HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20080616MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director
CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager
CC: John Worcester, City Attorney
DATE OF MEMO: June 12, 2008
MEETING DATE: June 16, 2008
RE: Proposed Additional Wind Energy Purchase in Cooperation with
Holy Cross Energy (HCE)
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: During this work session we are requesting direction from
Council on whether to proceed with an additional purchase of wind energy and whether
Council wishes to proceed with this purchase in cooperation with HCE to "green up" the
electric energy resource mix available to certain HCE customers.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council adopted the Canary Action Plan in May 2007.
That plan includes direction for the Electric sector to achieve 45 % of electric purchases from
non-carbon sources on a community wide basis by 2012. The community wide direction of this
goal was a result of the current disparity of renewable energy generation and purchases
considering the two electric energy suppliers for the Aspen area. The City's municipal
electric system currently achieves a level of approximately 75% from non-carbon sources.
HCE is a recognized leader on renewable energy production amongst rural electric
cooperatives and receives approximately 8.75% of its energy from renewable sources.
Following adoption of the Canary Action Plan, financing for the new Castle Creek
hydroelectric plant was approved by Aspen voters. This action is expected to bring the non-
carbon sources for the Aspen electric system to approximately 80% begimming in 2010.
BACKGROUND: With the addition of the new Castle Creek hydroelectric plant (scheduled
for late 2009), the City electric system will likely reach its maximum level of renewable
generation and purchases. Under current technology, electric generation must match electric
consumption for the City service area on a real time basis. Because renewable resources such
as wind and hydroelectric cannot be scheduled to meet all of the Aspen electric system
customer demands on a real time basis, it has been the practice to fill in the gaps between
Page 1 of 5
supply and demand with purchases of carbon sources of energy such as coal and natural gas
fired power. The Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) supplies the power that
Aspen does not generate in Ci[y owned hydroelectric plants. In 2004 Aspen requested an
additional purchase of wind energy from MEAN and was advised that 80% renewable would
be a practical limit for the amount of energy that could be purchased given the above
constraints. As a percentage of its total energy supply, the Aspen electric system now
purchases three times as much wind power when compared to the next largest purchaser of
wind energy in the country.
Given these limitations, further progress towards the Canary Action Plan electric sector goals
could best be focused on the HCE service area. The extent that purchases of renewable energy
are available to HCE is limited by its existing contract with Xcel Energy. Under the Xcel
contract, HCE must exclusively buy power through Xcel, unless it acquires power through a
"qualified facility". Xcel serves approximately 60% of the electric customers in Colorado, has
a backlog of requests for wind energy and is not in a position to offer new wind energy to
HCE under attractive terms on a schedule that meets the Canary Action Plan goals. Under its
contract with MEAN, the Aspen electric system has access to additional wind energy purchases
that are financially attractive, but it would be difficult to integrate these new sources because it
would exceed the 80% ceiling described above. The solution to moving forward on this goal is
to work together with HCE to take advantages of the strengths of both systems, without
financial damage to one another.
DISCUSSION: HCE and City Staff have identified a potential way to move forwazd toward
the goal of reaching 45% renewable electric power on a community wide basis. Total annual
energy production and purchases for the area within the Aspen urban growth boundary is
approximately 200 million kwh (130 million for HCE and 70 million for Aspen electric). The
current level of non carbon electric energy purchases/production for the two combined utilities
is approximately 60 million kwh (8 million for HCE and 52 million for Aspen). The 2010 goal
of 45 % non-carbon energy translates to production or purchase of 90 million kwh of
renewables for the combined area, leaving an additional need for approximately 30 million
kwh per year. The planned operation of the Castle Creek plant reduces the un-met need to
approximately 25 million kwh of new renewable energy for the combined utilities on an annual
basis in order to meet the Canary Action Plan goal of 45 % by 2012.
In cooperation with other partners, MEAN is developing a new wind facility that will come on
line on a schedule which fits community wide energy needs as described above.
