of Fire District memorabilia; and, WHEREAS, the Thrift Shop enhancements will increase the retail and display space and basement storage space, add offices and improve the drop-off and sorting azeas; and, WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the Civic Center Master Plan which recommends improvements for both entities so they may continue their traditional contributions to the community in their historic locations which add to the civic presence within the community and the commercial core of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Project has benefited from the COWOP Task Force Team's dialogue regarding community goals that could be achieved by this community project. The inclusion of affordable housing, free-market housing, public pazking, and City offices were items discussed by the Task Force and for critical reasons related to security, space and the lack of employee generation by the Fire Station and Thrift Shop expansions, all four were deemed unsuitable for this project; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team determined that additional floors above the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop should not be designed or entitled as part of this project but the building shall be structurally designed and built to accommodate future floors when and if the organization(s) require more space for reasons to be determined as changed conditions in the community may dictate; Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 3 of 10 and any such future additions will be subject to a land use review process defined at the time of review in the future; and, WHEREAS, Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team agreed that 540 East Main Street was an appropriate location for a temporary shelter for an emergency response engine for the duration of the redevelopment of the Headquarters; and, WHEREAS, during a publicly noticed meeting of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team on December 18, 2007, the Task Force Team recommended, by a vote of fourteen to zero (14-0), that City Council approve the Project as it was represented during the December 18, 2007, meeting; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team adopted a recommended motion to City Council related to the Project; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 26.500 of the Land Use Code, City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny all requisite land use approvals necessary to grant a development order for a proposed development determined eligible for COWOP land use review upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director and consideration of comments offered by the general public at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Community Development Director has reviewed the proposed development in consideration of the recommendations of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team, the requirements of the land use code, and comments from applicable referral agencies and has recommended approval of all necessary land use approvals for granting a development order for the proposed Project including Final approval of a COWOP Land Use Review, Final PUD Plan approval, Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility for the Project, a temporary shelter for a fire engine on 540 East Main Street, and vested rights; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public heazing on March 11, 2008, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the public hearing until April 14, 2006; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 14, 2008, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the public heazing until April 28, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team, the Community Development Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 4 of 10 Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standazds and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and the recommendations of the Civic Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the first official community action for the Project will be a community celebration titled the "Wrecking Ball," sponsored by the Thrift Shop. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: The Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Project is hereby granted a development order for a site specific development plan and granted all necessary land use approvals including Final approval of a COWOP Land Use Review, Final PUD Plan approval, Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility, the temporary use of 540 East Main Street, and vested rights subject to conditions of approval as described herein. Section 1• Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team Findings The Aspen Fire Station COWOP Task Force Team recommends approval to the Aspen City Council for the redevelopment of the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop finding that: 1. The redevelopment is consistent with the recommendations of the Civic Master Plan in that both entities will be expanded and will remain downtown thus preserving their civic presence within the community. 2. The COWOP Task Force supports the mass, scale and dimensions of the redevelopment as presented to the COWOP at their meeting on December 18, 2007 clazifying that the squaze footage of the Thrift Shop is net square footage. 3. The COWOP Task Force approves of the use program for the site and the gross square footages as presented to the COWOP at their meeting on December 18, 2007 recognizing that from design to construction square footage does shift slightly. 4. The redevelopment is compatible with the immediate neighborhood and the downtown area. Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 5 of 10 5. The COWOP Task Force approves of the design elements as described at the COWOP meeting of December 18, 2007. 6. The Aspen Fire Protection District is an essential public facility. The expansion of both the Fire Station and the Thrift shop will not generate additional employees. Both entities depend upon volunteers to support their organizations. 7. The COWOP Task Force approves of the use of the Zupancis property for the essential service of a temporary fire engine shelter from March 2008 to December of 2010. In the event that the Zupancis/Galena Site Plan development of the Zupancis property should begin before the end of the shelter's term, the City shall work with the Fire District to find an appropriate alternative site that would allow the relocation in a timely manner without compromising public safety. 8. The COWOP Task Force understands and endorses the potential future need for an additional floor on the Fire Station and/or Thrift Shop. In the current plan, the structure will be designed to support future development and the Fire District and/or Thrift Shop may seek additional land use approvals when a use program and design have been defined in the future, and according to land use requirements at that future time. 9. The design development team explored the opportunity to provide a basement under the truck bays in the Fire Station and presented to COWOP that it is not feasible. The COWOP supported that conclusion. 10. The first official action for the commencement of destruction of the Thrift Shop is "The Wrecking Ball," to which the COWOP task force is invited to attend. Section 2: Adoption of Findines The City Council hereby adopts the findings of the Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force, as listed in Section 1. Section 3: Aaproved Project Dimensions The following approved dimensions of the project shall be reflected in the Final PUD Plans, as follows: Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 6 of 10 Per Final PUD Plan TOTAL: 22,980 sq. ft. Fire Station: 12,599 sq. ft. City/County IT Server: 600 sq. ft. 40' measured from existing grade depicted on Final PUD Plan with following exceptions: Hose and stair tower: 50' Elevator enclosure: 54' Roof access hatches, chimneys, exhaust flues, solar panels, communication antennae and skylights may extend up to 10' above [he roof elements on which they are located. 3 spaces on the alley Section 4• Temnorarv Use of 540 East Main Street The City of Aspen City Council hereby approves the temporary use of 540 East Main Street (the former Zupancis property) for a shelter to house afirst-due fire engine while the Headquarters building is being reconstructed. During reconstruction all operations of the Fire District will be relocated to the recently completed North Forty fire station. However, in order to effectively respond to a call in Aspen, east of Castle Creek, it is important to station a vehicle in downtown Aspen. Many of the volunteers work in Aspen and arriving at 540 East Main Street to prepaze for a call will ensure a timely response to an emergency in downtown and the immediate vicinity. A temporary use for the shelter was granted by Aspen City Council pursuant to Resolution 99, Series of 2007. However a temporary use is only permitted for a maximum of six months, with one additional six-month period, if approved. This Ordinance approves the use of 540 East Main Street for the duration of the reconstruction of the Fire Station Headquarters unless the Zupancis/Galena Site Plan development of the Zupancis property should begin before the end of the shelter's term. In that event the City shall work with the Fire District to find an appropriate alternative site that would allow the relocation in a timely manner without compromising public safety. The Aspen City Council hereby approves the Fire Station and Thrift Shop as Essential Public Facilities, pursuant to Section 26.470.040(D)3, finding that the proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan; that the expansions of these buildings will not generate new employees as both organizations operate with volunteers; that there is no free market residential or commercial component to this plan; and that the project generally adds to the overall capability of the public infrastructure. Section 6: Civic Center Master Plan The Aspen City Council finds that the proposed redevelopment of the Aspen Fire Protection District Headquarters and the Thrift Shop are consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan; and, Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 7 of 10 Section 7: Final PUD Plans Within 90 days after final approval by City Council, the applicant shall record a Final PUD Development Plan. The Final PUD Plans shall include: 1. An illustrative site plan with dimensioned building locations. 2. A landscape plan showing location, amount, and species of landscape improvements with an irrigation plan with a signature line for the City Parks Department, this should include any movable planters/pots within pedestrian areas. 3. Building elevations demonstrating the general azchitectural chazacter of the project, building materials, fenestration, projections, and dimensions and locations of elevator shaft head, skylights, mechanical equipment, etc. 4. A utility plan meeting the standazds of the City Engineer and City utility agencies. 5. Construction details for improvements to the public rights-of--way, including the alley. 6. A grading/drainage plan with any off-site improvements specified. Any off-site improvements shall be done incoordination with the City Engineering Department. 7. An exterior lighting plan meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.150. 8. A table summarizing dimensional standazds of the project. Section 8: PUD Agreement Within 90 days after fmal approval by City Council, the applicant shall record a PUD Agreement binding this property to this development approval. The Agreement shall include the necessary items detailed in Section 26.445.070, in addition to the following: 1. Agreements with the City of Aspen, as described above, regazding: use of the 540 East Main Street property. 2. An estimated construction schedule with estimated schedules for construction affecting city streets. Section 9• Building Permit Submission and Issuance The Community Development Department shall accept and process a building permit application upon adoption of this ordinance and prior to recordation of the necessary plats and agreements. The Community Development Department shall expedite the permit and issue an Access Infrastructure and Demolition Permit in an expedited fashion. Section 10: Building Permit Requirements The building permit application shall include/depict: 1. A letter from the primary contractor stating that the approving Ordinance has been read and understood. 2. A signed copy of the final Ordinance granting land use approval. 3. A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health Department. Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 8 of 10 4. A construction management and pazking plan meeting the specifications of the City Building Department. Section 11: Project Amendments Amendments to the Project within one yeaz of the adoption of this ordinance shall be reviewed by the Community Development Department Duector and, as applicable, the Historic Preservation Officer and Project Monitor. If, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the amendment is substantial, the Community Development Director shall forward the request to the City Council for review and approval. Amendments to the project after this initial one-yeaz period, shall be reviewed according to the procedures and limitations of the Land Use Code. Sectionl2: Vested ltiehts The development approvals granted herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of the development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following the final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properties: 420 East Hopkins Avenue, Lots O, P, Q and R, Block 87, City and Townsite of Aspen; and 540 E. Main Street, a metes and bounds pazcel, East Aspen Addition, Block 19, City of Aspen, by Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2008, of the Aspen City Council. Section 13: All material representations and commitments made by the Aspen Fire Protection District and Thrift Shop (the developer), pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Aspen Fire Station Redevelopment COWOP Task Force Team, or the Aspen City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 14: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 15• Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 9 of 10 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 16: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 17: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 28s' day of April, 2008, at 5:00 in the Rio Grande Meeting Room, 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was made according to the requirements of Section 26.304.060E(3)b-c. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 11 w day of February, 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance 3, 2008 Page 10 of 10 Exhibit A REVIEW STANDARDS' CONCEPTUAL FINAL, CONSOLIDATED, AND MINOR PUD. Section 26.445.050, of the City Land use Code requires that a development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. A. Genera[ requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. Building a stronger foundation for the Aspen Fire Protection District also builds a stronger foundation for the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department, which is an important element of our yeaz-round community. Including a museum within the new Headquarters Station promotes appreciation of our history and a unique experience for locals and visitors. The redevelopment of the Fire Station and Thrift Shop is: ^ Consistent with the 2000 Vision for the Aspen Area as follows: "Aspen needs more get-together places and public activities that naturally encourage an informal mix of our diverse population. The community must support and enhance such places, and not allow those precious to us to slip away." ^ Consistent with the Community Themes of "Encouraging a more balanced permanent community," and "Ensuring quality design and construction." • Consistent with the Economic Sustainability Philosophy as follows: "Essential to long-term viability is the unique, vazied, high quality and welcoming experience Aspen offers to both residents and a diverse visitor population." • Consistent with the Historic Preservation Philosophy as follows: "The mission of the preservation community is based on two interlocking convictions; A desire to safeguard a broad representation of our region's cultural, natural and historical treasures; and, the belief that by promoting appreciate of our history we maintain a `sense of place' and a sense of community ..." • Consistent with the Design Quality Goal of, "Making every public project a model of good development on all levels, from quality design to positive contributions to the community fabric." 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Findin:r: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The Fire Station has been an iconic presence at this site since the 1950s, and The Thrift Shop is aquasi-retail store in the downtown commercial core. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff FindinE: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. This azea is effectively fully developed, and the Fire Station is an essential part of the public safety infrastructure for a historic downtown. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The Community Development Director has determined both the Fire Station and Thrift Shop to be Essential Public Facilities. B. Estahlishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The proposed height is 40 feet, or two feet below the maximum in place when this land use application was submitted. The proposal features a change in height from the fire station to the thrift shop, which reflects a traditional mixture in heights within the commercial core. b) Natural or man-made hazards. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd, as there aze no natural or man-made hazards in this area. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and signiftcant vegetation and landforms. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as this proposal is in a fully developed urban area. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The PUD Amendment reflects a minimal change from existing conditions regarding these elements. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The site coverage of this proposal is driven mostly by the requirements for anextra-wide sidewalk area allowing for maneuvering of fire engines. The design has retained elements of the existing "pocket pazk" outside The Thrift Shop and Fire Station entrance. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There is no change from existing conditions. Parking spaces reserved for volunteer firefighters are typically used to respond to the station as part of emergency response. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd, as the joint use of common parking is not proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The site is located one block from a major transit route. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The site is directly proximate to the commercial core and general activity centers. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insuff dent infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.' a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff FindinE: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility ofmud flow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to [he natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air guality in the surrounding area and the City. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. d) The design and location of arty proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal does not request a reduction in density. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a signifcant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This proposal does not request an increase in density. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identifzed in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This proposal does not request an increase in density. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. This proposal does not request an increase in density. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unigue, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Findine: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. The existing concrete block design and materials used in the existing Fire Station and Thrift Shop buildings do not contribute to the identity of the town as much as the culture of the volunteer department itself. The AFPD is more about culture than masonry. The new design be an visual improved symbol of a fire station. The historic silver bell will be retained on site. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve signiftcant open spaces and vistas. Staff Findine: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. Structures are aligned in the traditional mode found in the downtown core. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standazd. The site coverage of this proposal is driven mostly by the requirements for anextra-wide sidewalk area allowing for maneuvering of fire engines, establishing an urban context for a fire station. The design has retained elements of the existing "pocket pazk" outside The Thrift Shop and Fire Station entrance to enswe visual interest. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. There is appropriate access for emergency response vehicles. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standazd. The proposal will comply with all relevant code requirements. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff FindinE: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standazd. Site drainage is adequate and is not expected to change significantly. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standazd. Buildings are aligned in the traditional form for the commercial core. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing slgnifacant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. Vegetation is planned to retain a portion of the existing "pocket-park," and the Parks Department must sign off on the Final PUD Plan. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The historic silver bell will be retained on site. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. A Landscape Plan must be submitted and approved by the Parks Department prior to building permit issuance. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual ddentity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall. 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The architecture reflects the history of the department with direct references to 19~' century downtown fire barns. The architecture is a mazked improved from the existing 1950s concrete block structure. The Historic Preservation Commission has given Final Approval to this plan. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. This property has a north-south orientation. Many elements, including mechanical systems, aze driven by the functional needs of a fire station. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. 7 Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as the proposal does not include pitched roofs. On-site snow storage will not be required. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The lighting will comply with Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Land Use Code. Compliance with said sections will provide consistency with this PUD review standard. Any lighting installed will not cause direct glare on or hazardous interference of adjoining streets or lands. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The development will comply with Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Land Use Code. Compliance with said sections will provide consistency with this PUD review standard. Any lighting installed will not cause direct glare on or hazardous interference of adjoining streets or lands, and a lighting plan will be submitted for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. Staff Findin¢: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include common park, open space or recreational areas. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. Staff Findin¢: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include common pazk, open space or recreational areas. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Findin¢: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include common park, open space or recreational areas. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This development will improve the capability of public infrastructure due to the redevelopment of the fire station. Also, space is being provided as central location for the City/County IT System. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Findin¢: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. Any adverse impacts on public infrastructure will be paid for by the AFPD. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. All utility improvement will be sized according to the requirements of the respective utility companies. I. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other Zand use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The fire station is locate on East Hopkins. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There are no changes regarding vehicle access, paking or intensity of use. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. There are no changes to historic pedestrian uses, there aze no recreational trails or access to public lands. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specif c plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There are no specific City of Aspen plans regarding recreational trails, or pedestrian and bicycle paths in this area. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. There are no private streets in this PUD proposal. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standazd. There are no security gates, guard posts or entryway expressions proposed. J. Phasing of Development Plan. 10 The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defaned in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Staff Finding: No phasing plan is proposed. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. Staff Finding: No phasing plan is proposed. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding: No phasing plan is proposed 11 Exhibit B GROWTH MANAGEMENT: ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES Section 26.470.090(4), of the City Land Use Code gives City Council authority to approve, approve with conditions or deny a development application based on the following criteria. This section requires a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, a P&Z recommendation is not required under the COWOP process. a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Staff Findin¢: The Community Development Director has determined the primary use of the Fire Station to be an Essential Public Facility due to its public safety mission. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use of The Thrifr Shop to be an Essential Public Facility due to its provision of basic necessities to a significant segment of the local and working local population. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. C. City Council Review (Growth Management) Staff Findin¢: The Community Development Director recommends waiving any affordable housing requirements due to the promotion of civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. In addition, neither the Aspen Fire Protection District nor The Thrift Shop anticipate hiring any new employees, as both organizations are primarily supported through volunteer workers. Exhibit C CONSISTENCY WITH THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN Under Section 26.104.030 of the City Land Use Code, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents, the City Council may adopt supplemental plans as regulatory documents. The Civic Master Plan is a regulatory document adopted by Council and any land use application for the Fire Station and Thrifr Shop site must demonstrate consistency with the recommendations of the Civic Master Plan. The Civic Master Plan recommended that, during the design process for the renovation of the Hopkins Street Headquarters Stations, the Aspen Fire Protection District should consider.• • The civic nature and central location of the building; • The iconic quality of the AFPD and its members; • The value ofpedestrian and public interaction. Staff FindinE: Staff finds the application has demonstrated consistency with this recommendation. The new fire station will be located at the current site, the azchitecture reflects the iconic quality of the AFPD and its members and the sidewalk configuration and museum encourages pedestrian and public interaction. The Civic Master Plan foand that: • The Thrift Shop is an Aspen institution that provides an important service for lower income residents and workers that no one else provides, while donating proceeds to local non profits and student scholarships. • The central location of The Thrift Shop supports its overall mission, as many of its customers use public transit. • The Thrift Shop relies on subsidized rent and could not carry out its mission if it had to pay retail rental rates. • The simultaneous renovation of the AFPD Headquarters Station and The Thrift Shop is an opportunity to create a vibrant mixed-use area. Staff Findin¢: In the absence of recommendations regarding The Thrift Shop, staff finds the application has demonstrated consistency with these findings. The AFPD has worked closely with The Thrift Shop to coordinate the redevelopment efforts and to create a vibrant mixed-use area. ~ re ~I-hese P• ~-~u-~es a,Ioo, ooa f~+yP-cal Monday morn~,n9 .n M~ty . ~~-~n9 thro~t9h ~t r-~oun+twr aooc#s -ho ~'eac.h -W-e door. laugh.... 'Thrift Shop ~~ iaY~ yes -~atfi~'~esses wor-i~ . ~ iY15~d-e 5orf;n9 ~Ut of his We Sma~'~ne ... WhAf CU~'f-e ttY1G~ ...~DrYI~'im2,5 it SY101~V5 ~ Held us get ~ Bide aw~~ ~2.SO, ovo yearly. we could do wt~1-h ~ou~ hel p. 2007 CONTRIBUTIONS THE THRIFT SHOP OF ASPEN TOTAL $210,000.00 ARTS $15,750 Aspen Dance Connection Aspen Film Fest Broadway Players Earthbeat Choir Theater Masters Symphony in the Valley Hudson Reed Ensemble Music Associates of Aspen COMMUNITY $69,350 Community Health Services Response Pathfinder Valley Angels Roaring Fork Leadership KDNK Carbondale Community Access Grassroots TV Special Olympics Columbine Home Health Aspen Given Foundation Aspen Historical Society Anderson Ranch Arts Aspen Choral Society EDUCATION $35,550 Aspen Community School Yampah Mountain High School Science in the Schools Roaring Fork HS Project Graduation Basalt High School Art Department Waldorf School Aspen High School Project Graduation Basalt Middle/High School Band ACES Computers for Kids Aspen Hall of Fame Veterans Historical Project Pitkin County Senior Services Lift Up Pitkin County Animal Rescue Foundation KJAX Roaring Fork Family Resource Center Your Friends For Life Aspen Interfaith Assoo. Holiday Baskets Seniors Independent Advocate Safehouse SourceGas Growing Years Pre-School Colorado Rocky Mt High School FihnFest Roaring Fork Early Learning Center Glenwood Springs HS Project Graduation Aspen High School Literary Magazine Basalt High School Project Graduation Cazbondale Community School Literacy Aspen High School Dance Team Tomorrow's Voices Wellspring at Yampah Mountain COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS $37,000 ENVIRONMENT $25,000 Roaring Fork Conservancy Independence Pass Foundation Solaz Energy International Forest Conservancy Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers Sustainable Settings Wildlife Foundation Wilderness Workshop YOUTH ACTIVITIES $30,750 Aspen Middle School Booster Club Aspen Youth Center Buddy Program Youth Recovery Center Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club Extreme Sports Camp Aspen Skating Club Aspen Speedo Swim Team Shooting Stars 4H Club Aspen Junior Hockey 2006 DONATIONS BY CATEGORIES TOTAL DONATIONS $207,695.00 ARTS- $38,400.00 Aspen Film Fest Basalt High School Drama Program Theater Aspen Music Associates of Aspen Aspen Stage Aspen Santa Fe Ballet Wyly Community Art Center COMMUNITY- $56,220.00 KJAX KinderMorgan Mt Sopris Historical Society Pitkin County Senior Services Aspen Given Foundation Special Olympics Seniors Independent Ranch Good Days Alpine Legal Services SPARC Aspen Dance Connection Red Brick Center for the Arts Earthbeat Choir Aspen Choral Society Cazbondale Clay Center Anderson Ranch Art Center Aspen Writers Foundation Roaring Fork Family Resource Center Grassroots TV Columbine Homemakers Lift Up Pitkin County Valley Spellbinders Advocate Safehouse Pitkin County Dept of Social Services Aspen Interfaith Association Simba Fund ENVIRONMENT- $24,300.00 Wilderness Workshop Solar Energy International Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Colorado Rocky Mountain School Sustainable Settings ACES EDUCATION- $49,075.00 8 COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS Basalt High School Project Graduation Glenwood Springs HS Project Graduation Aspen High School Model UN Aspen High School Literary Magazine Tomorrow's Voices Aspen Community School YOUTH ACTIVITIES- $39,700.00 Aspen High School Booster Club Aspen Speedo Swim Team Aspen Skating Club Aspen Youth Center Aspen Camp School for the Deaf Science in the Schools Roaring Fork HS Project Graduation Growing Yeazs Pre-School English in Action Aspen High School Project Graduation Children's Health Foundation Jon Seigle Outdoor Education Fund Aspen Junior Hockey Buddy Program Aspen Recreation Department Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboazd Club 2005 THRIFT SHOP DONATIONS TOTAL DONATIONS 5244.000.00 ARTS----------40, 800.00 BasaR High School Drama Program Aspen Dance Connection Aspen Choral Society Broadway Players Music Associates of Aspen Earthbeat Choir Aspen Writers Foundation Wyly Community Art Center Battle of the Bands Carbondale Clay Center Anderson Ranch/Ice Sculpture Symphony in the Valley Aspen Santa Fe Ballet COMMUNITY-------$76, 820.00 KAJX Sopris Therapy KinderMorgan Adult Literacy Program Roaring Fork Hospice Pitkin County Senior Services Roaring Fork Leadership Aspen Boarding Kennel/Katrina Computers for Kids Response Aspen Hall of Fame Advocate Safehouse Interntl Rescue Committee/Tsunami Columbine Homemakers The Right Door Lift-Up Pitkin County Valley Spellbinders American Red Cross/Katrina Mt. Sopris Historical Society Alpine Legal Services Aspen Intertaith Association Special Olympics COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS---$37,000.00 EDUCATION------$26, 250.00 Colorado Rocky Mountain School Film Fest Science in the Schools Basalt High School Project Graduation Roaring Fork High School Project Graduation Glenwood Springs H.S. Project Graduation Roaring Fork Precollegiate Program Aspen Institute Great Ideas Seminar Basalt Elementary School After School Program Wellsprings Science Outreach Jason Pro)'ect Aspen High School Project Graduation Waldort School Children's Health Foundation Basalt H.S. English Publication Stepstone Center ENVIRONMENT-----$20,500.00 ACES White River Interpretive Association Roaring Fork Conservancy CenVal Rocky Mountain Permaculture YOUTH ACTIVITIES-----$42,250.00 Aspen Youth Experience Aspen Theater in the Park Aspen Skating Cfub Aspen Youth Center Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers Solar Energy International Wilderness Workshop Basalt Girls Volleyball Aspen Speedo Team Buddy Program Aspen Camp School for the Deaf Aspen Middle School Booster Club 2004 THRIFT SHOP DONATIONS TOTAL DONATIONS $260,146.00 COMMUNITY -------------------$85,150.00 Community Health Services Pitkin County Animal Shelter Aspen Given Foundation Columbine Homemakers Pitkin Co. Department of Social Services Latinos Unidos Aspen Snowmass Nordic Council Response American Valley Veterans Computers for Kids Lift Up- Pitkin County Aspen Animal Shelter Pitkin County Senior Services Challenge Aspen KAJX Valley Spellbinders Roaring Fork Leadership Special Olympics Valley Angels Seniors Independent Aspen Elks Lodge #224 Puppy Smith Memorial Rocky Mountain Restorative Justice Aspen Historical Society Aspen Interfaith Association Animal Rescue Foundation Valley View Hospital- SANE Alpine Legal Services Grassroots TV KinderMorgan ARTS-------------------------------- $40,100.00 Aspen Snowmass Council for the Arts Aspen Art Museum Broadway Players Aspen Santa Fe Ballet Aspen Stage Aspen Chapel Gallery Aspen Music Festival Earthbeat Choir Carbondale Clay Center Aspen Writers Foundation Aspen Film Fest Aspen Choral Society Anderson Ranch Arts Center H.P.B. III Scholarship Fund ENVIRONMENT------------------ $15,500.00 Sustainable Settings Solar Energy International White River Conservation Roaring Fork Biodiesel Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Roaring Fork Conservancy Earth Day Committee ACE S EDUCATION----------------------- $38,896.00 Scence Outreach (Jason Project) Early Learning Center Aspen Elementary School Aspen Middle School Aspen High School Basalt Middle School Basalt High School Tomorrow's Voices Carbondale Community School The Waldorf School Aspen Center for Integrative Health Science in the Schools Roaring Fork School District Early Childhood Center Aspen Community School Roaring Fork IGds Colorado Rocky Mountain School COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS--$28,000.00 YOUTH ACTIVITIES------------- $52,500.00 Buddy Program Aspen Figure Skating Aspen Theater in the Park Aspen Speedo Swimming High Mountain Volleyball Aspen Junior Hockey Aspen Youth Center Andy Zanca Youth Radio Aspen High School Girl's Golf Aspen High School Literacy Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club Aspen High School Band 2003 THRIFT SHOP DONATIONS TOTAL DONATIONS $250,000.00 COMMUNITY $80,000.00 Aspen Snowmass Nordic Council SPARC Challenge Aspen Pitkin County Senior Services Roaring Fork Family Resource Center Heritage Aspen KAJX KinderMorgan Garfield Legal Services Valley Spellbinders Roaring Fork Legal Services Advocate Safehouse Aspen Hall of Fame Alfred A. Braun Hut System Response Adult Literacy Program Lift Up Pitkin County Mountain Regional Housing Sopris Therapy Aspen Elks Lodge #224 Scholarships Grassroots TV Roaring Fork Leadership Special Olympics Colorado Aspen Interfaith Assoc. Holiday Baskets Roaring Fork Hospice ARTS $31,000.00 Dance Connection Music Associates of Aspen Carbondale Clay Center Aspen Writers Foundation Aspen Choral Society Aspen Film Fest Earthbeat Choir Symphony in the Valley Aspen Art Museum Anderson Ranch Arts Center EDUCATION $60,000.00 8 COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS-Aspen, Basalt & Roaring Fork High Schools Basalt Middle School Mountain BOCES Science Outreach Jason Project Aspen High School Project Graduation Roaring Fork High School Project Graduation Basalt High School Project Graduation Science in the Schools Carbondale Community School Aspen Center for Integrative Health Yampah Mountain High School Aspen Middle & High School Orchestra Tomorrow's Voices Aspen Elementary School Summer Scholarship ACES Aspen Elementary School Environmental Ed Little Red Schoolhouse Stepstone Center Growing Years Preschool Roaring Fork Kids Wellsprings Aspen Institute Great Ideas H.S Seminar Wildwood School YOUTH ACTIVITIES $70,000.00 Aspen Figure Skating High Mountain Volleyball Three Rivers Little League Aspen Youth Center Aspen High School Girls Golf Program Andy Zanca Youth Radio Silver City Gymnastics Club Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club Basalt Recreation Department Aspen Junior Hockey Buddy Program Basalt Volleyball Club Aspen City Day Camp Scholarships Aspen Junior Golf Aspen Camp School for the Deaf ENVIRONMENT $9000.00 Independence Pass Foundation Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture White River Conservation Aspen Wilderness Workshop 2002 THRIFT SHOP DONATIONS TOTAL DONATIONS $233,090.00 COMMUNITY $90,629.00 Lift Up Pitkin County Broadway Players Pitkin County Senior Services Riding Institute of Disabled Equestrians Valley Spellbinders Mission Comunidad COAL SEAM FIRE VICTIMS Robbie Wade Memorial Fund Valley Partnership for Drug Prevention Heritage Aspen Historical Society Aspen Hall of Fame Advocate Safehouse Project Aspen Elks Lodge #224 Aspen Given Foundation Aspen Center for New Medicine Cooper Corner Adult Day Care Roaring Fork Family Resource Center Sopris Therapy Services Friends of the Moore Pool Garfield Legal Services Leadership Aspen Sara McFlynn Memorial Fund Columbine Homemakers Roaring Fork Legal Services Holden Marolt Mining Museum Aspen Interfaith Holiday Baskets Indian Reservations Kinder Morgan ARTS $28,000.00 Aspen Dance Connection Aspen Stage Carbondale Clay Center Aspen Choral Society Aspen Art Museum ENVIRONMENT $10,500.00 Central Rocky Mt Permaculture Institute Solar Energy International Independence Pass Foundation Wyly Community Art Center Music Associates of Aspen Aspen Santa Fe Ballet Aspen Theater in the Park ACES Roaring Fork Conservancy EDUCATION $46,361.00 8 COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS- Aspen High School, Basalt High School, Roaring Fork High School Aspen Elem School Environmental Ed Science Outreach Center Growing Years School Aspen High School Project Graduation Girls to Women, Women to Girls Basalt High School Project Gradutation Yampah Mountain High School Roaring Fork High School Project Grad Aspen High School Journalism/Yearbook Aspen High School Literacy Program Compass Aspen Elementary School Play Roaring Fork Kids Aspen Institute Great Ideas Seminar Aspen Elementary School Summer School Scholarships YOUTH ACTIVITIES $57,000.00 Aspen Junior Hockey Aspen Buddy Program High Mountain Volleyball Club Earthbeat Choir Aspen Youth Center Aspen Camp School for ~Q Deaf Aspen Writers Foundation Special Olympics Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club Andy Zanca Youth Empowerment Prog. Aspen Katsuyama Education & Cultural Exchange 2001 THRIFT SHOP TOTAL DONATIONS COMMUNITY 586.520.00 Mountain Rescue 10th Mountain Hut Services Lift Up Pitkin County Riding Institute for Disabled Equestrians Castle Creek Terrace Youth Recovery Center Veterans Rembrance Day Valley Partnership for Drug Prevention Greg Mace Award Community Health Services Leadership Aspen Assistencia Para Latinos Aspen Historical Society Aspen Basalt Care Clinic Pitkin County Senior Services THE ARTS 534.500.00 Aspen Dance Connection The Broadway Players Carbondale Clay Center Youth Recovery Center Art Program Music Associates of Aspen Aspen Writers Foundation ENVIRONMENT 513.950.00 ACES Solar Energy International DONATIONS $271,375.00 Pitkin County Senior Services Columbine Homemakers Aspen Hali of Fame Challenge Aspen Annual Thrift Shop Family Gift American Red Cross Disaster Relief Aspen Community Church City of Aspen Olympic Torch Aspen Interfaith Christmas Baskets KJAX Response Aspen Given Institute Advocate Safehouse Project BPOE #224 KN Energy EDUCATION $69,705.00 College Scholarships for 8 Aspen, Basalt & Basalt High School Science Program Aspen High School Project Graduation Science Outreach Center Valley Spellbinders Aspen Elementary School Environmental Ed Yampah Mountain High School Early Childhood Center Basalt High School Project Graduation Aspen High School Literacy Project Aspen Santa Fe Ballet Aspen FilmFest Symphony in the Valley Aspen Art Museum Aspen Theater in the Park Aspen Choral Society-Messaih White River Conservation Project Aspen Wilderness Workshop Roaring Fork High School Graduates Aspen High School History Play Aspen High School Ex Ed Service Trip Parent Teacher Resource Center Early Learning Center Basalt Middle School Art Program Mountain BOCES Aspen Institute HS Great Ideas Seminar Aspen Community School Aspen School District ESL YOUTH AND SPORTS ACTIVITIES 571.500.0 Aspen Junior Hockey Silver City Gymnastics Aspen Junior Volleyball Youth Zone Aspen Buddy Program Aspen Camp School for the Deaf Grassroots Aspen Experience Aspen Skating Club Mountain Laurel Music Preparation Community Evaluation Team Aspen Youth Center Special Olympics City of Aspen Recreation Department Aspen Valley Ski/Snowboard Club Tribe of Valor 2000 THRIFT SHOP DONATIONS COMMUNITY 570.632.00 Lift Up Sopris Therapy Services Asistenaa Para Latinos Riding Institute for Disabled Equestrians Valley Partnership for Drug Prevention Aspen Historical Society Veterans Event Account Aspen Community Church Garfield Legal Services KN Energy Aspen Interfaith Christmas Baskets THE ARTS 531.000.00 Carbondale Clay Center Aspen Dance Connection Grassroots TV Film Fest MAAhony in the Valley Rhythms of the Heart ENVIRONMENT 517,500 00 Roaring Fork Conservancy ACES Aspen Global Change Institute EDUCATION 554.878.00 BOCES Aspen Science Outreach Project Aspen Elementary School Environmental ED Aspen High School Project Graduation Holocaust Studies Girls to Women, Women to Girls Aspen Elementary School Pine Core Play Basalt High School Project Graduation College Scholarships for 8 Aspen, Basalt Advocate Safehouse Challenge Aspen Pitkin County Senior Services Aspen Hall of Fame Columbine Home Health Care Restorative Justice Roaring Fork Legal Services Leadership Aspen Response Annual Thrift Shop Family Gift Donations in Memory of Members Aspen Writers Foundation Aspen Stage Aspen Art Museum Aspen Theater in the Park Aspen Choral Society Roaring Fork Earthbeat Choir Independence Pass Foundation Wilderness Workshop Aspen High School Clubs Aspen High School Literacy Project Early Childhood Center Aspen Elementary School Play Little Red Schoolhouse Carbondale Community School Basalt Middle School Art Program Aspen School District ESL Program & Roaring Fork High School Graduates YOUTH AND SPORTS ACTIVITIES X51.000.0 Aspen Junior Hockey Aspen Junior Volleyball Aspen Skating Club City of Aspen Recreation Department Aspen BalleU Mexican Dance Special Olympics Aspen Valley Ski/Snowboard Club Aspen Booster Club Aspen Youth Center. Pitkin Division Garfield Youth Services Solar Energy International Scholarship TOTAL DONATIONS $225,010.00 v~~t~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development ~~ DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 MEETING DATE: Apri128, 2008 RE: Zupancis-Galena Master Plan Determination of COWOP Review Eligibility -Public Hearing Resolution No.3S, Series of 2008 SUMMARY: The Zupancis-Galena (ZG) Partnership includes the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, the Pitkin County Library, the Aspen Chamber Resort Association and the Aspen Art Museum. The ZG Partnership has submitted a request to be determined eligible for the City's Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) review process. The intent is to develop a Master Plan for the Zupancis-Galena azea that encompasses property held by the City of Aspen, Pitkin County and the Pitkin County Library. The ZG Partnership has been engaged in an informal public process since Mazch 2007. The intent of this year-long process was based on the concept that engaging in community outreach as part of an informal process allows for educational efforts and public feedback to proceed in a relatively relaxed atmosphere. During this informal process, the ZG Master Plan was always referred to as "A Work in Progress ..." 1 In Mazch 2007, a two day public chazrette generated four diffferent concepts for a site plan. More than 35 people attended this charrette process and a "thumbs" exercise was held to conclude this session, providing important feedback to the ZG Partnership as it proceeded to draft a site plan in subsequent weeks. In August 2007, approximately 55 people attended a public meeting to provide feedback for the at-grade site plan, focusing on open space, pedestrian movement and broad azchitectural concepts. In November 2007, approximately 75 people attended a public meeting to heaz each party make a 10-minute presentation on their space needs, and why they believe their group or organization should be located at the ZG Site. On Mazch 12, 2008, approximately 160 people attended a public meeting to provide feedback on a 3-D site plan, including open space and pedestrian routes as well as the location, mass, scale and height of buildings. Establishing the public-at-lazge as the COWOP Task Force Team would provide a sense of continuity to this public process, rather than establishing a new process that may appeaz more limited in its scope than what the public has become accustomed to regarding the ZG Master Plan. There will be one important difference between the past public meetings and future public meetings held under the "umbrella" of the COWOP process: The future public meetings on the ZG Master Plan would be legally noticed as public hearings and would feature a more rigorous structured feedback process using wireless keypads. The use of wireless keypads will allow for spontaneous questions from the public during the public meeting. This method will allow for the same kind of input and feedback that a more traditional Task Force might have. While a traditional COWOP Task Force Team may include 6 or 7 citizens-at-lazge, this broader approach could allow for 200 or more citizens to provide feedback. Staff is recommending this master planning effort be determined eligible for the City's Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) review process. Staff recommends adoption of the proposed Resolution. WHY A MASTER PLAN? The Zupancis-Galena Site is located directly between the dense, grid-style downtown and the open pazk and river corridor. Because of its location, the entire ZG site should shaze a common chazacteristic as a transitional site between the dense downtown and the open pazk and river azea. The most prudent way to insure this critically important transitional character in a coordinated way throughout the site is through a master plan, rather than a piecemeal approach. In a larger context, the ZG Master Plan is based on the Core Principles, findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan, which was intended to guide the future use of public lands, and focused heavily on the ZG Site. Adopted by City Council in December 2006, the Civic Master Plan sought to "implement goals and principles at many sites azound the Civic Core (in order) to realize a cascading series of seemingly small steps that add up to great strides." The Civic Master Plan explicitly intended that its 8 Core Principles be applied well after the Civic Master Plan's adoption in 2006: "(The Civic Master Plan) is intended to be a living and working document, continuing to provide context for informed decision-making in the future." (p. 3) Furthermore, the Civic Master Plan's adoption requires that any land use application focusing on the properties within the plan demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan. Many of the findings and the recommendations -and the 8 Core Principles -- of the Civic Master Plan are reflected to varying degrees in the cun•ent draft version of the ZG Master Plan, as it has emerged from the informal public process during the last yeaz. The ZG Master Plan could provide: / both new and enhanced open space azeas; / both new and enhanced pedestrian routes; / an affordable housing neighborhood "on the Park"; / additional space for needed public safety operations, including secure sub-grade space for emergency response vehicles; / additional space for City offices for the purpose of improved public services; / the consolidation of County offices in the long-term interest of locating the operations of the County seat in Aspen's downtown core, to retain the sense of a traditional small town within a resort environment, rather than relocating County offices out of town; / additional sub-grade pazking to access a consolidated County complex and the County Courthouse, and to remove City/County fleet vehicles from the Rio Grande Parking Garage, thereby providing more public parking there; / additional space for library functions for the purpose of improved public services; / additional space for the 9`h Judicial District; / the preservation of important local and national historic resources including the McMurtchy-Zupancis cabins; / capitalizing on the prominent Rio Grande site to construct a signature Art Museum building that reflects Aspen's identity as a center for arts and culture, and provide space that can be utilized by other local non-profit groups; / an improved Visitor Center and Aspen Chamber Resort Association offices including additional space and a more viable and accessible location to serve visitors; / the redevelopment of public parking at the Rio Grande Pazk Pazking Lot site including at-grade parking for short-term public parking and sub-grade parking for affordable housing; / ensuring dramatically improved long-teen energy and space efficiency via the responsible redevelopment of the fonner Youth Center and County Plaza Building; 3 / a unified approach to managing construction impacts and ongoing maintenance and operations of the area's infrastructure. THE PUBLIC-AT-LARGE AS TASK FORCE TEAM Staff believes the intent of any COWOP Task Force is fundamentally different than other City advisory boazds and commissions that review development applications. Boazds and commissions, such as the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Boazd of Adjustment, hold votes that sometimes authorize legal entitlements and sometimes make recommendations to City Council based on a majority vote. In contrast, the purpose of a COWOP Task Force is to provide more general feedback on a development proposal, and it has been the goal of past COWOP applicants to gain a general consensus of support from the Task Force. A hypothetical COWOP Task Force vote of 12-11 to recommend a proposal to Council does not provide useful guidance or direction to City Council. In the same sense, a Task Force made up of the public-at-large would need to convey a general consensus. The Task Force Team as public-at-lazge is proposed to encompass a range of perspectives without any one perspective being overly represented. This balance is important to the credibility of the Task Force and its recommendation. Sign-in sheets at open public meetings and introductory demographic questions using wireless keypads aze methods to help ensure and evaluate the balance of perspectives. The answers to demographic questions can be cross-tabulated to show what "group" voted in what way. Additionally, this community is small enough so that Council members who attend these events can get a fairly clear indication of whether a range of perspectives was present. ROLE OF CITY COUNCIL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Also important to the success of a master planning process is guidance provided by City Council, and this includes check-ins with City Council with regard to various "benchmazk" issues. The ZG Partnership intends to hire various consultants to assist in a range of tasks, but will also rely on in-house resources from the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, APCHA and the 9~' Judicial District. This range of specialists will assist the partnership, and will be available for check-ins with Council as needed. At the same time, the ZG Partnership will be seeking Conceptual Development Plan approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, as required by the COWOP process. THE PROPERTIES: The subject lands are all those adjacent to Rio Grande Place, from N. Mill Street to the entrance to the County Jail; and adjacent to E. Main Street, from the Galena Street Extension to the Zupancis Property. Exhibit A includes several maps that depict the 4 area of this master plan. The proposed resolution includes the legal descriptions of these lands. IF THE MASTER PLAN IS FOUND ELIGIBLE FOR COWOP REVIEW. If the master planning effort is determined eligible, the next step would include refining a scope of work in order to identify in-house resources and draft a Request for Proposals so the ZG Partnership can hire a consulting team. The ZG Partnership anticipates that the first phase of work would include refining the existing 3-D Site Plan to provide greater context with regazd to visual corridors, producing 2-D sections of the site plan, drafting conceptual architecture, conceptual landscape azchitecture and a phasing plan. All of this draft information would be presented to a meeting of the Task Force Team (public-at-lazge) in June, during which structured feedback would be taken. Following this meeting, the ZG Partnership, consulting team and in-house resources would then incorporate public feedback, revisit the space needs plan of each party, conduct an analysis of the historic cabins, produce an affordable housing mitigation plan, review traffic capacities, review engineering and soil studies and investigate a conceptual construction management plan. Again, all this information would be presented to a meeting of the Task Force Team (public-at-lazge), during which structured feedback would be taken. The partnership anticipates this public meeting could occur in August. If this meeting does not provide a general consensus, the partnership would again refine the site plan. If this meeting does provide a general consensus, the partnership would bring a recommendation to Council. As with other previous COWOP processes, the applicant would bring a recommendation to City Council requesting a conceptual endorsement in the form of a resolution. This proposal would consist of the location and "footprint" of buildings, the mass, scale and height of buildings, the uses of buildings, a broad "conceptual" approach to the future azchitecture of buildings, the location of open space areas and pedestrian areas, a broad but consistent "conceptual" approach to landscape architecture across the site, an engineering feasibility analysis and a phasing plan for implementation. Asimilar approach to obtaining a conceptual endorsement from Council was used for Burlingame Ranch, Obermeyer Place and the Fire Station. In each of these past COWOPs, a final, detailed development proposal was drafted, which then proceeded to City Council for approval by ordinance. Much like the Burlingame COWOP, it is anticipated that the ZG Master Plan would include a phasing plan for implementation, spelling out the order in which individual buildings would proceed towazd a final approval via City Council ordinance. It is anticipated that the portion of the process leading to a conceptual endorsement phase would take four to five months. The final implementation of the overall phasing 5 plan could take 10-15 yeazs. The recommended process and proposed timeframe are included in the proposed resolution. COST SHARING: The proposed Resolution references an agreement to shaze costs of the master planning. Staff and the parties have discussed an appropriate cost shazing strategy for the planning phase of this project: Each party will bear costs related to the investigation/evaluation of a specific site on which the party would ultimately pursue a development project. Each party will share common costs based on a squaze-footage use ratio established in the resolution of conceptual endorsement. Subsequent to this resolution, each party would effectively be on their own with regazd to final approvals and implementation. The cost shazing agreement will need to be authorized by City Council and staff will proposed a supplemental budget to cover the City costs of this effort. The City established a budget of $50,000 in 2007 for the ZG Master Plan, and there is about $20,000 remaining. The ZG Partnership has defined a generalized scope of work to be conducted by consultants, so the partnership can issue a Request for Proposals and awazd a contract. The partnership would also identify the scope of work that can be accomplished with in-house resources. The partnership believes the list of tasks to be conducted by consultants include: • Conceptual azchitectural goals • Conceptual landscape architecture • Historic cabin analysis • Traffic study • Engineering, soil, geotech study • Conceptual construction management plan The partnership believes the list of tasks to be conducted in-house include: • Refining the 3-D model • Generating 2-D site plan "sections." • Affordable housing mitigation plan • Space needs review • Phasing plan In some cases, in-house resources would be used in combination with consulting work. A preliminary estimate of the consulting work is approximately $100,000, meaning that the $20,000 remaining in the City budget may be adequate to cover these costs. 6 IF THE MASTER PLAN IS NOT FOUND ELIGIBLE FOR COWOP REVIEW. If the project is determined not to be eligible for COWOP, then the ZG Partnership would likely proceed with atwo-step application to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council for approval of a Master Plan, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.104.030. Although the full ZG Partnership has not comprehensively discussed this option, it is likely that the partnership would continue to hold lazge public meetings to evaluate subsequent portions of the ZG Master Plan prior to bringing it to the P&Z and Council. If that were the case, the timeline for this alternative Master Plan approach would likely be somewhat longer than the above-described COWOP approach due to the required public hearing(s) with the P&Z. APPLICANTS: 1. City of Aspen. Represented by Steve Barwick. 2. Pitkin County. Represented by Hilary Fletcher. 3. Aspen Chamber Resort Association. Represented by Deb Braun. 4. Pitkin County Library. Represented by Kathy Chandler. 