Approximately 7MW of additional wind energy (4 new wind turbines) could be available to
Aspen. The MEAN wind project would be phased over 3-4 years, such that by 2012, full
output (30 million kwh per year) of the new wind turbines would be available to Aspen for a
20 year contract term. The expected cost of the wind energy is approximately $.055/kwh at the
beginning of the contract term and ramping up to approximately $.065/kwh by the end of the
contract. Final prices are subject to further negotiations with MEAN. Like other wind energy
projects, the potential for future cost increases once the facility is constructed is minimal
because of limiting the exposure to future cost increases for fuel. For comparative purposes,
HCE is currently paying approximately $.055/kwh for energy under its contract with Xcel.
Page 2 of 5
This existing energy source is subject to price volatility due to future fuel costs. Note that a
recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission study projected as much as 50% increases in
gas fired electric power prices in 2008 because of the run up in demand for gas and increases
in petroleum prices generally. In summary, the initial price for wind energy from MEAN is
about the same cost already being paid by HCE for power, without the potential fuel price
volatility.
Taking advantage of the opportunity to acquire additional wind energy from MEAN requires a
creative approach. It would be difficult for Aspen to assimilate this new energy supply as
described above. Similarly HCE can't directly take advantage of this opportunity within the
scope of their existing power supply contract without taking advantage of the "qualified
facility" clause in its contract with Xcel. "Qualified facilities" are defined as generation within
HCE's service territory. All three of Aspen's hydroelectric plants (Ruedi, Maroon Creek and
Castle Creek) meet this definition and could be integrated into HCE's energy supplies within
the scope of their existing Xcel contract. The amount of energy available from these three
plants on an average annual basis closely matches the gap required between existing
community wide renewable energy supplies and the Canary Action Plan goals (gap is 25
million kwh/year and hydro projects produce 25 million kwh/year).
Given the above, staff requests that Council consider: 1) amending its contract with MEAN to
acquire approximately 7MW of new wind energy (annual production estimated at 30 million
kwh) fora 20 year period; and 2) enter into a contract with HCE to sell the output from
Aspen's three hydroelectric facilities (6.5 MW with an annual production of approximately 25
million kwh). Note that the purchase and sales amounts are approximately the same, but do
not match precisely. A portion of the wind energy supply (approximately 5 million kwh/year)
would be available to Aspen's municipal electric customers to supply a portion of expected
load growth over the 20 year contract term.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The financial impacts of the above electric power
exchange agreements is dependent upon the details negotiated in the two contracts described
above. For initial discussion purposes, the proposal is that the contract between Aspen and
HCE would provide that HCE pay all incremental costs necessary for Aspen to purchase an
equivalent supply of replacement wind energy, or approximately $0.055/kwh, escalating to
$0.065/kwh over the life of the 20 year term of the wind energy contract between the City and
MEAN. The initial implications for the municipal Electric Fund is that revenue would increase
by approximately $1,430,000 annually from the sale of hydroelectric power to HCE, while
expenses would increase $1,650,000 due to the wind energy purchases from MEAN. The
initial net cost of the wind energy purchases of approximately $220,000 per year can be
recovered from increased sales to electric customers resulting from load growth or through
increased rates on high use customers as part of the current electric rate study. These expenses
and revenues will be provided to the City's electric rate consultants and incorporated in the
study expected to be completed by August 2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The net effect of the two proposed contracts is that less
coal and natural gas energy will be purchased by HCE and by the City's electric system to
Page 3 of 5
supply their respective customers. Assuming that the sale of (25 million kwh/year) hydropower
to HCE will eliminate cazbon emissions at their average rate of 1.57 lbs COz/kwh, the
emission reductions for the HCE system are expected to be 19,625 tons COz/yeaz. Assuming 5
million kWh of new wind energy is retained by the City for customer growth and an emission
factor for MEAN resources at 1.793 lbs COz/kwh, an additional 4485 tons COz/year would be
avoided, for a total reduction of 24,110 tons COz/year. For comparative purpose the 2004
carbon emission inventory from all sources (electricity, natural gas, ground and air travel, etc.)