5. Aspen Art Museum. Represented by Heidi Zuckerman-Jacobson. REVIEW PROCEDURE: COWOP Determination of Eligibility. At a noticed public hearing, the City Council shall by resolution: (a) make a determination whether the proposed development is reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public by applying the standazds of Section 26.500.040 [see Exhibit B]; (b) establish a procedure for review of the proposed project to include standazds of review; (c) establish a Task Force Team to review the development proposal; and, (d) establish a timeframe for the procedures to be used to review the proposed development. If the proposed project proposes development subject to Chapter 26.415 (Development in an "H", Historic Overlay District, or Involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures), or Chapter 26.420 (Historic Overlay District and Historic Landmarks), the City Council shall include in the review procedures the requirement for an application for review of the eligible project to the Historic Preservation Commission in accordance with the applicable sections of the Land Use Code. The City Council may, in appropriate circumstances, include as part of the review process it adopts a separate referral to the Planning and Zoning Commission, or any other City boazd and commission for their sepazate review and 7 recommendation. Should the City Council determine that the proposed development is not reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public, the application shall be reviewed in accordance with the applicable sections of this Land Use Code. The City Council may amend the resolution at any time upon the request of the applicant, the Community Development Director, or upon its own motion. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council determine the Zupancis-Galena Master Planning effort eligible for the City's COWOP process. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. Series of 2008, initiating the Zupancis- Galena Master Plan COWOP review process." ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution No. , Series of 2008 Exhibit A -Map of Master Planning Area Exhibit B - COWOP Eligibility Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit C -Proposed Resources RESOLUTION N0. _ (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL DETERMINING THE "ZUPANCIS-GALENA MASTER PLAN" ELIGIBLE AS A PROJECT REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC (COWOP) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON RIO GRANDE PLACE AND EAST MAIN STREET, OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PTHIN COUNTY, ALL WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PTHIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received a completed application from the Zupancis-Galena Partnership; made up of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, the Aspen Chamber Resort Association, Pitkin County Library and the Aspen Art Museum; for a determination of eligibility for a project, known as the Zupancis- Galena Master Plan, reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public (COWOP) for a redevelopment of lands, owned by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, for the purpose of providing a range of uses including a signature Art Museum; additional City and County offices; new open space areas; new pedestrian routes; sub-grade parking; additional library space; City and County public safety services; a relocated Visitor Center and offices for the Aspen Chamber Resort Association; and improvements to public infrastructure such as the replacement of the roof over the Rio Grande Parking Garage and relocation of the Rio Grande Parking Garage elevator; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen manages public right-of--way in the planning area including Rio Grande Place, North Mill Street and Main Street, and owns certain public land known locally as the Zupancis Property, Rio Grande Building, Rio Grande Parking Garage, Galena Plaza, and Rio Grande Park Parking Lots; and, WHEREAS, Pitkin County owns certain public lands known locally as the County Plaza Building and the Pitkin County Jail; and, WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Library District owns certain public lands known locally as the Pitkin County Library; and, WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the lands subject to this review are attached as Exhibit A and are generally described as lands between East Main Street and Rio Grande Place, and between North Mill Street and Obermeyer Place/Concept 600; and, WHEREAS, changing the disposition of certain city-owned lands within the project area may require a public vote; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.500.050 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may make a determination whether a proposed development is reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public by applying the standards of Section 26.500.040 during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and a recommendation from the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that the Zupancis-Galena Master Plan may be eligible for consideration as a project reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public, and notified in writing the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the date of the public hearing before the City Council at which time a determination is to be made concerning eligibility of the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Zupancis- Galena Master Plan eligibility proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public heazing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds the Standards for Determination, Section 26.500.040, for the following reasons: 1. The Master Plan could provide both enhanced and additional open space areas; both enhanced and additional pedestrian routes; affordable housing units that serve the needs of the community, additional space for needed public safety operations including secure sub-grade space for emergency response vehicles at the Zupancis Property; additional sub-grade pazking at the Zupancis Property to provide access to consolidated County services, 9~' Judicial District services and to store City/County fleet vehicles, thereby provide additional space for public parking at the existing Rio Grande Parking Garage; the development of pazking at the Rio Grande Park Parking Lot site including at-grade parking for short-term public parking and sub-grade parking for affordable housing; additional space for City and County offices for the purpose of improved public services; additional space for library functions for the purpose of improved public services; the preservation of important local and national historic resources including the McMurtchy-Zupancis cabins; improved arts and cultural facilities via the Aspen Art Museum redevelopment; an improved Visitor Center and Aspen Chamber Resort Association offices including additional space and a more viable location to serve visitors; the redevelopment of buildings such as the former Youth Center and the County Plaza Building to ensure dramatically improved long-term energy and space efficiency; a unified approach to managing construction impacts and ongoing maintenance and operations of the azea's infrastructure. 2. Portions of the subject area are owned by the City of Aspen and a Master Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties; 3. Portions of the subject area are managed by the City of Aspen as rights-of--way and a Master Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties; 4. The bifurcated ownership of the subject area and independent projects in various 2 stages of entitlement may result in an ad-hoc development pattern while a master planning process that is interactive with the public-at-lazge will lend itself to the type of open dialogue needed to determine a cohesive future vision for the neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessayy for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1- Eli¢ibilitY Pursuant to Section 26.500.040 of the Land Use Code, the Zupancis-Galena Master Plan, as described herein, is determined to be eligible development necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public. Section 2 -Procedure and Standards Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(b), the procedure and standards for review of the project shall be: Process: 1. Under Section 26.500.050(B)(c), the Task Force Team shall be all those members of the public who choose to attend meetings of the Zupancis-Galena Master Plan, as widely advertised in local newspapers, and as practiced prior to this COWOP process. The Task Force Team (public-at-large) shall be given the opportunity to provide structured feedback at public meetings. 2. Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(C), following a determination of eligibility by City Council, the Community Development Department Director shall establish an Interdepartmental Development Review Committee. These technical resources/referral agencies shall identify and resolve any potential issues associated with the provision of utilities and services, environmental constraints, site engineering, access and circulation and for providing any other technical information to the applicant which would assist in the preparation of an application for further review. 3. The Zupancis-Galena Partnership, including representatives of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, the Aspen Art Museum, the Aspen Chamber Resort Association and the Pitkin County Library, will continue to develop the Master Plan with the assistance of the IDRC and based on structured feedback from the public-at-lazge during widely advertised public meetings. 4. The Task Force Team in the form of the public-at-large, via structured feedback at widely advertised public meetings, and Staff, shall provide recommendations to City Council. 5. A Resolution of Conceptual Endorsement of the Zupancis-Galena Master Plan shall be the responsibility of City Council. Final and formal approvals that implement and entitle a portion or portions of the Master Plan shall be the responsibility of the City Council and shall require adoption of an Ordinance(s). City Council may, by resolution, determine the project no longer qualifies for the COWOP process, at any time. Standards: 1. Section 26.445.050, Review Standazds: Planned Unit Development. 2. Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map. 3. Section 26.415, Development Involving Historic Resources. Any development affecting a historic resource shall be required to comply with this section, beyond any decision reached in the COWOP review. 4. Section 26.470, Growth Management, to the extent determined necessary during project review. 5. Section 26.480, Subdivision, if determined to be necessary during project development and review. 6. Technical design standazds of utility providers shall be considered and the COWOP decision shall not supercede any non-city utility provider. 7. The Aspen Area Community Plan shall be considered a policy guide and the final recommendation shall include an analysis of conformance with this adopted plan. 8. The Civic Master Plan shall be considered a regulatory document and any land use applications must demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan. To the degree that land use applications do not demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan, land use applications shall demonstrate consistency with the eight (8) Core Principles of the Civic Master Plan. Section 3 - COWOP Task Force Team Members Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(c), the Task Force Team to review the development proposal shall include representatives from the following: • Task Force Team Chair -Chris Bendon, Community Development Director, or designee (non-voting). • The public-at-large, to be invited to multiple and widely advertised public meetings. All meetings of the Task Force Team will be conducted in public heazings. • One or more members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is also acknowledged through this resolution that numerous City Departments, other governmental or district agencies and consultants will provide technical assistance and analysis as determined to be necessary or as required via the IDRC. Section 4 -Proposed Timeframe Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(d), the proposed timeframe for the procedures to be used to review the proposed development aze anticipated to be completed within approximately four (4) months from the date of this resolution. The following schedule is an estimated timeline and is subject to change: 4 May Meetings with technical resources/referral agencies. Identification of conceptual architecture and conceptual landscape architecture; identification of phasing plan; further refinements of the 3-D Site Plan, including 2-D sections of the site plan. June Task Force (public-at-large) Meetings. July Meetings with technical resources/referral agencies. Identification of physical, regulatory and economic constraints with input from technical advisors on nature of constraints. Identification of constraints that can be overcome and constraints that must be observed. Check-in or hearing with HPC, P&Z and Council. August Multiple Task Force (public-at-large) Meetings to consider balance of goals and constraints, project program, and site plan (uses, access, intensities, height, massing). Finalize Task Force recommendation via structured public feedback. Aug. -Sept. Public Hearings for Conceptual Development Plan Approval with HPC and Conceptual Endorsement with City Council. Section 5 -Components of the Master Plan and Adoation At a minimum, the Master Plan adopted pursuant to this process shall include: 1. A description and depiction of allowable development on each property, including allowable height, azea, bulk, density, uses, operating characteristics, and unit ownership structure. 2. A description and depiction of conceptual architecture, character and materials. The Master Plan should describe the specificity upon which conceptual architecture may be amended and the process of amendment. 3. A description and depiction of the rights-of--way to be vacated, upgraded, or otherwise affected including encroachments therein. 4. A description of the amount and method(s) of affordable housing and other development impact mitigation requirements that must be provided. 5. A description and allocation of responsibility for the development and maintenance of neighborhood and shazed infrastructure and community benefits (e.g., sub-grade parking, replacement of Rio Grande Parking Garage roof, new stairway from Galena Plaza to Rio Grande Place, relocation of Galena Plaza/Garage elevator, rehabilitation and maintenance of historic McMurtchy- Zupancis Cabins). 6. A description of the timing, phasing, and management of construction activity. As necessary, the construction management plan shall contemplate the individual property owners proceeding separately, provided that such development is 5 consistent with the Master Plan and that the shazed obligations and construction management requirements aze satisfied. The Community Development Director shall present the findings and recommendations of the Task Force to City Council during a public hearing and shall provide an analysis for the proposal and the standazds of review identified herein along with a proposed Resolution of Conceptual Endorsement. Following such endorsement, the Community Development Director shall present further findings and recommendations of the Task Force to City Council during a public hearing and shall provide an analysis for the proposal and the standards of review identified herein along with a proposed Ordinance(s) that implements and entitles a portion or portions of the Master Plan. The proposed Ordinance(s) shall provide final approval of the necessary land use reviews and shall cause issuance of a Development Order(s), subject to any detailed design, engineering, documentation and platting recordation requirements applicable to each development site and any final reviews that may be required in connection therewith, with the understanding that all such final reviews shall be ministerial in nature excepting any required final review by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Ordinance adopting a portion or portions of the Master Plan shall describe and implement the necessary reductions in Growth Management Allocations to accommodate the build-out of the Master Plan. Section 6 -City's Timely Processin¢ and Review The City Council shall allocate meeting times and resources of the City and necessary and reasonable for the timely processing, review, and guidance of the master planning COWOP process. Section 7 -Historic Preservation Commission Review This Resolution does not exempt the subject properties from the procedures and requirements of Section 26.415, Development Involving Historic Resources. Both Conceptual and Final Review approval shall be necessary for properties designated Historic Landmarks regardless of the direction or disposition of the Master Plan. Section 8 -Cost Sharin¢ There shall be established a cost shazing agreement that shall identify and proportionately allocate joint costs of the master planning process to the parties involved. Costs associated with individual sites shall be the responsibility of the particular party; costs associated with common areas shall be allocated based on a squaze-footage ratio as established in the Resolution of Conceptual Endorsement. The City shall not assess land use review fees for this master planning process. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 28`h day of April, 2008. 6 Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Michael C. Ireland, Mayor. Exhibit A -Legal descriptions of land subject to Master Planning Review. Exhibit A Legal Descriptions of Land within ZG Master Plan Rio Grande Buildine (Former Youth Center) Owner: CITY OF ASPEN Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: RIO GRANDE LOT:4 DESC: CITY OFFICES PARCEL ID # 273707306854 Rio Grande Place Parking Lots Owner: CITY OF ASPEN Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: PORTION OF RIO GRANDE LOT:1 SOUTH OF RIO GRANDE PLACE RIGHT OF WAY PARCEL ID # 273707306851 Rio Grande Pazking Gazaee (Galena Plaza included) Owner: CITY OF ASPEN Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: RIO GRANDE LOT:2 PARCEL ID # 273707306852 Galena Street Owner: CITY OF ASPEN Legal Description: GALENA ST. RIGHT OF WAY NORTH OF MAIN ST. Pitkin County Library Owner: PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: RIO GRANDE LOT: 3 PARCEL ID # 273707306853 Courthouse Owner: PITKIN COUNTY Legal Description: SUBDIVISION PARCEL ID # 273707347851 PITKIN COUNTY CENTER LOT:1 Veteran's Pazk Owner: PITKIN COUNTY Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: PITKIN COUNTY CENTER VETERAN'S PARK PARCEL ID # 273707347852 Pitkin CountYJail Owner: PITKIN COUNTY Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: PARCEL ID # 273707347851 PITKIN COUNTY CENTER LOT:1 Pazking Lot/azea behind the Jail Owner: PITKIN COUNTY Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: RIO GRANDE LOT: 5 PARCEL ID # 273707306855 Sheriff s Allev Owner: CITY OF ASPEN Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: PORTION OF RIO GRANDE LOT:1 SOUTH OF RIO GRANDE PLACE RIGHT OF WAY PARCEL ID # 273707306851 Countv Plaza Building Owner: PITKIN COUNTY CAPITAL LEASING CORP. Legal Description: SUBDIVISION: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN BLOCK: 92 LOT: Q + R + THE WESTERLY 7.5 FEET OF LOT S SUBDIVISION: EAST ASPEN ADDITION BLOCK 19 LOT: 11 + 12 + THE WESTERLY 7.5 FEET OF LOT 10 PARCEL ID # 273707324004 Zunancis Property Owner: CITY OF ASPEN / 130 S GALENA ST / ASPEN, CO 81611 Legal Description: 540 EAST MAIN ST, A METES AND BOUNDS PARCEL, EAST ASPEN ADDITION, PARCEL ID #273707324003 Exhibit I~ Zupancis-Galena Master Plan Criteria for Eligibility Section 26.500.040: A development may be determined to be reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public if the applicant for development is the City of Aspen, an agent of the City of Aspen authorized by the City Council to proceed under this Chapter of the Land Use Code, or the City of Aspen or agent of the City of Aspen is a co-applicant with a private party for the development of land which constitutes an essential public facility, provides essential services to the public, and which is in the best interests of the City of Aspen to be completed. By way of example and not limitation, the following types of developments may be determined to be reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public: (a) affordable housing projects developed by the City of Aspen by itself or in conjunction with an agent or private developer; (b) the development of public utilities; (c) park and recreational facilities development; (d) public infrastructure improvements; (e) public buildings and structures; or (f) transportation improvements. Staff Analysis: The City is a co-applicant with four others -Pitkin County, the Aspen Art Museum, the Aspen Chamber Resort Association and the Pitkin County Library -- for the purpose of determining the most appropriate manner for redevelopment to occur in the area between E. Main St. and Rio Grande Place; and between N. Mill St. and Obermeyer Place/Concept 600. This includes a possible change in the disposition of City-owned land. This project presents an opportunity to develop, redevelop, or improve a range of public services including: both enhanced and additional open space areas; both enhanced and additional pedestrian routes; affordable housing units; additional space for needed public safety operations including secure sub-grade space for emergency response vehicles at the Zupancis Property; additional sub-grade parking at the Zupancis Property for the purpose of accessing consolidated Pitkin County services, 9'" Judicial District services and to store City/County fleet vehicles to provide additional space for public parking at the existing Rio Grande Parking Garage; the development of public parking at the Rio Grande Park Parking Lot site including at-grade parking for short-term public parking and sub-grade parking for affordable housing; additional space for City and County offices for the purpose of improved public services; additional space for meeting rooms both for government purposes and for the use of local groups and organizations; additional space for library functions for the purpose of improved public services; the preservation of important local and national historic resources including the McMurtchy-Zupancis cabins; improved arts and cultural facilities via the Aspen Art Museum redevelopment, also to be used by other arts-related non-profit groups; an improved Visitor Center and Aspen Chamber Resort Association offices including additional space and a more viable location to serve visitors; a unified approach to managing construction impacts and ongoing maintenance and operations of the area's infrastructure. The COWOP process allows for greater discussion and community input in a master plan and vision for the redevelopment of the neighborhood than does the traditional system -especially considering the bifurcated ownership of lands in this neighborhood. Exhibit C ZG Master Plan: Proposed Resources After a determination of eligibility, an Interdepartmental Development Review Committee (IDRC) would be established. The purpose of the IDRC, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.500.050(C), is to "identify and resolve any potential issues associated with the provision of utilities and services, environmental constraints, site engineering, access and circulation and for providing any other technical information to the applicant which would assist in the prepazation of an application for further review...." The issues to be investigated by the ZG Partnership and/or the IDRC include: / conceptual architecture/landscape architecture; / construction phasing plan; / space needs plan of each party; / historic cabin analysis; / affordable housing mitigation plan; / traffic and parking; / engineering and soil studies; / conceptual construction management plan. The resources needed to investigate these various topics will include a consulting team as well as vazious in-house resources available to the ZG Partnership, including but not limited to: Judge Jim Boyd /Administrative Judge 9`h Judicial District Richard Pryor / Chief of Police APD Bob Braudis /Sheriff SO Amy Guthrie /Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen Blake Fitch /Parking Department Manager City of Aspen Brian Pettet /Public Works Director Pitkin County Tom McCabe /Housing Authority APCHA Tricia Aragon /Engineering Department City of Aspen Bentley Henderson /Asset Management City of Aspen Jeff Woods /Parks Department City of Aspen Ed ValWalraven /Fire Marshall AFPD Jodi Smith /Facility Manager Pitkin County Temple Glassier /Asset Manager Pitkin County Gerald Fielding /County Engineer Pitkin County Tom Oken /CFO Pitkin County Lance Clarke /ComDev Pitkin County Chris Bendon /ComDev City of Aspen ~ii~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~'~ MEMO DATE: April 21, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 28, 2008 RE: Code Amendments in the Service/CommerciaUIndustrial Zone District -Ordinance No. 4, Series 2008 - 2"d Readin¢ Public Hearing continued from March 24, 2008 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: Staff is requesting the following from City Council: • Determination if application to amend code text meets Standards of Review, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310.040 Standards of Review. PROJECT SUMMARY: Please note that the proposed ordinance and this memo have been adjusted based on feedback from City Council at the March 24 public hearing. This version of the memo only contains information on issues that remain unresolved. However, the proposed ordinance contains all the changes proposed to Council on March 24 for easy reference. STAFF COMMENTS' The enclosed Ordinance demonstrates code changes by using sts~eughs for removed code text and blue shading to denote new code text. Each proposed code change is accompanied by a numbered red box in the Ordinance that correlates with a numbered red box in the left column of this explanatory staff memo. Staff suggests setting the Ordinance side-by-side with the memo, using the red boxes to track the changes in code language with staff s explanation in the memo. In this memo, the numbered red boxes that remain are those issues that were left unresolved at the March 24 public hearing. The text of this memo has been revised to reflect Council discussions on March 24, as well as additional staff responses for consideration on Apri128. In some cases, the topics that remain to consider include changes to different portions of the Service/Commercial/Industrial Zone District. In the interest of clarity, staff has described all relevant code changes by topic. In other words, Council may see different numbered red boxes (technically reflecting different code changes) under one "topic." DEFINITION AND OPERATION OF BREWERIES: Under Section 26.710.160(B)2(r), staff recognizes there is a current issue with regard to the definition of "brewery and brewing supply," and the type of operation allowed. As stated on Mazch 24, staff concedes that the language in the existing code that governs this use is sufficiently loose that someone might interpret it to allow them to set aside 25% of their space to serve patrons without limitation. On the other hand, staff strongly believes that the SCI district was not intended as a location for bars and restaurants - it was established as a small business pazk for businesses like auto repair, welding, motorcycle sales and Laundromats. On March 24, it was clear that a majority of City Council wanted to establish a limit on beer/ale consumption on aper-person, per-day basis. It was also clear that Council wanted any brewery to seek a City license that would provide "teeth" with regard to this limited service and other standazds of operation that would ensure patrons are not over-served regazdless of any potential consumption limit. Towards the end of the Mazch 24 public hearing, representatives of Aspen Brewing Co. suggested a 48 ounce per-person per-day limit, and also suggested their willingness to obtain a City license. Since the March 24 hearing, the City Attorney's Office has met with representatives of the Aspen Brewing Co. and they have come to an agreement on the need for Aspen Brewing Co. to obtain a City license. In addition, Community Development Dept. staff met with representatives of the Aspen Brewing Co. for a general discussion on what may unfold at the April 28 public hearing. After the March 24 heazing, staff conducted some informal research on the practice of Tasting Rooms for breweries across the country for the purpose of gaining a general sense of how Tasting Rooms operate (please see Exhibit A). Staff understands that the Aspen Brewing Co. has conducted its own reseazch and may present such research to the Council on Apri128. Generally speaking, staff finds there is no "scientific" answer that easily suggests an appropriate consumption limit. Staff simply observes that the Community Development Dept. Director previously made an interpretation of the land use code finding that 16 ounces per person per day was an appropriate limit, the Aspen Brewing Co. suggested a 48-ounce limit at the Mazch 24 heazing and the research conducted by staff found that most operations across the country fall somewhere in between. Because in this case staff is no more qualified to make a determination than City Council, it is staffs position to leave the determination of a consumption limit to the Council. However, staff did find that it is typical for breweries to have one consumption limit for the public, and a different limit or unlimited consumption for wholesale buyers. The reason for this is that wholesale buyers -representing bars, restaurants and retail outlets -may travel widely to visit a number of regional breweries over a period of time to choose what "brews" they will buy for that season or for the year. It is not a simple task for some wholesale buyers to return to a given brewery. Staff believes it is reasonable to establish different limits for wholesale buyers as opposed to the general public. 2 Staff suggests that Council may proceed in two different ways: 1) Establish a consumption limit that will be applicable to all breweries after the adoption of this ordinance, and adopt the same consumption limit for the Aspen Brewing Co. via a condition of the City license. 2) Establish a consumption limit that will be applicable to all breweries after the adoption of this ordinance, and adopt a different consumption limit for the Aspen Brewing Co. via a condition of the City license, considering the "looseness" of the code language when the Aspen Brewing Co. sought to establish its business in Aspen. MEDICAL OFFICES /PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS OFFICES: Under Section 26.710.160(B)4(aI, staff is recommending the addition of a Medical Office use. Staff has become increasingly awaze that office space in general has become difficult to find at affordable rates in the City. Past discussions have included allowing general office uses in the SCI district. Staff is opposed to allowing general office uses, as the district was never intended for this purpose, and many office uses are not necessarily locally-serving. However, medical offices represent a different category of use from the perspective of a municipality that is primarily charged with maintaining the public health and welfare. Staff also believes that maintaining medical offices in close proximity to the core business district and high-density population azeas of any municipality is a basic element of "community chazacter." Staff recognizes the potential for future redevelopment at the Puppy Smith site within the SCI district, and recognizes there may be a substantial amount of space created on upper floors that tend to be difficult spaces for traditional SCI uses to locate in. Staff believes Medical Office uses could be viewed as an "add-on" use rather than a core, traditional SCI use. In the interest of this "add-on" concept, under Section 26.710.160(D)11(b), staff is recommending a code text amendment that would require that .75:1 FAR be devoted to SCI Commercial Uses before .25:1 FAR of Medical Office Uses can be approved. The intent is to require a substantial amount of space to be used for traditional SCI uses, and only then to include Medical Offices as an "add-on" to the district. Staff recommends a definition for Medical Offices as follows, under Section 26.104.100 Definitions: Medical Office: An office of practitioners of the medical arts, where the primary use !s the delivery of health care services on an outpatient basis, where sale of merchandise is incidental to the sale of services, and where no overnight accommodations are provided During consideration of these code amendments by the Planning & Zoning Commission, staff explained that the .75:1 FAR minimum for SCI uses does not exist today on any of the SCI parcels, and therefore Medical Offices would not currently be allowed in the SCI district. Furthermore, due to the recent redevelopment of Obermeyer Place, the only realistic potential for such Medical Office space would be as part of a redevelopment project at the Puppy Smith SCI site. The P&Z sought to find a method for allowing some limited amount of Medical Offices in the SCI district today, and recommended that 15% of each building in the SCI district should be available for use as Medical Offices. 3 While staff does not support this concept, and City Council did not appear to welcome this "15% method" of accommodating medical offices, Council asked staff to determine if there were another option that may be considered, specifically with regard to existing vacant space at Obermeyer Place. At the same time, Council focused on the public benefit provided by Primary Care Physicians that accept walk-ins and Medicare patients, as opposed to a more general definition of Medical Offices. Upon further review, staff recognizes that for better or for worse, the SCI commercial space designed and built in the "Crescent building" at Obermeyer Place was effectively designed for non-impactive, non-traditional SCI uses -largely because this commercial space abuts a pedestrian-only azea with a compromised ability for on-loading and off-loading (please see Exhibit B). Staff is recommending that it would be reasonable to adopt an overall square footage limit for Primary Care Physicians Office uses of 2,500 square feet at Obermeyer Place via the approval of an administrative Insubstantial PUD Amendment, under Section 26.710.160(B14(b). If Council moves forward with this concept, staff recommends establishing a definition for Primary Care Physicians Office, as discussed at the March 24 Council hearing, as follows, under Section 26.104.100 Definitions: Primary Care Physicians' Office: A physician's office, where the sole use is the delivery of primary care medical services that shall include one or more of the following areas of health care practice: pediatrics, family practice, internal medicine, and/or obstetrics-gynecology; where sale of supplies and/or medicines is incidental to the sale of services, and where walk-in and Medicare patients are accepted. " (Staff recommends retaining the wider Medical Office definition only as it applies to the broader intent of allowing .25:1 FAR of Medical Office space only if .75:1 FAR of SCI uses exist on a given parcel.) SEPARATION OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES: Mayor Ireland and Council asked staff to bring new language to Council on Apri128 that would encourage commercial spaces to be occupied. Staff has drafted new language, as well as the appropriate context, under "Conditional Uses." Under Section 26.710.160(C) Conditional Uses, the third pazagraph reads as follows, "Under Section 26.710.160(C)4-5, the [Planning & Zoning] Commission shall review the site plan to determine compliance pursuant to the review standazds of Section 26.710.160(F)2-3, and establish conditions of approval as needed." The purpose of this additional language is to establish a new conditional use standard that requires land use applicants to show that commercial and residential uses are separated enough to prevent future conflicts and to insure that commercial uses can function properly. Part of the community feedback regarding Obermeyer Place is that the commercial elements at the site are somewhat hidden and somewhat dominated by residential uses. Staff agrees with this 4 assessment. Staff is also concerned that when SCI-type uses are in close proximity to residential users, complaints from residential users could adversely affect the commercial users. This additional conditional use standazd for housing means that applicants must address this issue. The new Conditional Use Review Standard was presented to Council on March 24, as follows, under Section 26.710.160(F)2: 2. Applicant must demonstrate that the affordable housing and/or free market housing is substantially removed and physically separated from Commercial Uses on the same pazcel, to the extent practicable, so as to isolate residential uses from commercial impacts and to adequately provide for on-loading, off-loading, circulation and parking for commercial uses. In response to Mayor and Council's concerns on March 24, staff has also drafted two additional conditional use standards. It is staff's intention not to outline a method for meeting these additional standards, but to place the burden on the applicant to present a method for meeting these standards for adoption as a condition by the appropriate review authority. The proposed conditional use standards are as follows, under Section 26.710.160(F)3: 3. Applicant must demonstrate minimum occupancy levels of all Commercial and Medical Office space, and demonstrate an acceptable operational strategy to insure minimal vacancy periods acceptable to the City Attorney. Mayor Ireland also asked staff to develop language prohibiting the cross-ownership of commercial and free market residential space in order to prevent a free market residential owner from owning a commercial space with the intent of not leasine the space in order to preserve his/her own quiet enjoyment of the residential unit. Staff believes this could be a method that may be used under F(3) above, rather than amandate -especially considering the square footage cap on free market residential units in this district. S/C/I ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMITS At the March 24 public hearing, Council expressed concern about the maximum height allowed in the S/C/I Zone District. Staff would like the opportunity for further discussion on this issue. Staff has invited architect Robin Schiller of Cottle, Carr Yaw to provide further background on this issue. Mr. Schiller was deeply involved in the design of Obermeyer Place, and is familiar with the pros and cons of height limits especially with regard to the provision of first floor SCI commercial space. Under Section 27.710.160(D18, staff recommended removing one of the options that would allow an applicant to add 5 feet in height to the 35-foot limit. Staff recommended removing the option under D(8)a that additional height may be approved if a development attains a minimum of .75:1 FAR of SCI uses. Staff believes the additional five feet of height as an incentive is no longer needed due to new incentives related to Floor Area Ratio under D(11). However, staff recommends retaining the incentive to add 5' in height in order to provide a taller first floor to accommodate SCI-style uses. Further, staff is recommending a tightening of code language to allow for the additional 5' only in areas of future development that are appropriate 5 with regard to the context of the development, including neighboring parcels, buildings and viewsheds. The P&Z recommended that the ability to gain an additional 5 feet in height -from 3S to 40' - should be removed entirely. The P&Z agreed that a 40-foot building seemed too tall for these azeas of town. Staff does not concur with this recommendation. Staff believes that Section E(1) Special Review Standards is sufficient in requiring the applicant to show the additional height will be applied to the first floor to accommodate SCI uses and not for residential purposes, and under additionally tightened language since the Mazch 24 hearing, the applicant is further required to show the "appropriateness of the additional height and massing considering the context in which the building will be developed, including the relationship to neighboring parcels, buildings and viewsheds ..." (Italics indicate additional language proposed by staff since March 24 hearing.) Staff believes there are azeas of the SCI district featuring topographical chazacteristics that may be conducive to somewhat taller structures. Under section 26.710.160(Ell Special Review Standards, this deletion simply removes the portion of the Special Review Standard that allows for applicants to gain an additional 5 feet of height if they attain a .75:1 FAR of SCI uses. SQUARE FOOT LIMIT ON FREE MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNITS: Staff was unsure if Council wanted to continue to address this portion of the code. Under D(12), this section mimics other commercial zone districts, where the code limits the size of free mazket units in order to increase density and social vitality. The Commercial Core and C- 1 districts have a 2,000 square foot limit, while the Neighborhood Commercial District has a 1,500 square foot limit. Staff believes that 2,000 square feet is appropriate for the SCI district to allow for the financial engine of free mazket residential space. One of the reasons this limit was established was to prevent extremely large residential units controlled by a single entity that could exert pressure on adjacent commercial uses or even buy out adjacent commercial uses to improve their residential enjoyment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this application for various code text amendments to the S/C/I Zone District. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE~: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2008, finding that the application for code text amendments meets the applicable Standards of Review." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Staff reseazch on Tasting Room limits for breweries nationwide. EXHIBIT B -Map showing location of "Crescent Building" at Obermeyer Place. ORDINANCE No. 4 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL, ASPEN, COLORADO, DETERMINING THAT AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER AND SECTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE: 26.710.160 -SERVICE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL (SCI) ZONE DISTRICT, MEET APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW. WHEREAS, on Apri125, 2006, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted asix-month temporary moratorium on land use applications in the Residential Multi-Family (RMF); Residential/ Multi-Family (R/MFA); Commercial Core (CC); Commercial (C1); Service Commercial Industrial (SCI); Neighborhood Commercial (NC); Mixed-Use (MU); Lodge (L); Commercial Lodge (CL); Lodge Overlay (LO); Lodge Preservation Overlay (LPO) Zone Districts of the City of Aspen, due to persistent concerns that the rate and character of development activity in the City of Aspen was having a negative impact upon the health, peace, safety, and general well- being of the residents and visitors of Aspen, and that recent land use applications did not appear consistent with the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council directed the Planning Director of the Community Development Departrnent to propose amendments to the Land Use Code related to the above-named zone districts, pursuant to sections 26.208 and 26.212; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and, WHEREAS, on June 26, 2006, the City Council enacted Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, approving amendments to the six-month temporary moratorium, and establishing additional exemptions to the temporary moratorium; and, WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, allowed for the termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, on September 25, 2006, the City Council enacted Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, extending the temporary moratorium until February 28, 2007; and, WHEREAS, on February 28, 2007, the City Council enacted Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007, extending the temporary moratorium until May 31, 2007; and, Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 1 of 10 WHEREAS, on May 29, 2007, the City Council enacted Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007, extending the temporary moratorium until November 30, 2007, only for properties within the Service Commercial Industrial Zone Districts; and, WHEREAS, on October 29, 2007, the City Council enacted Ordinance Number 47, Series of 2007, extending the temporary moratorium until May 30, 2008; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District, as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the proposed amendments encourage a greater social vitality of service commercial areas, support for service commercial businesses that without the SCI Zone District would likely relocate out of town and increase vehicle trip- generation by locals seeking needed services, long-term sustainability of the local economy that depends upon the services provided by businesses in the SCI district, the provision of affordable housing that could be utilized as a live-work opportunity, the continued provision of medical services to local residents in close proximity to the core business district and high-density population areas, and generally encouraging a more balanced pennanent community ;and, WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, which in part calls for: • The focusing of growth towards already developed areas and away from undeveloped areas surrounding the city by intensification of land uses within the downtown. • The retention of existing commercial and lodging uses. • The rejuvenation of aging commercial properties. • The development of mixed-use buildings with housing opportunities for locals. • The development of affordable housing in locations supported by the "Interim Aspen Area Housing Plan Guidelines" (incorporated as part of the 2000 AACP). • A balance between the community and the resort aspects of Aspen. • The long-term sustainability of the local social and economic conditions; and, WHEREAS, there aze several distinct geographic parcels of different shapes and topographical characteristics within the SCI Zone District, and these different pazcels have a range of neighboring parcels with different characteristics, and the differing natures of these parcels within the SCI Zone District may be appropriate for different kinds of uses within the District; and, WHEREAS, the Andrews-McFazlin Subdivision within the SCI Zone District is along and thin, metes and bounds parcel directly adjacent to the Roazing Fork River to the east, and directly adjacent to the arterial N. Mill St. to the west; and, Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 2 of 10 WHEREAS, this pazcel was included in the SCI Zone District when the it was established in 1975, at a time when it was common practice across the United States to locate industrial and light industrial uses directly adjacent to rivers, and since 1975, the City of Aspen has enacted strict regulations governing the use of properties adjacent to rivers, known as Stream Margin Review; and, WHEREAS, Design Studio uses identified as permitted uses in the SCI Zone District aze more appropriate for the Andrews-McFazlin parcel than most other permitted uses in the SCI Zone District, which generally feature the servicing, repair, rental and limited retail offerings of material goods including the space needed to store, service and ofload/offload material goods; and, WHEREAS, the unique nature of the Andrews-McFazlin parcel includes a limited functional capacity to support such uses; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends that Design Studio uses should be encouraged in specific azeas of the SCI Zone District where most other, more traditional permitted SCI Commercial uses are not likely to compete for space; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 29, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission found that the amendments met or exceeded all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310, and recommended that City Council approve amendments to the text of the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District, as described in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 5, Series of 2008, by a 6-0 vote; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on March 24, 2008, the Aspen City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council and continued the public hearing to Apri128, 2008; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 28, 2008, the Aspen City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and found that the amendments met or exceeded all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310, and approved amendments to the text of the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District, as described herein, by a vote; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows: Text being removed is strikethrough. T°°* w°:~.. _°~,°..°a '-• _° -~°~a°':°~ °c .w° Eevelel~ext~reeter-lo lts "-.-a~'anT New text being added by recommendation of the Community Development Director is shaded blue. Text which is not highlighted is not affected; and, Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 3 of 10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1: Section 26.710.160 -Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) Zone District, which section regulates development within the Service/Commercial/Industrial Zone District, shall read as follows: 26.710.160 Service/CommerciaUIndustrial (SCI). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district is to preserve and enhance locally-serving, primarily non-retail small business areas to ensure a more balanced permanent community; to protect the few remaining such small business pazks historically used primarily for light industrial uses, manufacturing, repair, storage and servicing of consumer goods, with limited retail, showroom, or customer reception areas. The SCI zone district contains uses that may not be appropriate in other zone districts or do not require or generate high customer traffic volumes, and permits customary accessory uses. B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district. Each of the permitted uses may have, in combination, ° °~°'"°~ "0'- °`'"° "°~- °-°° a limited percent of the floor area, as noted below, devoted to retail sales, ef€~e~ showroom, or customer reception, and such uses shall be ancillary to the primary commercial use. This floor area percentage may be increased through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and according to the standards of Section 26.710.160(E)2. 1) SCI Uses which may use up to 100% of the floor area for retail sales, e€fiEe~ showroom, or customer reception include the manufacturing, repair, customizing, servicing, detailing, sales, and rental of consumer goods such as: a)Building materials, components, hazdwaze, fixtures, interior finishes and equipment. b)Household appliances such as ranges, refrigerators, dishwashers, etc. c)Automobiles and motorcycles, Motor-driven cycles, and Motorized bicycles, including parts. d)Non-motorized vehicles such as bicycles and river-related recreational items, for rental or in combination with a service use related to guiding or touring. e)Fabric and sewing supply. 2) SCI Uses which may use, in combination, up to 25% of the floor area for accessory retail sales, a€f~ showroom, or customer reception including the manufacturing, repair, alteration, tailoring, and servicing of consumer goods such as, electronic equipment; floral arrangements; furniture; clothing; or sporting goods: b) Typesetting and printing, including copy center Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 4 of 10 c) Photo processing laboratory. d) Locksmith. e) Post Office branch. f) Shipping and receiving services h) i) Internet auction consignment outlet j) Laundromat. k) Commercial dry cleaning. 1) Recycling center. m)Artist studio. n) Del. e., ....1 ..« fo.,,.l.:«,. ..t..,l:,. C al.e ,, e„t:..e e..F «..,:«.. .. ,«.,.rt: ~l ~a~ ...:r}. .. «..l.l:,. «,...C ........«,.e., Tl,:.. ..1,,,11 «..,:• ., ...,/«:l.,ro.. ~r.,,7:,. h„t «..,t,;l.;r ARo.1;~~1 rl:«:,... ,.«a r..«e.... ,.l.a.. o) Veterinary clinic. p) Animal boarding facility. q) Animal grooming establishment. r) Brewery and brewing supply, limited to ... s) Coffee roasting and supply t) Commercial Kitchen or Bakery. u) Design Studio, limited to the Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision. ...~ ce~.:,.e .....,1 .. ...,... ~,,:..e,l . ..~ c..l,.....«a ....«a..l ., «a : ,.:ao«..,t .,.., ..,,:..o,l , .,~ n,.,.e....,.... 1...a A:«,....,«a , t i\,...: ,.« c...,l:,.....,.1, •l.,,t ~l,e ~,.~..I «04 lo.,~.,l.lo ~.,..~.e F ,.r~..o .le.,.,ro.l r., r== ~,r,. ...:al.:« 41.e a«ti«e -, a .7:..t«:..t .i..,... «..v „ ,~..,] () !1!1!1 .. e f et =`_____ e SCI Uses which may use, in combination, up to 10% of the floor area for accessory retail sales, showroom, or customer reception: a) Building/landscape maintenance facility. b) Automobile washing facility. c) Warehousing and storage. 4) Medical Office Uses permitted: a) Medical Offices, on Upper Floors, pursuant to Section 26.710.160 (D)11(b). b) Primary Care Physicians' Office, limited to a cap of 2,500 square feet at the Obermeyer Place PUD, upon execution of an Insubstantial PUD Amendment. Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 5 of 10 5) Permitted Accessory Uses: a) Service yard accessory to a permitted use. b) Sales and rental accessory and incidental to a permitted use. c) Accessory buildings and uses. d) Home occupations. e) Offices, accessory to a permitted or conditional use, not to exceed 10% of a commercial unit. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (S/C/I) zone district, subject to the ~ procedures established in Chapter 26.425.050 Procedures for Review, and the standards established in Section 26.710.160(F). Under Section 26.710.160(0)1-3, the Commission shall establish the appropriate amount of floor area to be devoted to retail sales, office, showroom, or customer reception for each conditional use during the review, pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160 (F)1. Under Section 26.710.160(C)4-5, the Commission shall review the site plan to determine compliance pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160(F)2-3, and establish conditions of approval as needed. 1. Consignment retail establishment. 2. Commercial Pazking Facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. Gasoline service station. 4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing on Upper Floors. 5. Free Market Multi-Family Housing on Upper Floors ~ n.w:..r+.. er..,]:,...:rl. „ ,.:n.,...... ~:ae«,.o ,.., r t««o. ~t,.,..~ D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (S/C/I) zone district: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): 3,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sguaze feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yazd setback (feet): No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement. 7. Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle area: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. 8. Maximum height: 35 feet, which may be increased to 40 feet through one of the following options: ..\ n« .,,1,7:r:,.«.,1 G Feer ..F r..r.,l L.,.: mwr ...., l.o .. .oa ..«r r,. C«e..:.,1 A o. ,: o... c,...r: ,... 7G n2l1 l~Gl1 .,«.] ..«.7:«rt r.. rl,o ..r.,«.7.,...7.. „F Co..r;.... , Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 6 of 10 7G 71 n 1 Gn/L'\ :F ...« ,.F '1c.1 L'1,.,.« A «e.. D.,r:.. ,.F C!'i , .. rl.e .. ..el / n 1..,. a L'1,...« A «o., D.,r:.. l.ol...,, \ a) An additional 5 feet of total height may be approved, pursuant to Special Review, Section 26.430.050 and according to the standards of Section 26.710.160(E)1, to increase first floor ceiling height. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No Requirement. 10. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. 11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of ~ 2.25:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a) Commercial Uses: 1.5:1. b) Medical Office uses: .25:1 FAR, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial uses, listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3, exist on the same parcel. c) Affordable Multi-Family Housing:.5:1. d) Free-Market Multi-Family Housing:.25:1, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial Uses listed in Section 26.710.160(B)I-3 exist on the same parcel. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing:.5:1, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial Uses listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3 exist on the same parcel, and a minimum of .25:1 FAR of Medical Office Uses exist on the same parcel. 12. Maximum multi-famil residential dwelling unit size (square feet): 2,000 sq. fC. of net livable area. a. The property owner may increase individual multi-family unit size by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates ("certificate" or "certificates"), subject to the following: (1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is purchased. (2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). (3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot. Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 7 of 10 Commentary: Refer to Chapter 26..i3.i,for the procedures for extinguishing certificates. E. Special Review Standards. Whenever the dimensional standards of a proposed development within the SCI Zone District aze subject to Special Review, the development application shall be processed as a Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: -1- To increase the allowable height the applicant shall demonstrate the need for additional height, the appropriateness of the additional height and massing considering the context in which the building will be developed, including the relationship to neighboring parcels, buildings and viewsheds, and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. Five (5) feet of additional height may be approved ° °~'~-•~ '° °~''-°_ ,,,,..°~,...., ,.r -,c., ~ n D ,.f e''' '-~~°°_~~°° °~°~° ~~ to increase the usable floor-to-ceiling height of the ground - -,----- floor. The height increase shall not be used to accommodate additional ceiling height for residential uses. r'°'° ° ° ~- ~ r°°' "°:°,.' :~ ° w° ° .°a :F,.°',, 2. To increase the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for such additional space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. The additional approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. F. Conditional Review Standards. 1. To establish the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for the space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCl Zone District. The approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. 2. Applicant must demonstrate that the affordable housing and/or free market housing is substantially removed and physically separated from Commercial Uses on the same pazcel, to the extent practicable, so as to isolate residential uses from commercial impacts and to adequately provide for on-loading, off-loading, circulation and parking for commercial uses. 3. Applicant must demonstrate occupancy of all Commercial and Medical Office space, and demonstrate an operational strategy to insure minimal vacancy periods. Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 8 of 10 Section 2: Section 26.104.100 -Definitions, which section defines vazious terms, shall include as follows: Medical Oftce: An office of practitioners of the medical arts, where the primary use is the delivery of health care services on an outpatient basis, where sale of merchandise is incidental to the sale of services, and where no overnight accommodations are provided. Primary Care Physicians' Office: A physician's office, where the sole use is the delivery of primary care medical services that shall include one or more of the following areas of health care practice: pediatrics, family practice, internal medicine, and/or obstetrics-gynecology; where sale of supplies and/or medicines is incidental to the sale of services, and where walk-in and Medicare patients are accepted." Artist's studio. Primarily a fine arts workshop of a light industrial nature such as painter, sculptor, potter, weaver, carver, jeweler, ^'~'-p,.oto~phe~r or other similar art that requires artistic skill, and not ^°~°~°"° ••'~'~'°~~°~, related to personal hygiene or adornment, ~ --~-~~^ ^- ° ~ -°~^~' °°~° and secondarily receiving the public and engaging in retail sales on a limited basis. Brewery. A facility licensed by the City of Aspen Liquor License Board for the production and packaging of alcoholic malt beverages for distribution, and secondazily ~~^~ a°°° ~°~ ^°~°-°"° -°^°~°° receiving the public and engaging in retail sales on a limited basis. Coffee roasting facility. A facility for the processing and packaging of coffee beans for distribution '-• " a _^,,. ~° ° `"° ....,.r.^ ^ ,. " '°'°:, °°`°° and b° J r ~a°a° secondarily receiving the public and engaging in retail sales on a limited basis. No beverage consumption is allowed on site. Section 3• A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 24th day of March, 2008, at 5 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided bylaw, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 25`h day of February, 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Chair Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 9 of 10 FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Chair Approved as to form: City Attorney Ordinance 4, 2008 Page 10 of 10 Exhibit A Staff research on Tasting Room limits Troegs Brewing Co. Harrisburg PA 6 samples / 5.5. oz. Mass Saranac Brewery Utica NY 2 samples / 12 oz Glass Sprecher Brewing Co. Glendale WI 4 samples / 7 oz. glass Lakefront Brewery Milwaukee WI 4 samples / 6 oz. Blass Coors Brewery Golden CO 3 samples / 6 or 10 oz. Mass Flying Fish Brewery Cherr~Hil] NJ 4 samples / 4 oz glass Anheiser Busch St Louis MI 2 samples / 11 oz Glass Anheiser Busch Fairfield CA 2 samples / 11 oz glass 5 samples / 2 oz glass + I sample / 11 oz ]g ass 3 if '1 / C ~~ ~m ~Z .~ n ,• (> .