was 840,875 tons C02/yeaz. The additional wind energy would therefore represent an overall
reduction in COz emissions of 2.9% within the Aspen area considering all existing sources.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: If Council chooses to accept staff's recommendations
regarding acquisition of new wind energy in cooperation with HCE, the next steps would be to
move forward on contract negotiations with MEAN and HCE. The agreement with MEAN
would be for acquisition of approximately 30 million kwh of new wind energy. The agreement
with MEAN would be for the sale of hydroelectric energy produced at the three (two existing
and one under development) facilities owned by Aspen. Both agreements would have a 20 year
term.
ALTERNATIVES: There aze two methods under consideration by HCE in order to pay for
the cost of the hydroelectric purchase agreement with the City. The first is to deal directly with
a willing customer who would agree to pay for any added costs of the hydroelectric energy
purchased from the City. The second is to establish an assessment district which passes any
added costs [o all HCE customers within the designated area.
The Aspen Skiing Company has expressed an interest in ensuring that the energy they use in
all their enterprises (skiing facilities, hotels, business offices, etc.) in the Aspen -Snowmass
area are driven by directly trackable purchases of renewable energy. They have also expressed
a willingness to pay for any added cost of the renewable energy purchase from HCE. HCE and
Aspen Skiing Company have been invited to the June 16`" work session to report on the status
of their discussions. The Aspen Skiing Company annual energy purchases from HCE total
approximately the same amount as the production from the three hydroelectric plants.
The option of forming a district requires both research into customers willingness to pay and
action by a governmental entity that mandates the delivery of a minimum quantity of renewable
energy within the district's boundaries. If this option is pursued by the parties, HCE has
asked the City to front the cost (approximately $5,000) of a customer survey to determine the
extent of customer willingness to pay. Draft language for the survey has been developed.
Depending on the outcome of the survey, governmental action on the part of Aspen and Pitkin
County may be necessary in order to ensure collection of any costs increase of the renewable
energy purchases through HCE's monthly customer bills.
A final option is with respect to the amount of wind energy to be purchased through MEAN.
The above proposal provides more wind energy than is required to replace the energy to be
sold to HCE by approximately 5 million kwh/year. If Council desires to eliminate any costs to
its electric customers due to the net effect of the two proposed contracts, it could potentially
Page 4 of 5
negotiate with MEAN to acquire only a direct replacement amount for the hydroelectric energy
sold to HCE. In so doing, the City would not have the benefit of increasing renewable energy
supplies to match growth in consumption in its electric service area.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Page 5 of 5
0
0
N
V
Yr
3 ~'
O G
~ U
it w
O ~'
~~ H
w
0
O ~
..r p
v~ p
y ~
.~
W
h
~ ~
~
V
a
F
V
~ W
.~
G. Ley a~i ' C ~ ~ C
H Q d W
u ~ W
~ W
W
Yi
y
0.
M V ~
~ ~ ~ ~ G E
b
h,
H
Y
0 0
~
•O o
O ~ W U c ~
~' G
Q
3 3 chi d
a
h
F' W
J
Q!
~
N
U
ctl
¢
~ ~
U
cyd
~
~ ¢
F a
V ~
~ ~
~ W /
N ~ ~ ~
' ~
V ~ ~ ~
~ ~
W
~ ~ W
~
W ~ /
"
W ~
/ ~
'
~ ~ a
~ i
o
~ N
E t+
~ ~ U
Y d
o
x x
N
ti y
~ ~
C
d
, ~, x
~
~ o~u
~
Q .a U ~ W
x U
~
o
~ .a
W
N U ~ O y ~
C
I
a
i
i
i
i
i
T
b
~ 3 ~
p O ~
~ ~
W
'a.;
b0
d
J Q
> >
U_ ?'