~ '1 ~~ ~~ ~~ 0 Z v '1 a w~ R ~~ Z 3i~ zZ A 1 ~r~ 0 m 3 r "1 (D "t- (/~ C (L >~ n a O M 0 Vl~l Gi MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~~ ~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Director Community Development DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 MEETING DATE: Apri128, 2008 RE: Extension of SCI Moratorium Second Reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series 2008 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: If necessary, a six-month extension of the "SCI Moratorium" adopted under Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, as amended. Council is discussed potential code amendments to the Service/Commercial/Industrial Zone District on Mazch 24, and made progress by narrowing the issues remaining on the table for discussion. If Council is able to come to a resolution on the SCI code amendments by the conclusion of the regular Council meeting on April 28, there would be no need to extend the moratorium. If there is no resolution on the subject by Apri128, staff will request asix-month extension. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, established a temporary moratorium on the acceptance of land use applications in vazious Zone Districts, and was adopted by Council on April 24, 2006, with an original termination date of October 31, 2006. On September 25, 2006, Council extended this moratorium until February 28, 2007. On Februazy 28, 2007, Council extended this moratorium until May 31, 2007. On May 29, 2007, Council terminated this moratorium, with the exception of all properties within the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone District. Council extended the moratorium on land use applications within the SCI Zone District until November 30, 2007. On November 29, 2007, Council extended the moratorium for six months, with a termination date of May 29, 2008. DISCUSSION: Dating back to 2006, staff has held work sessions with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, and has presented the results of extensive research into the history and trends within the SCI Zone District. As a general matter, the question of code amendments for the SCI Zone District has taken an extended period of time due to the fundamentally different chazacteristics of the separate and distinct properties within this Zone District, including Obermeyer Place, the "Puppy Smith" property on N. Mill and the "riverside" property on N. Mill. Other factors have included the inherent complexity of the permitted and conditional uses within this unique zone district, and vazious other pressing priorities. RECOMMENDED ACTION: If Council has not adopted code amendments by the conclusion of the regulaz Council meeting on April 28, staff recommends that Council extend the moratorium established by Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, as amended, by six months to November 30, 2008. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2008," upon Second Reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ORDINANCE N0.9 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, EXTENDING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 19, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.23, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 38, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2Q, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 47, SERIES OF 2007. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (the "City") is a legally and regulazly created, established, organized and existing municipal corporation under the provisions of Article XX of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the home rule charter of the City (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its Home Rule Constitutional authority and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act of 1974, as amended, §§29-20-101, et seq. C.R.S; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted a temporary moratorium pursuant to Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007; and as amended by Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007; and as amended by Ordinance Number 47, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, Section 2 of Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007, extended the termination date of the moratorium adopted in Ordinance 19, Series of 2006, only for properties located in the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone District, to terminate on November 30, 2007; and WHEREAS, Ordinance Number 47, Series of 2007, extended the termination date of the moratorium adopted in Ordinance 19, Series of 2006, to terminate on May 30, 2008; and, WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, allows for the termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms the reasons for implementing the moratorium, specifically that recent land use applications seeking Development Orders in various City Zone Districts do not appear to be consistent with the goals and vision as 1 expressed by the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and are having the following negative effects upon the community: • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the unique character of the commercial uses of buildings and structures within the City of Aspen; and, • Recent development activity indicates that locally serving businesses are being negatively impacted, thereby losing an essential character of the City's commercial economy. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to review all existing land use codes and regulations as they affect land use development in the SCI Zone District within the City of Aspen to ensure that all land use development proceeds in a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to conduct a thorough analysis and assessment of the Land Use Code and regulations affecting the development of land within the SCI Zone District of the City of Aspen with particular attention to the long-term provision of an adequate number oflocally-serving businesses; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to investigate methods and procedures to insure the long-term health oflocally-serving businesses; and, WHEREAS, an extension of the moratorium termination date will enable a reasoned discussion of the desired chazacter and rate of development and redevelopment and consideration of amendments to the Land Use Code without creating a rush of development applications and the related impacts upon the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section I -Extension of Moratorium Termination Date• The termination date of the temporary moratorium enacted through the adoption of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007; and as amended by Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007, and as amended by Ordinance Number 47, Series of 2007, is hereby extended to terminate on November 30, 2008. Section 2 -Chances to Moratorium: Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended 2 by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007, and as amended by Ordinance Number 2Q Series of 2007, and as amended by Ordinance Number 47, Series of 2007, shall continue in its full force and effect and nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to alter the substantive content of the above cited Ordinances, except as follows: • The termination date shall be extended as described in Section 1, above. Section 3• This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentegce, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 28~' day of April, 2008, at 5:00 in the Rio Grande Meeting Room, 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 7: This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following fmal adoption. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 24th day of March, 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of_ , 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Vlll h MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner /O v THRU: Chris Bendon, Director Community Development ~~ DATE OF MEMO: April 21, 2008 MEETING DATE: April 28, 2008 RE: Extension of Commercial Core Business Mix and Historic Interiors Moratorium Second Reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series 2008 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: A six-month extension of the "Commercial Core Business Mix and Historic Interiors" moratorium adopted under Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, established a temporazy moratorium on the issuance of building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District, and was adopted on December 12, 2006, for asix-month period, originally scheduled to expire on June 12, 2007. This moratorium was extended and is currently scheduled to expire on June 12, 2008. Under this moratorium, staff has worked with a consulting team on potential code amendments with regazd to the historic designation of interior elements, and with regard to the possible regulation of the mix of commercial uses. DISCUSSION: The issue of commercial mix was identified by the previous City Council in April 2006 as one of four areas of focus for the ls` Moratorium, adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006. The public feedback process on this issue began with a public wireless keypad session at the Jerome Hotel in July 2006, when approximately 10 questions were posed on this particular issue. Although staff began to conduct research on commercial mix regulatory tools in the fall of 2006, and work sessions were held with the P&Z, Council and ACRA in the early spring of 2007, the press of other moratorium-related issues left little time to focus squarely on this highly complex issue. The ls` Moratorium expired on May 29, 2007, without code amendments being reviewed or adopted regarding commercial mix. However, the 2"a Moratorium, adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 51, in December 2006, also identified commercial mix as an issue, and the prohibition on building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District effectively provided time to continue considering code amendment regazding commercial mix issues. Staff received general direction from the current Council in February of this yeaz regarding commercial mix. Staff continues to work with a consultant in developing potential legislative options for City Council. A work session to review progress is currently scheduled for May 6`h. As a general matter, the public policy discussion on commercial mix has taken an extended period of time due to the highly complex nature of the problem, the sometimes experimental nature of the potential regulatory tools, and the time required to attend to vazious other pressing priorities. With regard to potential code amendments on the historic designation of interior elements, staff has met with Council at a work session and has received sufficient direction to draft code amendments. These amendments have been reviewed by HPC and the P&Z and are currently waiting for review and recommendation by the Historic Preservation Task Force, as requested by City Council. POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION: Staff has proposed and City Council has adopted amendments to Ordinance No. 51 to add additional exemptions in order to ensure a reasonable measure of flexibility with regard to the issuance of building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District. Local resident Peter Fornell has recently approached staff and Council in an effort to craft an additional exemption. Mr. Fornell seeks to redesign a basement commercial space at 520 E. Cooper ("Texas Reds" restaurant) to change one lazge restaurant use to one small restaurant use and four small retail spaces. Staff has prepared a sepazate memo "Response to Inquiry by Peter Fornell ..." for the Council to review and discuss (please see Exhibit A). The proposed additional exemption as drafted by Mr. Fornell has been included in the attached ordinance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council extend the moratorium established by Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended, by six months to December 12, 2008. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2008, upon Second Reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Staff memo responding to inquiry by Peter Fornell ORDINANCE NO. 10 (Series of 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, EXTENDING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 51, SERIES OF 2006, AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.2, SERIES OF 2007, AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 26, SERIES OF 2007, AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 37, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 46, SERIES OF 2007. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (the "City') is a legally and regularly created, established, organized and existing municipal corporation under the provisions of Article XX of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the home rule charter of the City (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its Home Rule Constitutional authority and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act of 1974, as amended, §§29-20-101, et seg. C.R.S; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted a temporary moratorium pursuant to Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance 46, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, allows for the termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms the reasons for implementing the moratorium, specifically that recent land use applications seeking Development Orders in various City Zone Districts do not appear to be consistent with the goals and vision as expressed by the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and are having the following negative effects upon the community: • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the preservation of the unique historic character of certain structures, including their interiors and current uses; • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the unique character of the uses of buildings and structures within the commercial core of the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to review all existing land use codes and regulations as they affect land use development in certain Zone Districts within the City of Ordinance No. 10, Page 1 Series 2008 Aspen to ensure that all land use development proceeds in a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to conduct a thorough analysis and assessment of the Land Use Code and regulations affecting the development of land within certain Zone Districts of the City of Aspen with particular attention to the preservation of historic interior elements, and with particular attention to a diverse, healthy and vibrant mix of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to investigate methods and procedures to insure the preservation of historic interior elements, and to insure a diverse, healthy and vibrant mix of commercial uses; and, WHEREAS, an extension of the moratorium termination date will enable a reasoned discussion of the desired character and rate of development and redevelopment and consideration of amendments to the Land Use Code without creating a rush of development applications and the related impacts upon the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1-Extension of Moratorium Termination Date: The termination date of the temporary moratorium enacted through the adoption of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance 46, Series of 2007, is hereby extended to terminate on December 12, 2008. Section 2 -Chances to Moratorium: Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, shall continue hi its full force and effect and nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to alter the substantive content of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006; Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007; Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007; and Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance 46, Series of 2007, except as follows: • The termination date shall be extended as described in Section 1, above. • One additional exemption clause as described in Section 3, below. Section 3: Exemptions from the moratorium Section 2 of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, is hereby amended by the addition of a new exemption to read as follows: "The Community Development Director shall exempt from the provisions of this moratorium building permit applications that replace in whole or in part, basement restaurant uses with restaurant or retail uses" Ordinance No. 10, Page 2 Series 2008 Section 4: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Secfion 5• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 7: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 28a' day of April, 2008, at 5:00 in the Rio Grande Meeting Room, 455 Rio Grande Place; Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 8• This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 24a' day of Mazch, 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this Michael C. Ireland, Mayor day of Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Ordinance No. 10, Page 3 Series 2008 Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No. 10, Page 4 Series 2008 ~~ ~; 61=~-- A- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Director, Community Development DATE OF MEMO: Apri121, 2008 MEETING DATE: Apri128, 2008 RE: Response to inquiry by Peter Fornell regarding exemption to Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff has included an additional exemption to Ordinance 51, Series of 2006, which is included in the attached ordinance. Staff requests that Council consider this additional exemption, as requested by local resident Peter Fornell. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: During the "Public Comments" portion of the City Council agenda on March 24, 2008, Mr. Fornell asked whether a new exemption to the Commercial Core building permit moratorium (Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006) could be considered. Council asked Community Development Dept. staff to consult with Fornell regarding his request. BACKGROUND: Mr. Fornell is interested in replacing the basement space at 520 East Cooper Street now occupied by the bazbecue restaurant "Texas Reds" with one small restaurant, four small retail stores and an "azcade" space. Staff initially told Mr. Fornell that Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended, prohibits building permits from being issued in the Commercial Core Zone District unless the applicant qualifies for an exemption. The overriding purpose of Ordinance No. 51 was to preserve existing uses while staff and City Council explore potential regulations with regard to "commercial mix," and also to protect existing "historic interior elements" from demolition. In Mr. Fornell's situation, staff could find no exemption to Ordinance No. 51, as amended. Mr. Fornell then appeazed before Council on March 24, and submitted a letter on March 31 to the Community Development Department, suggesting language for the adoption of a new exemption to Ordinance No. 51. In his letter, Mr. Fornell suggested the following new exemption: Page I of 3 "The Community Development Director shall exempt from the provisions of this moratorium building permit applications that replace, in whole or in part, basement restaurant uses with retail and/or restaurant uses. " Community Development Department staff met on April 3 to review Mr. Fornell's request, along with Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended, to determine whether Mr. Fornell's suggested exemption, or some other exemption, would be advisable and appropriate. DISCUSSION: The staff discussion first focused on whether Mr. Fornell's proposed exemption fit with the intent and spirit of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2008, as amended. Staff Found that one of the primary purposes of Ordinance No. 51 was essentially to "freeze" existing uses while staff and Council explore potential regulations regarding commercial mix. The relevant portions of the "Whereas" section of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, follows: "WHEREAS, there is a substantial public interest in the preservation of the unique historic nature and character of certain stmctures, including their interiors and current uses, located within the commercial core district of the City of Aspen; and ... "WHEREAS, the City Council finds, determines and declares that the City Council and the Community Development Department require a period of time in which to review all existing land use and building codes and regulations as they affect properties within the Commercial Core Zoning District whose current uses add to the value aesthetics tourist exaerience vitality. characte~_or histo to the City's Commercial Core to ensure that all land use development proceeds m a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan ..." (Emphasis added.) This primary intent of temporarily "freezing" uses is also reflected in Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2008: "Section 2• Exemptions from Moratorium. e) Anv aoplication for a Buildin Pg ermit, or portion of an application for a Building Permit, for work that is limited to the interior spaces of commercial spaces within a building or structure that is determined by the Community Development Director to be undertaken to move an existing use from one location to another within the Commercial Core Zone District or to make minor imarovements to a business' existin¢ space' and which does not substantially alter the intensity of the use and the profile of the use." (Emphasis added 1 In the case of Mr. Fomell's request, staff finds that the replacement of one large restaurant with one small restaurant and four small retail stores would substantially alter the profile of the use. Staff also reviewed other ordinances that amended Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, to determine if Mr. Fornell's request could be accommodated. Staff found that Ordinance No. 37, Series of 2007, was relevant to the discussion, but did not provide an exemption for Mr. Fornell's request. Ordinance No. 37, Series of 2007, included "Section 1• Changes to Moratorium," which adopted an additional exemption as follows: Page 2 of 3 "The Community Development Director shall exempt from the provisions of this moratorium building permit applications that replace in whole or in part, basement or ground floor office space with restaurant or retail use." Adopted on October 9, 2007, this additional exemption allowed for building permits to be granted in relation to a change in use, but only when office space is to become retail or restaurant space. This exemption was adopted primarily because it is awell-accepted planning principle that retail and restaurant uses bring more vitality, interest and character to the downtown as compared to office uses. However, because Mr. Fornell is effectively requesting a change in use from restaurant to restaurant and retail, this exemption does not apply. Staff recognizes that Mr. Fornell is a local resident and accepts the premise that Mr. Fomell's intent is to bring locally-serving uses to this site. However, staff also recognizes that during the term of this building permit moratorium, staff and Council have exhaustively explored the exact meaning and definition of "local-serving uses" as part of an effort to investigate potential regulations regarding commercial mix, and have not yet been able to define such a use. The effort to define "locally- serving" uses is a continuing effort. Additionally, staff finds that one of the primary motivations for the adoption of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, was community concern at that time over the imminent change in use from a well known restaurant to a retail use. Staff also recognizes that there are a number of existing restaurant/nightlife uses in basements in the downtown area that would be allowed to change to retail uses under Mr. Fornell's proposed exemption. Such existing uses include Takah Sushi, Kenichi, Su Casa, Club Chelsea, The Watering Hole, Belly Up, Double Dog and Zocalito. Staff believes this change in uses from restaurant to retail, even if restricted to basement spaces, could contribute to a significant change in character of the downtown. It is this change in character that is the subject of continued investigation into potential regulations regarding "commercial mix," and is the reason for instituting the current building permit moratorium. Staff does not believe it is appropriate to pursue this kind of exemption at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff is not recommending the adoption of this additional exemption by Council. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 3 ._. ,,~.D~1~ ~. _ /o /~;,~,/s~°cJ /~~~1 ~~~ ~ ~' fir'%~~ .~"~. ~d 8L6b-5Z6 OL6 pawo~ ~a~ad dL0 Z0 80 8~ i smo Glass Aspen 970 925 8039 April 28, 2008 Aspen Community llevelopmenl Kathryn Koch, Clerk, City of Aspen 04/28/08 12:26P P.001 Subject: Re(teve5opment of 520 E. Cooper, aspen, CO 81611 I would like to offer some perspective on the proposal being brought forth by Mr. Peter Fomell and his partner John Cooper to redevelop the above referenced pmperty. The loc;etion being discussed bas been home to u number of restaurant businesses, most if not all of which have struggled to develop a successful business plan. This `garden level' or sub-grade space does not seem to attract the eye of visitors or locals in its current configuration. The property is obviously in need of a makeover that would attract and prove profitable to small business tenants. ldcally, through subdividing the interior of this space, several smaller retail spaces would be created. This would potentially provide affordable and accessible sized locations that would be attractive to local small business owners. The plans being discussed suggest possibly five or so .units facing a common entry and access. This seems to be a much different vision from simply recycling another restaurant through these doors. "fhe proposal sounds creative, inclusive to locals, and has the potential to bring some home-grown diversity to the local retail experience. I currently manage a gallery near this locatign and would welcome the potential for variety. We have thirty or so b"alleries, dozens of restaurants, s number of jewelry and ski equipment purveyors within tlx; core. i believe this oppost~rity 4:or divcrsificatios slwuld be given the support of the Community Aevelopment Goard. The "moratorium" currently in place seems to be having the effect of stifling the imagination and creativity of property owners. Causing most to manipulate proposals to include high yield condo or town home square footage in order to extract maximum dollars for their efforts. The project above suggests something different, flexible and affordable retail sp a that invites local participation with year round enterprises. Yleasc give this proposr and equitable consideration. Best Regan L Frank R ynolds __. 04/26/2008 14:16 9709251052 ATLANTIC ASPEN PAGE 01/03 r ~i TiZ~n/Zo~ L' S ~'~ F ~~-s~-.1 e. o .~..v~-~-c- ~ ~ L _ _ 4 ~4 T~-~ T ~ GS FLU (fib _ 1^".~ bC~ S '7~hF~ l Gcc"~y~ ~ Pr ~ G l-(~9~ l a/ 5 JCL ~ S, ~ " ^ a~ ~'t-~c `D~ ~N~'~C~z~ G~ o ~~~-- ~J_ Sw ~~ v~~~ 9 `lam S~SUi 4 yv(l b ~(( G' o ~f- ~ ~ ~ ~ S ©v t~ ~ v R ~ ~ d 1, o c,/-~ ~ S /~-S ~ ~ ~~ 3r-45~ ~ f T ~ 6 ~ ~-~-- ~ p~L_S _ C~ ~ ~ V oil t 'C ~ T f-fr°l~~c/l~ '~ ~ Z.2 ~ S C i l-~ ~ o G- L ~- (~ yza',o~' 04/26/2006 14:16 9709251052 ATLANTIC ASPEN PAGE 02/03 Apri128, 2008 Members of Aspen's City Council, Please accept this letter as evidence of my support for Peter Fomell's proposed rc-make of the lower Cooper Avenue retail space. I especially admire the goal to create a commercial endeavor designed to support amixed-use, locally dictated retail experience. How many more Texas Reds or comedy club chains do we need to fail in such a prime location? Anything we as citizeivs and City Council members can do to foster more vitality anal local flavor in the Downtown Core would, I believe, be in the public's best interest. Thanks for your Attentions ~~~ Richazd Collies Aspen 948.6609 ATLANTIC ASPEN PAGE 03/03 04/28/2006 14:16 9709251052 4.27.08 Aspen City Council, I'm writing to express my support for the re-development of the old Coancdy Club/ restaurant space on Cooper Avenue. I look forward to a variety of local oriented, smaller concerns and the vitality that I feel it could create. I look at the commercial properties across from and northwest of the Gondola as a successful model. Ski shop(s), Ink! Coffee, Wraps, Ice Cream, sunglasses anal specialty shops...stuff for guests and ]o cntures in the midst of our com n xcial corese, but a mix of locally inspired niche filling I would like to see current and future Councils encourage more of these community- tnvolvedprojects. Sincerely, V'' ~- -~j~ C1/A G. ICcaft 121 Free Silver Ct Aspen -13-2005 21:41 From: rclepnona (97e) 9z5-cfioo April 2K, 200R To; Krllhryn Kush Rc: 520 E. Cooper To:970 920 5197 P.1~1 WEAVER & BRiSCOE, 1NC. 415 EAS7' 11YMAN AVENUE, Si)1'fF.2Ul ASPEN,COLOIkAUO 81611 klmail: charllet<t?.weaverandbriscne.com Fax (970) 925-(7fi7 As a full time Aspen resident, I Eully support the change ul' use for the shove address. l have experienced many turnovers and change of ownerships and believe it's a great spxcc fur s small retsiler. Regards, Kateri a Kirlc /~~~-~/ ~sca MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~ COPY: John Worcester, City Attorney FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer~~/ RE: Appeal of Land Use Code Interpretations - Section 26.415.025 (Ordinance #48, Series of 2007) DATE: Apri128, 2008 SUMMARY: One of the jobs assigned to the Community Development Director is to provide interpretations of the text of the City's Land Use Code. This is a formal process in which an applicant requests a written interpretation and, if they don't agree with the interpretation, affords the applicant the right to appeal the decision to the City Council. There are three criteria upon which the City Council has to decide an appeal of a code interpretation. Based solely upon the record established by the original decision, the City Council shall consider whether: 1) There was a denial of due process; 2) The administrative body exceeded its jurisdiction; or, 3) The administrative body abused its discretion. These standazds ask whether the Director's actions were ethical. The City's code states that the decision or determination made by the administrative officer shall not be reversed or modified unless there is a positive finding on one of these criteria. (Please see Exhibit A for the entire code section.) In this case, the Community Development Director rendered interpretations to address two distinct issues raised by the Aspen Institute related to the applicability and operation of Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 (Please see Exhibit B for the full ordinance.) First, The Institute asked whether Ordinance #48 was applicable to their entire property. Ordinance #48 applies to a specific list of properties, identified in the document. The Aspen Institute property is described as follows: 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens: Parcel Id: 273512129008, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT lA. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of seminar buildings): Pazcel Id: 273512129809, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1 B. Staff's interpretation, issued on February 20, 2008, was that Ordinance #48 does indeed apply to development on the entirety of Lots lA and Lot1B. We explained that the pazenthetical comments, noting buildings in the vicinity, were simply meant to provide a reference point. In addition, we named at least two instances during the development of Ordinance #48 when it was clarified to the Institute that the regulations being established for potential historic resources were intended to apply to their entire site. (Please refer to Exhibit C for the interpretation request, and Exhibit D for the full interpretation prepazed by Community Development.) During discussions of the interpretation described above, the Institute indicated their belief that, to the extent Ordinance #48 would be applicable to their property, they expected to proceed with planned work after volunteering to participate in anon-binding review by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission. Staff disagreed that anon-binding HPC review is a channel to proceed with work subject to Ordinance #48, and felt that the best way to address the difference of opinion would be to create a second code interpretation, issued on March 24, 2008. Staff's interpretation was that an owner who elects to proceed with planned work after a review by the Historic Preservation Commission may only do so if the HPC approves the subject project. The specific language of the code section in question reads: "An owner may volunteer to have any proposed work be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to the procedures and limitations of Chanter 26 415 of the Municipal Code and if the work is found by HPC to be in conformance with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines" an apphcahon for building permit shall be issued." (emphasis added) Please refer to Exhibit E for the interpretation request, and Exhibit F for the full interpretation prepared by Community Development. The Aspen Institute's request to appeal the code interpretations is attached as Exhibit G. CODE INTERPRETATIONS VS. CODE AMENDMENTS: The question in a code interpretation is what does the code say? On occasion, applicants seek a code interpretation because they believe the code should say something else. The code amendment process is the proper venue for the question what should the code say? STANDARDS OF REVIEW: 1. Due Process -With respect to due process, as required by the Land Use Code, a notice of tonight's meeting was published in the newspaper. (Please see Exhibit H.) Staff was late in providing the applicant with a copy of the notice by registered mail. The applicant waived the mailed notice, preferring to proceed on April 28ei as planned, rather than asking staff to re-notice. (Please see Exhibit I.) Staff believes therefore that proper due process has been provided to the appellant. 2 2. Jurisdiction -The Director's jurisdiction to interpret the Land Use Code is established in Chapter 26.210 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. This Chapter outlines the jurisdiction, authority, and duties allocated to the Community Development Director. One of the Director's duties outlined in the Chapter reads: "To render interpretations of this Title or the boundaries of the Oj~cial Zone District Map pursuant to Chapter 26.306. " Staff believes this language is clear and it does not appeaz that the applicant is questioning this provision of the code. 3. Discretion -With respect to abuse of the Director's discretion, the Director did need to use his discretion in rendering the interpretation. The question is whether the Director abused that discretion or acted unethically. In analyzing the code, it was cleaz to the Director that throughout the creation of Ordinance #48, there was an intention to provide "protection" and to "prevent the loss (and) limit the detrimental effect of development," on potential historic resources. There were several lengthy and heavily covered public meetings during which the concept of a list, and the implications of being on the list, were discussed. The Aspen Institute participated in that process and presented their objections to City Council, who did not elect to amend the ordinance in response. The Director concluded that, with regard to the questions raised by The Aspen Institute, the resources were cleazly named, and mandatory processes were established to screen any work that could have a negative result. TWO RESOLUTIONS: Attached are two Resolutions. One finds that the Director acted correctly and affirms the interpretation. The second finds that the Director exceeded his jurisdiction, abused his authority, or failed to provide due process and reverses the interpretation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the Director's interpretation was rendered ethically and that no abuse of authority or exceeding of jurisdiction occurred. Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's interpretation by adopting the proposed Resolution affirming the interpretation. If the City Council finds the Director did not act correctly, City Council will need to render an interpretation of the land Use Code. This may be more or less restrictive that the interpretation rendered by the Director. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: (all MOt10DS mUSY be made lri the pOSltive) "I move to approve Resolution No. Series of 2008, [affirming or reversing] the Community Development Director's inte etation of Land Use Code Section 26.415.025." 3 ATTACHMENTS RESOLUTION SERIES OF 2008 (AFFIRMING OR REVERSING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DI CTOR'S INTERPRETATION) Exhibit A -Land Use Code Section Regazding Appeals Exhibit B -Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 (contains Section 26.415.025) Exhibit C -Interpretation request from Jim Curtis, dated Januazy 29`h, 2008 Exhibit D- Interpretation dated February 20"', 2008 Exhibit E- Email from Jim Curtis (basis for second interpretation), dated March Sd', 2008 Exhibit F- Interpretation dated March 24th, 2008 Exhibit G- Appeal letter from Jim Curtis, dated March 3rd, 2008 Exhibit H -Affidavit of notice Exhibit I- Applicant's waiver of mailed notice requirement Exhibit J- Council minutes of November 12, 2007 RESOLUTION NO.~(AfTirming Decision) (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMING INTERPRETATIONS OF THE LAND USE CODE MADE BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ON FEBRUARY 20, 2008 AND MARCH 24, 2008, REGARDING SECTION 26.415.025 WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received from The Aspen Institute a request for a interpretation of the Land Use Code regarding Section 26.415.025; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.306 -Interpretations of Title, the Director rendered a decision and the applicant sought an appeal; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, may affirm the Interpretation of the Director or modify or reverse the Interpretation upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and verbal testimony from The Aspen Institute and/or representatives and the Community Development Director and has found that the Director provided due process and neither exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the Interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council affirms the Community Development Director's Interpretations of the Land Use Code made on February 20, 2008 and Mazch 24, 2008, regazding Section 26.415.025. This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Resolution No. ,Series of 2008. Page 1 APPROVED by the Aspen City Council on ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Zoos. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Resolution No. ,Series of 2008. Page 2 RESOLUTION NO ~~, (Reversing Decision) (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN APPEAL AND REVERSING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ON FEBRUARY 20, 2008 AND MARCH 24, 2008, REGARDING SECTION 26.415.025 WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received from The Aspen Institute a request for a interpretation of the Land Use Code regazding the content of Section 26.415.025; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.306 -Interpretations of Title, the Director rendered a decision and the applicant sought an appeal; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, may affirm the Interpretation of the Director or modify or reverse the Interpretation upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and verbal testimony from The Aspen Institute and/or representatives and the Community Development Director and has found that the Director either exceeded his jurisdiction, abused his authority, or did not provide due process in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council fmds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the appeal of the Community Development Director's interpretations of Section 26.415.025 and reverses the decision as follows: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for Resolution No. ,Series of 2008. Page 1 any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on , 2008. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Resolution No. _, Series of 2008. Page 2 Chapter 26.316 APPEALS Sections: 26.316.010 Appeals, purpose statement. 26.316.020 Authority. 26.316.030 Appeal procedures. 26.316.010 Appeals, purpose statement. The purpose of this Chapter is to establish the authority of the Board of Adjustment, Growth Management Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council to hear and decide certain appeals and to set forth the procedures for said appeals. (Ord. No. 17-2002 § 2 (part), 2002) 26.316.020 Authority. A. Board ofAdjustment. The Board of Adjustment shall have the authority to hear and decide the following appeals: 1. The denial of a variance pursuant to Chapter 26.314 by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. B. City CounciG The City Council shall have the authority to hear and decide the following appeals: 1. An interpretation to the text of this title or the boundazies of the zone district map by the Community Development Director in accordance with Chapter 26.306. An appeal of this nature shall be a public meeting. 2. Any action by the Historic Preservation Commission in approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving a development application for development in an "H,", Historic Overlay District pursuant to Chapter 26.415. An appeal of this nature shall be a public meeting. 3. The scoring determination of the Community Development Director pursuant to Chapter 26.470. An appeal of this nature shall be a public meeting. 4. The allocation of Growth Management Allotments by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Chapter 26.470. An appeal of this nature shall be a public meeting. 5. Any other appeal for which specific authority is not granted to another board or commission as established by this title. An appeal of this nature shall be a public meeting. C. Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall have the authority to heaz and decide an appeal from an adverse determination by the Community Development Director on an application for exemption pursuant to the growth management quota system in accordance with Section 26.470.060(D). City of Aspen Land Use Code.. August, 2007. Part 300, Page 35 D. Administrative Hearing Officer. The Administrative Hearing Officer shall have the authority to heaz an appeal from any decision or determination made by an administrative official unless otherwise specifically stated in this title. (Ord. No. 17-2002 § 2 (part), 2002; Ord. No. 27-2002 § 23, Ord. No. 12-2007; 2002) 26.316.030 Appeal procedures. A. Initiation. Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Duector. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the city office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this title to appeal any decision or determination. B. Effect of filing an appeal. The filing of a notice of appeal shall stay any proceedings in fiu-therance of the action appealed from unless the Community Development Director certifies in writing to the chairperson of the decision-making body authorized to hear the appeal that a stay poses an imminent peril to life or property, in which case the appeal shall not stay further proceedings. The chairperson of the decision making body with authority to heaz the appeal may review such certification and grant or deny a stay of the proceedings. C. Timing of appeal. The decision-making body authorized to hear the appeal shall consider the appeal within thirty (30) days of the date of filing the notice of appeal or as soon thereafter as is practical under the circumstances. D. Notice requirements. Notice of the appeal shall be provided by mailing to the appellant and by publication to all other affected parties. (See section 26304.060(E)). E. Standard of review. Unless otherwise specifically stated in this title, the decision-making body authorized to hear the appeal shall decide the appeal based solely upon the record established by the body from which the appeal is taken. A decision or determination shall be not be reversed or modified unless there is a finding that there was a denial of due process, or the administrative body has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. F. Action by the decision-making body hearing the appeal. The decision-making body hearing the appeal may reverse, affirm, or modify the decision or determination appealed from, and, if the decision is modified, shall be deemed to have all the powers of the officer, board or commission from whom the appeal is taken, including the power to impose reasonable conditions to be complied with by the appellant. The decision-making body may also elect to remand an appeal to the body that originally heard the matter for further proceedings consistent with that body's jurisdiction and directions given, if any, by the body hearing the appeal. The decision shall be approved by written resolution. All appeals shall be public meetings. (Ord. No. 55-2000, §§ 4, 5; Ord. No. 27-2002 § 24, Ord. No. 12-2007, 2002) City of Aspen Land Use Code. August, 2007 Part 300, Page 36 ORDINANCE N0.48 (Series of 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING CHAPTER 26.415 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING THE ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK STTES AND STRUCTURES OR DEVELOPMENT IN AN "H,° HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT. WHEREAS, in light of the on-going demolition of buildings, structures or objects that may have historical significance for the City of Aspen, the City Council adopted an Emergency Ordinance, Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2007, on July 10, 2007. The Ordinance amended Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 26.415 Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District and established a new process for the identification and protection of potential historic resources. The Ordinance was adopted to address the negative impacts that the loss of landmark eligible buildings would have on the health, peace, safety, and general well-being of the residents and visitors of Aspen, and the dimirrishment of Aspen's unique architectwal character, livability and attractiveness as a destination; and WHEREAS, City Council subsequently directed the Community Development De- partment toprepare further amendments to the historic preservation ordinance, including limit- ing the protection of potential historic resources to a list of properties which are at least 30 years old and which, in staff's opinion are associated with azchitectural styles and historical trends which represent Aspen's first one hundred years of history, most particularly Aspen's development since World Waz II. Said list is attached to this Ordinance as "Exhibit A;" and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends approval of the pro- posed additions and amendments to Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code, as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments to the above noted Chapter and Section on October 2, 2007, took and considered public testimony and the rewmmendation of the Community Development Di- rector and recommended, by a 3-1 vote, City Council adopt proposed amendments to the land use code by amending the text of the above noted Chapters and Sections of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the geographical area of the City of Aspen east of Castle Creek and south of the Roaring Fork River substantially defines the perceived character of Aspen's built environment and the buildings in this area aze visibly accessible and can be appreciated by the general public; and, WHEREAS, multi-family buildings aze typically owned by multiple parties and are subject to heightened development exactions upon demolition and are, therefore, less likely than other types of buildings to be demolished in the near future; and, Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page t WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the City Council hereby de- letes initsentirety Section 26.415.035, Designation of Historic Properties. (Note to codifier -this Section has been amended and recodified as Section 26.415.025.) Section 2: Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the City Council hereby amends Chapter 26.415 by adding Section 26.415.025, Identification of Potenfial Historic Resources, which section describes the process and criteria for the Identification of Potential Historic Resources to read as follows: 26.415.025 Potential Historic Resources A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section and identifying a List of Potential Historic Re- sources (alternatively, the "Lisf~ is to prevent the loss of buildings, sites, structures or objects, or collections of buildings, sites, structures or objects that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance, and to limit the detrimental effect of de- velopment or demolition of these potential resources on the character of the town during the time period that the City is undertaking revisions to the Historic Preservation Program. Pre- serving and protecting historic resources promotes the public welfare by making Aspen amore attractive and desirable place in which to live, work, or visit. B. List of Potential Historic Resources. There is hereby identified a List of Potential His- toric Resouroes. The properties identified in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007, shall constitute this List. The List shall be maintained and made available to the general pub- lic by the Community Development Department. C. Amendments to the List of Potential Historic Resources. No properties shall be added to the List of Potential Historic Resources by the City of Aspen for the effective period of Or- dinance No. 48, Series of 2007, while the City is undertaking an evaluation of the historic preservation program and a Citizen Task Force chazged with making recommendations is in operation. Properties may be removed from the List pursuant to Section 26.415.025.E. If the primary structure(s) on any property identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources have been destroyed by an act of God or are otherwise declazed unsafe and ordered demolished by the Chief Building Official, the property shall be removed from the List. D. Applicability and Exemptions. For those properties identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources no alterations shall be undertaken by the property owner and no building permits or land use applications for alterations, demolition or other similaz development activ- irythat substantially alters the Potential Historic Resource may be accepted by the Community Development Department except as permitted purstant to the provisions of Section 26.415.025.E. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 2 Exempt from this restriction shall be alterations, land use applications, and building permits limited to interior remodeling, paint color selection, exterior repainting or replastering similaz to the existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking, replacement of fasteners, or re- pair ofwindow glazing. The Community Development Director may exempt other such exte- rior alterations which aze determined by the Community Development Director to be mini- mallyintrusive orreversible work that does not diminish the historic character of the property. Alterations, land use applications, and building permit applications which exclusively impact the interior of a building shall be exempt from this Section. An owner may volunteer to have any proposed work be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to the procedures and limitations of Chapter 26.415 of the Municipal Code, and if the work is found by HPC to be in conformance with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines," an application for building permit shall be issued. Work undertaken in conformance with the International Building Code provisions for emergency repairs, assum- ingthatthe repair matches the surrounding exterior materials and character to the extent prac- ticable, shall be exempt from this Section. E. Ninety-Day Negotiation Period. For those properties identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources, building permits and land use applications for alterations, demolition, re- development, orother similar development activity that substantially alters the Potential His- toric Resource shall be accepted by the Community Development Department. Only complete Land Use applications, as determined by the Community Development Director, shall be ac- cepted. Aletter from the property owner indicating anunderstanding ofthisninety-day nego- tiationperiod shall acwmpany the building permit or land use application. Upon acceptance, the building permit or land use application may be reviewed, but shall not be issued, fora pe- riod ofninety days to allow for a period of negotiation regazding the preservation of the Re- source. This period may be extended an additional thirty (30) days upon a resolution adopted by a majority of the Council. Within the ninety-day negotiation period, the following shall occur 1. The Community Development Director shall offer to meet with the property owner to discuss the City's Historic Preservation Program and development and other benefits that the property may be eligible to receive upon designation as a Historic Landmark. 2. The Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regazding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided no- tice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission. 3. The Community Development Director shall confer with the City Council regazding the proposed building permit, the nature of the Potential Historic Resource, and the staff and Historic Preservation Commission's assessment of the Resource and the ef- fects ofthebuilding permit upon the Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the City Council. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 3 4. The City Council may negotiate directly with the property owner or may choose to di- rectthe Community Development Director, or other City staff as necessary, to nego6- atewith the property owner to reach a mutually acceptable agreement for the preserva- tion ofthe Resource. The City Council may choose to provide this direction in Execu- tive Session, pursuant to State Statute. As part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council shall require that the property be designated as a Historic Landmark, pursuant to the standazds and limitations of Section 26.415.030, Designation of His- toric Properties. As part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may choose to require the affected building permit or land use application be withdrawn by the property owner. 5. If, upon the passage of 90 days or any extension thereof, the City and the property owner have failed to reach a mutually acceptable agreement, affected building permits shall be reviewed and shall be issued upon compliance with all applicable building codes. Affected land use applications shall be reviewed and shall be issued a Devel- opment Order upon compliance with all applicable provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. The City Council, at its sole discretion, may choose to terminate ne- gotiations at any time and allow the permit or land use application to be reviewed. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from reviewing building permits or land use applications during the ninety-day period. If, in the opinion of the Community Development Director after completion of a building per- mitissued pursuant to this Section, the Potential Historic Resource has been demolished or so altered as to render the property no longer a Potential Historic Resource, the Community De- velopment Director shall remove the property from the List of Potential Historic Resources. F. Procedure to Confirm a Property is not included on the List of Potential Historic Resources. To request confirmation that a property is not included on the List ofPotential Historic Resources, a property owner may submit a request to the Community Development Department. The request shall include the name and address of the property owner and any authorized agent acting on behalf of the owner. The confirmation letter shall be in a record- able format and indicate whether the subject property is on the List of Potential Historic Re- sources, shall include a current copy of the List of Potential Historic Resources, and shall con- firm that the property is exempt from the procedures and limitations of this Chapter for the effective period of Ordinance No. 48, Series of200'l, while the City is undertaking an evalua- tion ofthe historic preservation program and a Citizen Task Force chazged with making rec- ommendations is in operation. For structures between thirty (30) and forty (40) old, the con- firmation letter shall also exempt the property from the procedures and limitations of this Chapter for a period of one (1) year after the date of amendments to Chapter 26.415 adopted in response to the Citizen Task Force recommendations. The confirmation letter shall not create or constitute a vested tight. Confirmation requests maybe assessed an administrative review fee. An owner of the subject property aggrieved by the Community Development Director's determination may appeal the decision to the City Council pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Ap- peals. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 4 G. Voluntary Designation. The City Council, the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community Development Director may not initiate an application for designation unless the property owner consents to designation for the effective period of Ordinance 48, Series of 2007. An owner of a property identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources who consents to Historic Designation may request the Community Development Director ini- tiate anapplication for designation pursuant to Section 26.4 ] 5.030, Designation of Historic Properties. An owner of the subject property who consents to designation may concurrently submit any proposed redevelopment plans to be reviewed according to Chapter 26.415. H. Penalties. Any owner who takes action to alter or demolish a property identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources, including purposeful removal, change or damage to any exterior materials, features, portions of a building, or structural members of a building shall be subject to the penalties established in Section 26.415.140, Penalties. The Community Development Department must demonstrate to City Council, using date stamped photographs, that the exterior of the building has been altered after the adoption date of this ordinance in order to apply penalties. In addition, properties on the List of Potential Historic Resources are required to receive rea- sonable raze, maintenance and upkeep as described in Section 26.415.100, Demolition by Ne- glect. Repairs or minimally intrusive work permitted under Section 26.415.025.D or completed ac- cording to a Development Order or Building Permit issued by the Community Development Department, as maybe required, shall not be subject to penalties. Section 3. Notice to Property Owners. Al] owners of properties identified on the List of Potentially Historic Resources, as provided in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, shall be mailed a copy of this Ordinance by registered mail, within 10 days of the final City Council approval of this Ordinance. Property owners may submit to the Community Development Department alternate or additional addresses for this information to be mailed. (As opposed to or in addition to the address on file with the Pitkin County Assessor's Office.) Section 4. Effect on Existing Ordinance No. 30 Determinations. This Ordinance shall not affect any Determination of No Historic Significance approved by the Community Development Director pursuant to Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2007. These determinations issued pursuant to Ordinance No. 30 shall continue to be valid for afive-yeaz period from their issuance date. Section 5. Policy Task Force. A Historic Preservation Policy Task Force shall be established in order to provide guidance on additional changes to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Program. Membership of the Task Force shall be by appointment by City Council. Duties of the Task Force shall be determined by City Council, but shall include a review of the following as a minunum: Ordiaance q48, Series 2007 Page 5 • The criteria upon which designation applications are judged, including whether additional or different criteria should apply when the property owner objects to the designation and for 20s' century properties. • Changes to the Integrity Scoring System used to evaluate properties, including to the process by which the Scoring System is adopted. • Existing and additional benefits for owners of historic properties. • Strategic policy level review of the historic preservation program objectives and benefits and congruence with community goals as outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan. The City shall not proceed with property designations without owner consent until the Policy Task Force has made their recommendations and the City Council has considered proposed code changes. Section 6. Availability of Documents. The Community Development Deparhnent shall make available to the public all documents related to the List of Potential Historic Resources, criteria upon which properties shall be evaluated, research papers, scoring sheets, development and other benefits, and copies of this ordinance and shall diligently pursue timely inclusion of this information on the City of Aspen website. Section 7. Effect on Existing Applications. This Ordinance shall not affect any active Land Use Application, existing Development Order, or Building Permit, as such terms are used in the Land Use Code, submitted and determined complete prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Pre-Application Conferences, Pre-Application Conference Summary reports, or formal or informal discussions with Community Development staff or review Boards shall not constitute a complete application or any other official status. Applications submitted after the effective date of this ordinance shall comply with the terms of this ordinance and ofthe Land Use Code, as amended. Section S. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 9. Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 10. Notice A public hearing on the ordinance was held on November 12, 2007, continued to November 26, 2007, and continued to December 10, 2007, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 6 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22nd day of October, 2007. ' ~~!~ ~ /Z-!/ -d ~ Michael C. Ireland, Ma or ATTEST: ;~~ Kathryn Kqy ,City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this C~fitlay of UE 2007. cha C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: L~1~~ Kathryn Ko ,City Clerk APPROVED AS TAO FORM-: K- . r r-~--'°--~ Jim True, Special Counsel Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 7 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 114 E. Bleeker St: Parcel Id: 273512437010; 273512437009. Legal Description: BLOCK 65, 114 EAST BLEEKER CONDOMINIUMS. 118 E. Bleeker St: Pazcel Id: 273512437012; 273512437011. Legal Description: BLOCK 65, HOGUET CONDOMINIUMS. 408 E. Cooper Ave: Aspen Sports Parcel Id:2737-182-16-009, Legal Description: BLOCK 89, LOT PART OF L&M. Cooper Avenue, Hyman Avenue and Mill Street Pedestrian Malls 333 E. Durant Ave., Mountain Chalet: Parcel Id: 273718245002, Legal Description: BLOCK 84, MOUNTAIN CHALET PUD SUBDIVISION. 100 E. Francis St., Given Institute: Parcel Id: 273512419851, Legal Description: BLOCK 63, LOT A -LOT F, DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLK 63 PART OF FRANCIS ST PART OF CENTER ST & PART OF THE NW4 OF THE SW4 OF SEC 7-10-84 & PART OF THE NE4 OF THE SE4 OF SEC 12-10-85 SAID PARCELS DESC AS BGNNG AT A PT OF THE N LINE OF FRANCIS ST & 24.00 FT ELY OF THE W LINE OF CENTER ST TH N 14 DEG 50'49" E 121.59 FT TH N 33 DEG 03'19"E 42.21 FT TH N 7 DEG19'OS"E 112.35 FT TH S 70 DEG 18' 15"E 286.57 FT TH S 6 DEG 18'51 "W 103.11 FT TH 18 DEG 12'00"W 108.73 FT TH 9 DEG 25'21 "E 52.10 FT TH S 23 DEG 21'00"E 83.49 FT TO THE STHLY LINE OF FRANCIS ST EXTENDED ELY TH N 75 DEG 09'11 "W 288.99 FT TO THENW COR OF BLK 64 TH N 31 DEG 00'50"W 107.29 FT TO THE POB. 210 W. Francis Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512417005, Legal Description: BLOCK 48, LOT P & Q. 621 W. Francis St: Parcel Id: 2735142426011; 2735142426012, Legal Description: BLOCK 22, REEDS HOUSE CONDOMINIUM. 624 W. Francis St: Pazcel Id: 2735124090]2, Legal Description: BLOCK 21, STARRI CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT B. 626 W. Francis 5t: Parcel Id: 2735]2409011, Legal Description: BLOCK 21, STARRI CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT A. 215 N. Garmisch St., Yellow Brick: Parcel Td: 273512436850, Legal Description: BLOCK57, LOT A -LOT S, PLUS VACATED ALLEY. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Psge 8 233 Gilbert St., Skier Chalet Lodge: Parcel Id:273513119002, Legal Description: BLOCK 9, LOTS 5 - LOT 10 AND LOTS 4 & 11 LESS THEW 22' EAMES ADDITION SUBDIVISION. 700 W. Gillespie St., Aspen Center for Physics: Pazcel Id: 273512129803, Legal Descrip- tion: LOT 3, ASPEN MEADOWS SUBDIVISION. 110 E. Hallam St., Red Brick: Parcel Id: 273707313801, Legal Description: BLOCK 71, LOTS K,L,M 8c FRACTIONAL LOTS. A, B, & C, BLOCK 64, LOTS A-I & LOTS K-S AND A STRIP OF LAND. 327 W. Hallam St: Parcel Id: 273512434001, Legal Description: BLOCK 43, LOTS A - C. 928 W. Hallam St: Parcel Id: 273512300015, Legal Description: BLOCK 4, LOTS PART K, L & M SECT,TWN,RNG:12-10-85, TRACT OF LAND IN SW4 (ALSO SOMETIMES KNOWN AS LOT 9) SEC 12-10-85 DESC BY M/B BK 385 PG 357 & TRACT FORMERLY KNOWN AS PARCEL C OF HERNDON SUB FIRST AMENDMENT. 122 W. Hopkins Ave: Parcel [d: 273512455004, Legal Description: BLOCK 59, LOTS M & N. 129 E. Hopkins Ave: Pazcel Id: 273 5 1 24 5 8 004, Legal Description: BLOCK 68, LOTS G - I. 211 W. Hopkins Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512463003, Legal Description: BLOCK 53, LOTS F & G. 100 E. Hyman Ave., Chalet Lisl: Pazcel Id: 273512458005, Legal Description: BLOCK 68, LOTS K - M. 322 W. Hyman Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512464005, Legal Description: BLOCK 46, LOTS N & O. 334 W. Hyman Ave., St. Moritz: Pazcel Id: 273512464004, Legal Description: ST MORITZ LODGE MINOR PUD SUBDIVISION. 606 E. Hyman Ave: Pazcel Id: 273718212003, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOT K & L. 610 E. Hyman Ave: Pazcel Id: 2737182!2004, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOT M. 630 E. Hyman Ave., Patio Building: Pazcel Id: 273718212007, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOTS R 8c S. 720 E. Hyman Ave., Aspen Athletic Club: Parcel Id: 273718211008 THROUGH 273718211019; 27371 821 1 021 THROUGH 273718211031, Legal Description: BLOCK 104, ALL UNITS, ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUMS. 301 Lake Ave., Parcel Id: 273512416003, Legal Description: HALLAM ADDITION SUBDIVISION BLOCK 40, EAST 1/2 OF LOT 5 -LOT 7. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 9 120 E. Main St., Design Workshop: Pazcel Id: 273512438002, Legal Description: ELY 20 FT OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N & O BLOCK 66 & SLY 10 FT OF VACATED ALLEY ADJACENT ALSO LOT 2 OF US WEST SUBDIVISION. 200 W. Main St., Tyrolean Lodge: Pazcel Id: 273512440010, Legal Description: BLOCKS 1, LOTS R & S. 220 E. Main St., Cortina Lodge: Pazcel Id: 273707320707, Legal Description: BLOCK 73, LOTS PBtQ. 420 E. Main St: Parcel Id: 273707322801; 273707322014; 273707322015, Legal Description: BLOCK 86, ALL UNITS, GALENA PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS. 435 East Main St., Gas Station/local'scomer: Parcel Id: 273707330005, Legal Description: BLOCK 87, LOTS E - I. 630 W. Main St., Mountain Rescue: Pazcel Id: 273512444805, Legal Description: BLOCK 24, LOT M. 730 W. Main St., Hickory House: Pazcel Id: 273512445004, Legal Description: BLOCK 18, LOTS M - P. 745 Meadows Rd: Parcel Id: 273512201003, Legal Description: BLOCK 1, LOT 3, SNOBBLE SUBDNISION. 765 Meadows Rd: Pazcel Id: 273512201002, Legal Description: LOT 2, SNOBBLE SUBDIVISION. 119 S. Mill St., Wells Fargo Bank: Pazcel Id: 273707329009, Legal Description: BLOCK 80, LOTS P - S. 307 S. Mill St., D-19 Restaurant: Parcel Id: 273718217004, Legal Description: ASPEN COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM, UNIT:B. 536 W. North St., Christ Episcopal Church: Parcel Id: 273512111808, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOTS 11 - 1 S HALLAM ADDITION. 411 Pearl Ct: Pazcel Id: 273 5 121 1 0002, Legal Description: BLOCK 101, LOTS 7 & 8 & A STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN BLK 101 HALLAMS ADDITION BEING ONE HALF OF THE ALLEY WIDTH ADJ TO THE SLY BORDER OF LOT 7 & 8 HALLAM ADDITION. 434 Pearl Ct: Parcel Id: 273512109002, Legal Description: BLOCK 100, SOUTH 1/2 OF LOT 2 AND LOT 3, HALLAM ADDITION. 850 Roaring Fork Rd: Pazcel Id: 273512126001, Legal Description: LOT 1, MERRIAM SUBDNISION. Ordinance #48, Series 2007 Page 10 500 West Smuggler St: Pazcel Id: 273512404006, Legal Description: LOTS Q, R &S, BLOCK 26. 949 W. Smuggler Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512212001, Legal Description: BLOCK 3, LOT A- I. 300 S. Spring St., Hannah Dustin: Parcel Id: 273718227800; 273718227101, Legal Descrip- tion: BLOCK 105, LOTS A - D, ALL UNITS, HANNAH DUSTIN CONDOMINIUMS. 219 S. Third St: Parcel Id: 273512465005, Legal Description: BLOCK 39, LOTS O - S. 407 N. Third St: Parcel Id: 273512413006, Legal Description: BLOCK 34, LOTS P - S. 615 N. Third St: Pazcel Id: 273512110001, Legal Description: BLOCK 101, LOTS 9 & 10. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Ho- sier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens: Pazcel Id: 273512129008, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT lA. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of seminar buildings): Parcel Id: 273512129809, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1 B. 1280 Ute Ave., Benedict Building: Parcel Id: 273718156001 thru-003; 273718156005 tltru- 020; 273718156023 thru -034; 273718156036; 273718156129; 273718156131; 273718156804; 273718156821; 273718156822; 273718156835, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, POWDERHOUSE CONDOMINIUMS. 1005 Waters Ave: Pazcel Id: 273718282001, Legal Description: BLOCK 41, LOTS A-C, EAST ASPEN ADDITION. 1102 Waters Ave: Pazcel Id: 273718266001, Legal Description: LOT 14, CALDERWOOD SUBDIVISION. Ordiaaace #4S, Series 2007 Page 11 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council Chris Bendon, Aspen Community Development Director FROM: Amy Margerum, Executive Vice-President, Operations, The Aspen Institute DATE: January 29, 2008 RE: Ordinance #48 & Exhibit A Interpretation The Aspen Institute Property The Aspen Institute requests an interpretation/clarification of the recently adopted Ordinance #48 & Exhibit A as it pertains to the Aspen Institute property. This request for interpretation is made under Municipal Code Section 26.306. Exhibit A of Ordinance #48 lists the Aspen Institute property as Lot lA & Lot 1B, Aspen Meadows. The total property is approximately 40 ac. & Exhibit A further describes Lots lA & 1B as follows: • Lot lA as "area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr-Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture & Gardens." • Lot 1B as "area of seminar buildings." The Community Development Office is interpreting Exhibit A of Ordinance #48 to be "all inclusive" encompassing the tota140 acres of Lots lA & 1B, including all buildings and grounds. As we have stated verbally and in writing prior to this, the Aspen Institute feels this interpretation is overreaching and is not consistent with the written language of Exhibit A, i.e. Lot IA is further described as "area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr-Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture & Gardens" and Lot 1B is further described as "area of seminar buildings." The Aspen Institute further feels that having Ordinance #48 apply to the tota140 acres and all buildings and grounds creates an hardship on the Institute's operations and maintenance of the property. For example, over the past 2 years, the Institute has been upgrading the grounds and buildings signage on the property to make it more attractive, readable and uniform. The "all inclusive" interpretation of Ordinance #48 would require that each new sign be approved by the Community Development Office. An even more burdensome example is each spring the Institute typically reseeds areas that have been damaged by winter plowing. Again, under the "all inclusive" and a strict interpretation of AspCityCouncilMemo0rdinance#48 Ordinance #48 would require all reseeding be approved by the Community Development Office. The Aspen Institute is NOT OPPOSED to specific meritorious buildings and grounds being designated Historic, but is strongly opposed to designating buildings and grounds which are clearly not historic and which the City is not consistently applying to other properties in town. Designating the tota140 acres Historic creates unnecessary hardships on the operations and maintenance of the property. The Aspen Institute is supportive of the following Historic designations: Lot lA -Reception Center/ Restaurant, Health Center, and Marble Garden Grounds and Sculptures. Lot 1B - Paepcke Building, Koch Building, Boettcher Building, and Anderson Park Grounds. Secondarily, the Institute would like to point-out the following additional deficiencies/inaccuracies in Exhibit A, Ordinance #48. Neither the Benedict Music Tent nor the Harris Concert Hall nor the MAA property is designated in Exhibit A. This would be Lot 2, Aspen Meadows Subdivision, while both the Aspen Institute and Aspen Center for Physics properties are designated in Exhibit A. The Aspen Institute finds this to be extremely inconsistent and in-explainable. 2. The Aspen Meadows Townhomes are described as being on Lot lA, Aspen Meadows Subdivision, in Exhibit A. This is incorrect. The Aspen Meadows Townhomes are located on Lot 5, Aspen Meadows Subdivision, and consists of 11 twnhomes of which only 2 are owned by the Aspen Institute. The others are owned by private individuals. 3. The lodging rooms were completely torn down and re-built and thus should not be designated historic. This is also true with the brand new Doerr-Hosier Center. Again, we fail to understand why you would designate these new building and not the Music Tent facilities or Harris Hall. In advance, the Aspen Institute looks forward to the City Council discussion on this matter. cc: Jim Curtis, Owner Representative -The Aspen Institute AspCiTyCouncilMemoOrdinance#48 2 ~~I l ~i~ CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION JURISDICTION: APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: City of Aspen 26.415.025, Potential Resources EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: February 20, 2008 Amy Guthrie, Historic Historic Preservation Officer APPROVED BY: Chris Bendon, Date: February 20, 2008 Community Development Director COPIES TO: City Attorney, City Planning staff SUMMARY: .This Land Use Code interpretation clarifies the meaning of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.025, Potential Historic Resources. The interpretation request was filed by Amy Mazgerum, Executive Vice President, Operations, The Aspen Institute. Ms. Margerum references Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, which established the subject code section, and included an exhibit identifying affected property by address and legal description. Property owned by the Institute is identified in Ordinance #48 as follows: 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens: Pazcel Id: 273512129008, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT lA. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of seminar buildings): Pazcel Id: 273512129809, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1 B. The Institute objects to Community Development Staffs interpretation that the entirety of Lots lA and 1B are subject to Section 26.415.025. BACKGROUND: City Council held numerous public heazings to discuss the adoption of Ordinance #43, Series of 2007. This Ordinance created new regulations to address Aspen properties that do not currently have historic landmazk protection, but aze believed to be "Potential Historic Resources." A list of affected properties, by address and legal description, was made available to the public starting on September 26, 2007. Ordinance #48 is expected,to terminate once an appointed Task Force makes new policy recommendations to City Council. Meanwhile, affected properties may not proceed with alterations unless the work is approved by Staff or HPC, or the owner enters into a negotiation process with City Council to discuss preservation options. The Aspen Institute currently proposes alterations to Paepcke Auditorium and will volunteer for designation and HPC review. They have expressed unwillingness to have HPC review an adjacent project, installation of a permanent tent next to the Koch Seminaz building. This appeazs to be the impetus for the code interpretation request. DISCUSSION On Exhibit A to Ordinance #48, the property description provided for each Institute pazcel includes a pazenthetical note. For Lot lA, the note- states "azea of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens" and for Lot 1B it reads "azea of seminar buildings." This additional information was meant to serve as a reference point, since few people would understand the distinction between Lot lA and Lot 1 B. It was not intended to narrow the affected azea. In all cases on Exhibit A (and in fact almost without exception in Aspen's historic preservation program) the entire boundary of a property is used when applying regulations. Staff was cleaz in stating this intention with regazd to the Aspen Institute property. Immediately after the research to develop "Exhibit A" was completed and the document was distributed to the public, staff sent letters to all affected property owners. Staff contacted Amy iviazgerum of the Aspen Institute on 'finis topic via email on September 27, 2007, because of the high historic value of the campus. Staff was clear that the goal was to protect the entire campus, not just isolated azeas of the property. (Email attached.) Ms. Margerum attended the November 12`h City Council hearing on Ordinance #48. During comment, she asked staff directly if the intention was to designate the whole site. The meeting minutes state: Amy Margerum representing the Aspen Institute noted the Aspen Institute is under an approved master plan which provides for historic review. Ms. Margerum asked if the grounds as well as the buildings are under this ordinance. (Note that this was confirmed at the hearing, acknowledged by both Ms. Mazgerum and Mayor Ireland. Tape available from the City Clerk's office.) Ms. Mazgerum told Council the Institute has gone through reviews with the HPC and the end result was a better project. Ms Margerum said if the city is going to add properties to the historic list Council has to ask management to look into the time and money it takes to go through the HPC process it is onerous and costly especially fora non- profit organization. Ms. Guthrie said the grounds of the Institute aze not protected. Ms. Margerum stated she is vehemently opposed to designating the grounds of the Institute While City Council made amendments to Exhibit A at the heazings that led to the final adoption of Ordinance #48, they did not make any amendment relative to the Aspen Institute. The Institute is apparently opposed to designation of the property as a whole, 2 however the topic of a code interpretation is not what should the code state, but what does it state. The interpretation request raises side issues, such as the level of review that might result from landmark designation. Ordinance #48 is not landmark designation. For properties that do achieve that status, the existing Historic Preservation Ordinance explains which actions require review and which are exempt. Areas of apparent concern to this property owner include signs, which are a type of work that generally needs a staff sign off. Staff and HPC do not review reseeding of grass or similar forms of basic maintenance. The applicant also inquires why the MAA parcel was not included in Ordinance #48. In terms of structures, this site does not contain any that have been identified as historically significant yet (both the tent and Hams Hall are recent construction). To fully address the historic qualities of the entire Meadows area, the MAA pazcel should be discussed for designation as the Task Force effort moves forward. Staff's opinion, as reflected in the writing of Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, is that a great deal of the historic and architectural significance of the Aspen Institute property is the integrity of the campus as a whole. While it is a large parcel, there is precedence for regulating the preservation of an area of this size; for instance the downtown historic district is approximately 31 acres. ii is very important io provide formal Historic Preservation Commission review foz work that affects the landmark structures at the Institute, as well as proposed new construction, which, if not thoughtfully evaluated, could disrupt or destroy historic value. INTERPRETATION Staffls interpretation is that the entirety of the properties listed below are affected by Ordinance #48. The parenthetical comment is provided for reference only. Comments shown in pazentheses are generally understood to be amplifying words, independent of the surrounding grammatical structure. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens: Parcel Id: 273512129008, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT lA. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of seminar buildings): Pazcel Id: 273512129809, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1 B. APPEAL OF DECISION Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice of appeal shall be filed. with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination. 3 Message Amy Guthrie From: Margerum, Amy [amy.margerum@aspeninst.org] Sent: `Friday, September 28, 2007 1:37 PM To: Amy Guthrie Cc: Chris Bendon; Sara Adams; Perry, Allisdn; Jim Curtis Subject: RE: Changes to historic designations Page 1 of 2 Amy: Thank you for sending me this information. I will ask Allison to put the two dates on my calendar so we can be part of the process. Can you let her know the times? (October 2nd is awfully close...hope I can make it!) . As you mention, we do give HPC a courtesy review of many of the projects, however, we are not keen on having our landscaping and grounds under the purview of HPC. It is costly and cumbersome for us and I do not think it is appropriate for HPC to get into this area. We are running a major conference center and it is not public land...we need the flexibility to use our grounds in ways that work for our business, which often changes on a daily basis. We have a Master Pian which dictates the flavor and the uses'on the site and I believe we have been quite sensitive to the historic nature of the property and in keeping with that Plan. It is the Plan which should dictate the feel of the overall property. Right now at least I have no sense of any consistent guidelines or rules for our property that various staff and commissioners might impose upon us. I would also ask that during this review you really explore ways of making the process cheaper and easier on owners. The time it takes is very difficult given our seasonal nature and it seems the biggest incentive of all for us to be historically designated would be fo.r you to try and make decisions quickly and without a huge financial burden on us. Scheduling for HPC is .often months out and I always have to hire consultants and planners to prepare the applications. I look forward to workirig with you on this program. All the best, Amy -----Original Message----- From: Amy Guthrie [mailto:amyg@ci.aspen.co.us] Sent: Thursday September 27, 2007 4:29 PM To: Margerum, Amy Cc: Chris Bendon; Sara Adams Subject: Changes to historic designations Hi Amy- I don't know how much you have been following the discussion about the City ~n onnnQ Message Page 2 of 2 preventing any alterations to buildings at least 30 years old until it has been determined whether or not they have historic significance (Ordinance #30.) You may know that , Council has directed our office to narrow the scope of the Ordinance so that, instead of applying to everything at least 30 years old, the law would only apply to a specific list of properties that our staff feels are potentially eligible landmarks. We have created the list and released it at the HPC meeting last night. It will be published in the paper shortly and we aze sending out letters to the affected property owners to Iet everyone know this is under discussion. P&Z will look at this on Oct. 2nd and City Council will have a major discussion on Oct. 22nd. I wanted to give you notice that the list includes the concept of designating the whole Institute Campus. Pretty much every landmark site we have in the City right now was adopted based on the legal description of the entire property, so that HPC has purview over the setting of the historic building. The Institute fought that concept 12 or so yeazs ago and Council agreed to just name specific structures (i.e. Townhomes, Health Club, Restaurant, Marble Gardens and other Bayer landscapes.) Our concern with this is twofold. First, there are a number of other important resources at the Institute (i.e. the Fuller dome, the Kaleidoscreen, Paepcke Auditorium, Koch, and Boettcher) that have no formal protection. Second, the setting, landscape, and campus nature of the property is part of the most important aspect of its historic significance. Again, you will get more info in the mail, but I want to be sure you know.what is going on asap. Happy to discuss with you. Changing the designation to cover the campus as a whole would mean HPC would have purview over any significant landscape changes as well as any new structures. You have generally offered that as a courtesy in the past anyway. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (p) 970-429-2758 (f) 970-920-5439 www.aspenpitkin.com Page 1 of 2 Amy Guthrie From: Perry, Allison [Allison.Perry@aspeninst.org] on behalf of Margerum, Amy [amy. margeru m@aspeninst.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:26 PM To: Chris Bendon; Jennifer Phelan; John Worcester; Amy Guthrie Cc: 'Jim Curtis'; Margerum, Amy Subject: Ordinance #48 MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Aspen Community Development Director John Worcester, Aspen City Attorney FROM: Amy Margerum, Executive Vice-President Operations The Aspen Institute DATE: March 5, 2008 RE: Greenwald Pavilion Tent Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment Application Dated December 20, 2007 The Aspen Institute voluntarily agrees to have the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) review the above application pursuant to Chapter 26.440 "Specially Planned Areas" (SPAs) of the Code. Under Chapter 26.440 SPAS, it is my understanding the HI'C review of the application will be as a "referral and recommending" entity to Aspen City Council in Council's SPA review of the application. Under the SPA review, the Aspen Institute looks forward to the HPC discussion and would like to be scheduled before HPC as soon as possible. 3/6/2008 Page 2 of 2 Secondly, pursuant to my letter of March 3, the Aspen Institute has appealed the Code Interpretation of Ordinance #48. Hopefully, the appeal can be scheduled and heard before City Council before the HPC review of the above application. Even under Chapter 26.415 "Development Involving The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures ... "and Section 26.415.025D of the Code, the Aspen Institute feels the HPC review of the above application is as a "referral and recommending" entity to Aspen City Council, without any Code authority to approve or deny the application, because as of this date none of the Aspen Institute property including the Greenwald Pavilion Tent Site have been designated by City Council by ordinance to the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures" pursuant to Section 26.415.030 and Section 26.415.040 of the Code. Section 26.415.070 of the Code is clear HPC only has Code authority to approve, approve with conditions or deny development applications involving properties designated on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures." The Aspen Institute looks forward to the HPC discussion on the above application and the meeting with Aspen City Council to clarify Ordinance #48 and the procedures, rules and authority of the entities involved in the review of the above application. Please feel free to contact me on any questions concerning the above. 3/6/200R CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION JURISDICTION: City of Aspen APPLICABLE CODF. SECTIONS: 26.415.025, Potential Historic Resources F,FFF,CTIVE DATE: March 24, 2008 WRITTEN BY: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer APPROVED BY: Chris Bendon, Date: rc 24, 2008 Community Development Director COPIES TO: City Attorney, City Planning staff SUMMARY: 1 his Land Use Code interpretation clarifies the meaning of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.025, Potential Historic Kesources. The interpretation was suggested by Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute, and the Community Development Department agreed that the clarification should be pursued. The Institute is of the belief that a property owner affected by Ordinance #48 can proceed with any planned work afrer volunteering to allow the Aspen f listoric Preservation Commission to review the work in an advisory capacity, regardless of the disposition of the HPC. Community Development Staff disagree with this perspective and believe that work may only proceed if found by HPC to be in conformance with the guidelines. BACKGROUNll: City Council held numerous public hearings to discuss the adoption of Ordinance #48, Series of 2007. This Ordinance created new regulations to address Aspen properties that do not currently have historic landmark protection, but aze believed to be "Potential Historic Resources." "fhroughout the ordinance, the intention to provide "protection" and to "prevent the loss (and) limit the detrimental effect of development," is stated. Ordinance #48 is expected to terminate once an appointed Task Force makes new policy recommendations to City Council. Meanwhile, affected properties may not proceed with alterations unless the work is approved by Staff or HPC, or the owner enters into a negotiation process with City Council to discuss preservation options. The Aspen Institute currently proposes alterations to Paepcke Auditorium and construction of a new tent known as the Greenwald Pavilion. It is staff's understanding that the Institute believes that these projects arc not subject to Ordinance #48, which staff I disputed in a previous Code Interpretation, and the Institute believes that, to the extent Ordinance #48 is applicable, HPC's role in reviewing the appropriateness of the project is advisory only. This is the focus of the current code interpretation. DISCUSSION Section 26.4] 5.025.D states: D. Applicability and Exemptions. For those properties identified on the List of Potential I-Iistoric Resources no alterations shall be undertaken by the property owner and no building permits or land use applications for alterations, demolition or other similar development activities that substantially alters the Potential Historic Resource may be accepted by the Community Development Department except as permitted pursuant to the provisions of Section 26.415.025.E. Che section goes on to state exceptions from this prohibition. The first exception is that interior work, painting, and routine maintenance is allowed to proceed. In addition, the Community Development Director has the opportunity to determine that any proposed work is so minimally intrusive or reversible as to not require further review under Ordinance #48. Emergency repairs can also be undertaken. Property owners proposing work that is not exempt as described have another option, which is to volunteer to allow HPC to review their project. The language states An owner may volunteer to have any proposed work be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission ~rsuant to the procedures and limitations of Chapter 26 415 of the Municipal Code and if the work is found by HPC to be in conformance with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines;' an application for building permit shall be issued. (emphasis added) This language indicates that the owner may pursue their project by volunteering to participate in a review by the historic Preservation Commission. The referenced code section is the City's entire historic preservation program, which describes the kinds of development over which HPC has purview, the review criteria, and the procedures for review. In no case is HPC's decision in these matters advisory. The language of Ordinance #48 states that an owner choosing to work with HPC must present a project that the board finds is in conformance with their guidelines, and when that is the case, a building permit will be issued. 7~herefore, if HPC does not find that a project is in conformance with their guidelines, a building permit will not be issued and the project cannotprocced. INTERPRETATION Staffls interpretation is that an owner who elects to proceed with planned work after a review by the historic Preservation Commission may only do so if the HPC approves the subject project. 2 APPEAL OF DECISION Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City oftice or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination. 3 ~~~i~~k~ THE ASPEN INSTITUTE MEMORANDUM 1000 North Third Street Aspen, CO 81611 NH 970.9Y57010 H~x 970925.4188 wwwasPcninstituteorg ^ To FROM: DATE: RE Chris Bendon, Aspen Community Development Director Amy Margerum. Executive Vicc-President Operations The Aspen Institute March 3. 2008 Appeal of Land iJse Code interpretation Code Section 26.415.025 Potential Historic Resources fhe Aspen Institute wishes to appeal the code interpretation of the abo~~e dated February 20, 2008 written by Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Ofticcr. As set forth in the Aspen Institute's prior memorandum dated Januar}° 29. 2008, the Institute feels the Community Development Oftice's interpretation of Ordinance #48 & Exhibit A being °all inclusive' and encompassing all buildings and grounds on the total 40 acres (Lots 1 A & 1 B) owned by the Institute is overreaching, not consistent with the written language of Exhibit A, creates an operating hardship for the Institute and is not consistently applied to certain adjacent properties. The Aspen Institute ~~~ishes to clarity these items and interpretation before Aspen City Council as quickly as possible to the benefit of all parties. Thank you for your attention to this matter and please inform me when our appeal will be scheduled. RendonMemoAppctilhulilute ~~~~ l~- ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OFPROPERTY: ~~/~R ~,/ , Aspea, CO SCHEDULED PUBLICHEARINCDATE: 1 /ONAt1+- RtL Z~G~`'' SL?~Qo"(,200~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. CouutyoiPitkiu ) I ~-/1) ~ E( fj ~c-c> ~ L't'! (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304,060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (IS) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing and was continuously visible from the _ day of 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pickin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public heazing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the of£cial zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a genera] revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing on such amendments. ~~ ~~ Signa re The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowled ed before me this ~~- day bf ~-PlL1 L , 200 b, by ,~3'~ ~~G S~CO,~'F"L7 a++y S nes Weekly I PueucNOncE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL i RE APPEA OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF ORDI~ ' ~ NANCE M48, SERIES OF 200Jn APPEAL TO CRY ~ ~ couNaL My commission expires: )~ 11. o~LO l C7 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will ba heM on Montlay, April 20, 2008, al a meet- 'n9 to begin at 5:00 P.m. before the Aspen GIIY ' ~' a \ Sl i C A Council, Council Chambers, CI[y Hall, 130 S. i _ II Galena SL, Aspen, to hear an appeal of the ~, NOtary PUbhc ~^` Community Development Director's Interpretation ~ Gmnrie at the rent DePt., 130 429-2]50, (cr slMichael G. IrelanQ Mayor Aspen City Council Publishetl in the Aspen Tmes Weekly on April 13, 2000.(139]30]) ATTACHMENTS: t.l"tUM MEYER COPYOF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGl~~~l $J`~~ 08!1012010 LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL ,~~~~ Amy Guthrie From: Jim Curtis [jcurtis@sopris.netj Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:42 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: Re: notice The Institute is happy to waive the 15 day mail Notice. No problem. On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Amy Guthrie wrote: > Hi Tim- I've just realized that I neglected to send the Institute > notice of the April 28th Council appeal. Section 26.316.030.D, Appeal > procedures, requires notice to be published in the newspaper > (done) and mailed to the applicant 15 days before the meeting. we are > at 14 days now. > John Worcester has indicated that the Institute can waive this mailing > so we can go forward. Is that acceptable or would you like me to > reschedule the meeting to May 12th and re-do the notice? > Sorry for the oversight. The newspaper notice is attached. > <Ord48Appeal.doc> i Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 12, 2007 increase in mazking transportation funding which is a pass through from the l % lodging tax, half goes to ACRA and half pays for in-town transportation through RFTA. Menter pointed out there is an increase for the proposed city-employee housing of $140,000 and construction fund of $950,000 of contributions from existing operating funds to finance construction of 100 units of housing over the next 10 yeazs. Mayor Ireland moved to continue the public hearing and Resolution #94, Series of 2007, for two weeks; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Toni I{ronberg said this week the EOTC is meeting and will discuss a possible pedestrian bridge at Buttennilk as well as reinstating the free bus service between Aspen and Snowmass. Council should note these expenditures. Ms. ICronberg said the number of affordable housing unit at Burlingame should be expanded. Mike Maple suggested the sales tax be increased. Maple said only 54% of the retail sales in the city are subject to sales tax. Only 17% of fur sales pay city sales tax; only 14% of galleries and 26% of jewelry pay city sales tax. Maple told council only SO% of liquor sales aze subject to city sales tax. Maple said people who shop in city stores aze being under taxed in sales tax and this should be corrected. Maple said collecting half of this would garner the city $2 million/yeaz. Mayor Ireland reminded Council items shipped out of state aze not subject to city sales tax because they are not used within the jurisdiction. Maple encouraged Council to investigate changing the definition so that the city can charge sales tax on services. Maple said there appears to be abuse of shipping items out of Aspen and Colorado. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #48. SERIES OF 2007 -Code Amendments Historic Preservation Chris Bendon, community development department, reminded Council Ordinance #30 addressing historic designation of houses 30 years and older was adopted as an emergency ordinance, which provided protocol around review of properties for historic designation. Bendon reminded Council amendments were requested to Ordinance #30 as well as a process to analyze the entire historic preservation program. Staff came back with a new ordinance #45. After first reading, staff made significant amendments and created a new ordinance, #48. Bendon said in fast reading of #48, Counci] was presented with options and gave direction on all options except the provision for economic considerations for designation. Bendon said staff has been working with the citizens group to make changes to the ordinance and this is a much improved ordinance. Amy Guthrie, community development department, noted the definition section was amended to define new terms or define review processes that have not existed before. Reeular Meetint? Aspen Citv Council November 12, 2007 Potential historic resources is how the list is described, the purpose of the list, how properties get off the list. One of the purposes of Ordinance #48 was that Council wanted to move away from the idea every property 30 years or older is subject to regulation. The list contains staff's recommendation for properties that aze worth discussing. Ms. Guthrie told Council staff looked at integrity, how many alterations to a property, was there a specific azchitect, how refined of an architectural example was the building is how the list was built. Ms. Guthrie noted this list will not be expanded for 10 years; it can be amended as properties go through the designation process and are not approved for designation, they will be taken off the list. Interior remodel, basic maintenance work and minimally intrusive work is exempt from this ordinance. Ms. Guthrie said if a property owner wants to know whether their property should be on or off the list, the community development duector will use the existing landmark criteria to develop a preliminary conclusion whether the property has significance. If the community development director determines a property does not have historic significance, HPC and Council have a few days to object; if they do not object, the property is off the list. If the community development director determines there is historic significance, the ordinance outlines the next step in the review process. Ms. Guthrie noted the ordinance outlines how a property owner can confirm their property is not on the list. Ms. Guthrie pointed out there has been an effort, in writing the ordinance, to put the property owner in control of the pace of the process. The ordinance contains penalty provisions if someone does work without an approval. Ms. Guthrie said the actual designation is similaz to the existing process with amendments on dealing with post W WII properties. The criteria for historic designation have not been changed and these should be addressed by the citizens' task force. Ms. Guthrie pointed out in the existing ordinance a property has to meet one out of three criteria for designation; this states a property has to meet two criteria. Ms. Guthrie said the notion that if a property owner could not prove a property was built less than 30 yeazs ago, it would be assumed that to be the case. This ordinance is more flexible on that issue. The ordinance requires staff submit their memorandum to the property owner 30 days in advance of the HPC hearing on designation. The ordinance outlines the landmazk process; HPC makes a recommendation to Council. If there is an involuntary designation, HPC has to approve that by super majority. If super majority is not received, the matter will die and not go to Council. If the property proceeds to Council, they will hear a recommendation from HPC as well as getting an economic impact report, if requested by the property owner. If Council denies a ]andmazk designation, the property cannot be brought up for designation again for 10 years. Bendon told Council there aze 3 options for economic impact. The first asks Council to consider whether there has been a taking as a result of designation, the removal of all use of a property. The 2"d and 3rd options rely on an economic impact examination panel; the ordinance outlines how the panel will be constituted and what they go through. The panel will be a volunteer boazd whose members have expertise in the industry. The 10 Reeular Meetine Asaen Citv Council November 12, 2007 economic impact panel will make a determination and report to Council. In option 2, Council is asked to provide mitigation to the property owner if the economic impact is unreasonable. In option 3, Council is asked to provide mitigation to the property owner in any circumstance. Mitigation would be financial compensation and could also be benefits. Bendon presented language to modify option 2; one is to allow Council to pay the economic impact and to provide them with staff assistance. The amended language states it is at Council's sole discretion to mitigate a property owner. Ms. Guthrie noted if this ordinance is adopted, property owners on the list will be notified by registered mail. Some property owners already received a determination through Ordinance #30; this can be extended to 10 years. Ms. Guthrie said there is a provision in this ordinance that IiPC begin to narrow the list and they aze designing a process by which they can accomplish that. Bendon noted at first reading, the idea of a "public defender" was brought up. The ordinance allows the city to retain an expert. Bendon suggested a top set number for mitigation per property. Ms. Guthrie asked that Council give staff direction on the policy task force, the application process and that while the pohcy task force is completing its work, the city will not undertake any designations without owner consent. Mayor Ireland asked if staff had comments on the ordinance suggested by the citizens. Bendon said he has not seen it and pointed out any code amendments must go through review by P&Z before coming to Council. Councilman DeVilbiss asked for a definition of "takings". Jim True, special counsel, said the phrase referred to in takings is "reasonable investment backed expectations" and there are Supreme Court cases finding a taking is when there is no real economic value retained on the property after whatever government action. Mayor Ireland noted Council has discussed repealing this and starting over. Councilman Romero said he would be willing to drop Ordinance #48 and to repeal Ordinance #30 with some conditions putting the process back to commissioning a task force to look at updating the overall historic preservation code, trying to get community consensus and appeal to the public. Councihnan DeVilbiss said there maybe some peril in repealing Ordinance #30 and there would have to be conditions or adjustments. Councilman Skadron stated he does not support Ordinance #48. Councilman Skadron said he does not support the notion of the city writing a check to property owners. The 10 year window may have unintended consequences. Councilman Skadron said he is uneasy with the precedent of codifying a super majority. Councilman Skadron said he will support a repeal of Ordinance #30 and ask for a suspension by the city of designation of properties for a certain period of time. Councilman Skadron said he would like historic preservation be improved by an objective group of citizens in order to get improved criteria, and the process which leaves a historic preservation code that is credible and fosters a valid basis for designating properties. 11 Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council November 12, 2007 Mayor Ireland said Council has agreed there aze 2,000 properties that should not be dragged on and these should be out from under a cloud. Mayor Ireland said he is inclined to adopt this ordinance with a 6 month sunset clause so that new standards could be adopted during that time. An alternative would be that a property the city may think is historic cannot be demolished for 6 or 12 months while the city negotiates a package of benefits to leave the property as it is with the property owner. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Amy Mazgerum, representing the Aspen Institute, noted the Aspen Institute is under an approved master plan, which provides for historic review. Ms. Margerum asked if the grounds, as well as the buildings, aze under this ordinance, Ms. Mazgerum told Council the hnstitute has gone through reviews with the HPC and the end result was a better project. Ms. Mazgetnm said if the city is going to add properties to the historic list, Council has to ask management to look into the time and money it takes to go through the HPC process; it is onerous and costly, especially for anon-profit organization. Ms. Guthrie said the grounds of the Institute aze not protected. Ms. Mazgerum stated she is vehemently opposed to designating the grounds of the Institute. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 10 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Pam Cunningham, Aspen Alps, submitted a letter opposing the inclusion of the Aspen Alps on the list of historic properties. Terry Hale said Council has a chance to revisit the entire concept of historic preservation, not just Ordinance #30. Hale said this has not been a waste of the past 4 months but is an opportunity to rewrite the historic preservation code with input from builders and azchitects and other community members so that it is something the community is proud of. Chip Freeman submitted a letter on this issue with all his thoughts. Helen Klanderud asked what rationale has been used to have the properties on the list, on the list. Ms. Klanderud said all properties should be taken off the list until there is a historic preservation code that the community can accept and support. Ms. Klanderud said there aze no criteria as to who are notable architects, what in modem buildings is truly extraordinary and ought to be preserved. Ms. Klanderud said one needs to be able to look back and see what stands the lest of time, more than 30 or AO years. Les Holst said he supports historic preservation which leads to a viable economic community. Historic preservation is about scale and massing. Holst suggested designating the entire town, which would preserve property values for everyone. Connie Harvey said the city has discretion on whether property owners receive compensation which will set up resentments and entanglements which does not make a lot of sense and is a dangerous and unpleasant approach. Toni Kronberg said she supports historic preservation and passage of this ordinance. Mazk Friedberg said he has looked at the majority of properties on this list. Friedberg said the city should be looking 12 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 12, 2007 for a sense of reasonableness in trying to approach the goal of what the buildings aze that aze meaningfiil in contributing to the welfaze of Aspen. Friedberg said without the community input and review of criteria for post W WII buildings, there will not be resolution. Friedberg said the time that has been put into this will help the community think more cleazly about what they want as the end result. Marilyn Mazks said much of input has been citizens saying the community ought to be involved in this process. Council needs to find out what the community wants. Ms. Marks said major changes have been made to Ordinance #48; however, it is still overly complex and expensive to property owners. Ms. Marks said the ordinance leads to a lack of support and goodwill for a historic preservation program. Ms. Mazks said the list of historic potential properties feels flawed and arbitrary. Ms. Mazks said this is not consistent with the AACP, such as buildings should not take precedence over people who live in them. Mike Maple aid his proposed ordinance would repeal Ordinance #30 and revert back to the 2002 code. The task force could go forward and update historic codes. Maple suggested Ordinance #48 could be amended by deletions throughout the ordinance leaving only 100 yeaz old structures protected. Christina Crandall said protecting structures in Aspen may be too late. Aspen is going from generally small in mass and scale buildings to an upscale community. Ms. Crandall said the option to seek historic designation through creative uses of incentives is a more desirable approach. Ms. Crandall said the proposal seems overly complicated. Jack Wilkey said he has only received one letter and has no idea why his building is on the list of potential historic structures. Scott Hicks asked the process to exercise one's right to do future development on the property. Hicks said in his experience there is a lot of subjectivity to historic preservation and review and it took him two years to get through a historic approval process. Henry Hite said some of the post WWII buildings aze not energy efficient and need to be tom down. Pierre Wille, Tyrolean Lodge, told Council this property is already in the Main street historic district. Wille said they have been holding the building together with band aids for the last 20 years. Wi11e noted some buildings aze historic and some aze just old. Jesse Boyce said finding ways to remodel potential historic structures in a tasteful way and help with the canary initiative would be a good thing. Boyce suggested coming up with an incentive or funding source and let people come to the city to see what benefits there are in historic preservation. Susan Capiel Collin stated she supports the majority of the comments. The city needs to start over and scrap the list. Roine St. Andre said this community is about the people, not the buildings. Ms. St. Andre said this ordinance has been divisive. Bill Wiener said governments do things that increase or decrease property values; things that are good for neighborhoods or bad for neighborhoods. Wiener noted when properties aze upzoned and people's values go up, they do not offer to pay the city for the 13 Re¢ular Meetint=_ Aspen City Council November 12, 2007 difference in property values. Wiener said one reason Aspen's property values aze so high is that previous governments had values and protected this community. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. Councilman Johnson moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Romero, All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Johnson said there is feaz and distrust in the community over this issue. Councilman Johnson said there has been misinformation throughout the community. Councilman Johnson noted he has stated a list is an easy way to treat people unfairly rather than treating everyone the same. Councilman Johnson said he feels the past 4 months could have been better spent with a lazge community discussion on historic preservation. Councilman Johnson said the city was to draft an interim ordinance and got off track. Councilman Johnson said other issues aze values that Aspen has endorsed through the AACP and the core beliefs of 2006. Council needs to consider al] view points, to gather a diverse group of citizens to make a recommendation to Council on this issue. Councilman Johnson stated he supports creating a task force to represent all citizens of Aspen and to be charged with making recommendations to Council. Councilman Johnson suggested hiring an independent facilitator to insure all viewpoints aze heard. Councilman Romero reiterated he would like to drop Ordinance #48 and repeal Ordinance #30 and start over. Councilman Romero agreed there aze core principles over preservation; however, there are many different definitions surrounding preservation. Councilman Romero said if the two ordinances aze repealed, he would like the city to suspend all designations and let the process go through its steps. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like to see written legislation to accomplish what other Council has discussed so it can be voted on. Councilman Skadron said he feels it is appropriate to repeal Ordinance #48. Councilman Johnson said he would be willing to work with staff to draft an ordinance outlining the duties of a task force. Councilman Johnson stated he does not support any action that would provide no protection for historic properties. Councilman Johnson said he would like the task force to make recommendations to Counci] first. Councilman Johnson stated what is needed is a balance between economic fairness and historic preservation. Councilman Romero said he feels repealing Ordinance #48 is not as much of a component of historic preservation but as a restoration of community relations. Councilman Johnson stated new legislation to replace Ordinance #30 is needed before anything is repealed. A task force ought to be chazged with protection of the structures that have been discussed over the past 4 months. Councilman Johnson ageed Ordinance #48 should be dropped and Ordinance #30 should be repealed when there is some other leaslation in place. 14 Reeular Meetine Asoen Ciri Council November 12.2007 Mayor Ireland said he would like the potential historic properties protected until they can be reviewed, released or designated. Mayor Ireland said he would like to know what the community at lazge wants, not just what the affected property owners want. Mayor Ireland said he does not want this process to go on for another yeaz or two. Councilman Romero noted there is consensus to have a task force; however, this will take rime resulting in uncertainty for anyone whose property is on the list. Councilman Romero said the process should go forward without encumbrance of these two ordinances. Mayor Ireland asked who would limit the process to the current exhibit A list of potential historic properties; this would be demolition review while the task force is doing their job. Councilman Johnson agreed with that. Councilman Johnson said he supports the notion of certainty for a period of time when a property knows they will not be considered for historic designation. Councilman Johnson said he does not think Council ought to tie the hands of the task force on any issue. Councilman Skadron agreed with a suspension of the city involuntary designations, which means no list. Councilman Skadron stated his intention is to repeal Ordinance #30 and to return to procedures before that. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11:15 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Ireland moved to continue Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, to 11/26 with the direction to strike all language other than demolition review of the list on exhibit A, put a time limit of 6 months at which time the ordinance sunsets and to create a task force to consider all the issues raised by this and to allow in the interim with the existing standards that the HPC further narrow the properties while the citizen committee is operating; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor with the exception of Councilmembers Skadron and Romero. Motion carried. Councilman Johnson moved to continue Ordinance #28, Series of 2008, 508 East Cooper and Resolution #95, Series of 2007, Extension of Vested Rights 110 East Bleeker, to November 13's at 3 p.m.; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #46. SERIES OF 2007 - Extension of CC Business Mix and Historic Interiors Chris Bendon, community development department, recommended Council adopt this ordinance and extend the moratorium to June 12, 2008, so staff and Council can continue to work on code amendments. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. 15 To: Aspen City Council THE ASPEN~NSTITliTE Amy Margerum Executive Vice President Operations Corporate Secretary 1000 North Third Street Aspen, Colorado 8161 I PH 970.544.7905 FX 970.544.7908 www.aspenins[itute.org ^ From: Amy Margerum, The Aspen Institute CC: Community Development Office City Attorney Office Date: April 21, 2008 Re: Aspen Institute -Ordinance #48 Appeal 8 Clarification The Aspen Institute is scheduled before City Council on Mon. April 28`n seeking clarification on two Ord. #48 questions. I & Jim Curtis, our planner, felt it would be helpful to outline our questions & thinking to you beforehand to facilitate the discussion on the 28t". The two questions are: 1. What Aspen Institute "facilities" are encumbered under Exhibit A of Ord. #487 The Planning Office takes the position that Exh. A is "all inclusive" meaning all buildings & grounds on the 40 ac. Aspen Institute property are encumbered under Exh. A. (all of Lot 1A & 1 B). The Institute feels this interpretation is overreaching 8 imposes a hardship on the day today operations of the Institute. The Institute feels Exh. A is more limiting as set forth by the areas in () of Exh. A, i.e. Lot 1A (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr-Hosier, Restaurant, Sculpture 8 Gardens) 8 Lot 1 B (Area of the Seminar Buildings). The "all inclusive" interpretation creates a hardship on the day to day operations of the Institute. For example, over the past 2 years, the Institute has been replacing & upgrading its signage for buildings & grounds to make the signage more uniform & attractive. The "all inclusive" interpretation of the Planning Office means every new sign must now be approved by the Planning Office even when a sign permit is not required by the Municipal Code. Moreover, a "very strict" interpretation of the Planning Office position would say any & all physical changes to the 40 ac. campus, i.e. planting new trees or grass, would need Planning Office approval. The Institute feels it was neither the intent nor goal of Ord. #48 to delegate this much discretionary oversight 8 authority to the Community Development Office or the Historic Preservation Commission. 7. What is the role & authority of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) under the Municipal Code 8 Ordinance #48? The Aspen Institute has two SPA Amendment applications pending before the City, i.e. Greenwald Pavilion Tent 8 Paepcke Auditorium Renovation. The Institute's reading of the Municipal Code & Ord. #48 is that the HPC is a "referral & recommending" body & not a "decision-making & approval" body for the two SPA Amendment applications. The Institute welcomes & appreciates (8 voluntary agrees) to the HPC review of the two applications as a "referral & recommending" body consistent with the Institute's reading of the Code. The Institute's 2 basic points are: A. None of the Aspen Institute's "facilities" are officially designated by City Council by ordinance to the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Structures" as of this time even under Ord. #48. Specifically, under Ord. #48, Code Section 26.415.025(G) Voluntary Designation states" The City Council, the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community Development Director may not initiate an application for designation unless the property owner consents to designation for the effective period of Ordinance #48, Series of 2007". The Aspen Institute has not consented to voluntary designation to the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Structures" at this time. Like City Council, the Aspen Institute is awaiting the recommendations of the Historic Preservation Commission Task Force. B. Under Municipal Code, Section 26.220.010 HPC Powers 8 Duties states' The Historic Preservation Commission (....) shall have the following powers & duties: B. Review & approval, approval with conditions, suspension or disapproval of development within the H, Historic Overlay District or development involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Since none of the Aspen Institute "facilities" are officially designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Structures, at this time, the HPC must be a "referral 8 recommending" body to the two pending SPA Amendment applications because HPC only has "decision-making & approval" authority once a property has been officially designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Structures. The Institute fully understands both applications have to be reviewed under the SPA (Specially Plan Area) provisions of the Municipal Code & that Council would reasonably expect HPC referral comments under the City's SPA review procedures. Please feel free to email or call on any questions on the above. As always, thank you for your time & attention to this matter. Amy Margerum Executive Vice President, Operations The Aspen Institute