OC ~
H ~
U ~
W ~
J
W A
Z ~
W ~
a ~
~w
¢ti
0
0
N
Cp ~ N
r r ~
'i
O ~ CO
s;;enne6aw
~ N O
U
N
O
Z
U
m
rn
a
~,
N
a
IO
.`
Q
Q
t
U
(0
N
LL
C
t0
s
r
C
O
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner
Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner
RE: Council Work Session -- Aspen Area Community Plan Existing
Conditions Report
DATE OF MEMO: June 11, 2008
MEETING DATE: June 16, 2008, S:OOpm, Council Chambers
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: There is no formal action requested at this time. The purpose of
this meeting is to provide Council an opportunity to provide general comments and feedback on
the Draft Existing Conditions Report.
DISCUSSION: Julie Ann Woods, of Elk Mountains Planning Group, and Chris Cazes, of RRC
Associates, are working with Community Development staff to produce an updated Existing
Conditions Report. This report will be used to educate Aspen community members and visitors
on current trends and capacity of services in the Aspen Area, and will be used in the public
process for the AACP update.
Staff provided a draft of the report to City Council and the Board of County Commissioners for
the June 3, 2008 joint work session. An updated draft is attached to this memo. Minor changes
have been made to the document by staff and referral departments in an effort to ensure accurate
information is included in the report. Specifically, updated information is included in the
Lifelong Aspenite Chapter, in the Storm Water section of the Environmental Quality Section,
and in the form of added ski industry information in the Aspen Idea section. The report attached
to this memo is not si¢nificantly different from the report previouslyprovided, so if Council has
read the previously provided report they do not need to re-read this report.
At the work session, Staff would like to hear from Council on the "big picture" items: are there
any sections missing from the report that should be included, are there any sections that are
difficult to understand, etc.
The document is in a draft stage, so there may be typos, grammatical errors, notes to staff for
follow up, different formatting, etc. These will all be corrected for the final report. Additionally,
Staff continues to fact check the document, and is examining different ways to format the
document to ensure it is an accessible, user friendly report. For these reasons, the final document
may look different than it does today.
Topics included in the AACP Update: The intent is for the AACP to address topics that can
have implications for City and County policies -- but could also invite other local government
agencies and local non-profit groups to be part of the solution. The AACP Update will include
Page I of 2
all of the topics from the 2000 AACP, with some minor modifications. The City's Existing
Conditions Report is also divided into these sections. The topics are outlined in Table 1, below.
The Parks, Open Space and the Environment section will be divided into three different sections,
including, Urban Parks, Open Space and Trails, and Environmental Oualitv. The Arts Culture
& Education section has been renamed Sustaining the Aspen Idea to reflect the historic legacy of
arts, culture, and education in the Aspen Area. As mentioned in previous memos and meetings
with the Council and Commissioners, staff is broadening the AACP Existing Conditions Report
and Public Process to include two new sections. The first is titled The Lifelong Aspenite and is
included to detail the continuum of care provided for residents and visitors from toddlers through
retirees. Sub-topics will include Day Care, Education, Recreational Facilities, Human Services,
Health Care, Emergency Services and Senior Services. The second is titled Philosophy of
Governance which outlines the governmental structure in Aspen. Often community members
assume the City is responsible for many programs and taxes that are actually addressed and
levied by other entities. This section is a sort of "who does what" explanation of government in
Aspen.
Table I: AACP Topics
Topics in 2000 AACP Topics proposed for
2008/2009 AACP Update
Managing Growth -~ Managing Growth
Transportation -~ Transportation
Housing ~ Housing
Economic Sustainability ~ Economic Sustainability
Urban Pazks
Parks, Open Space, and the
Environment ~ Open Space & Trails
Environmental Quality
Historic Preservation -~ Historic Preservation
Design Quality ~ Design Quality
Arts, Culture & Education ~ Sustaining the Aspen Idea
The Lifelong Aspenite
(NEW for Update)
Philosophy of Governance
(NEW for Update)
ATTACHMENTS:
Exr-t[eiT A - 6.11.2008 DRAFT Existing Conditions Report
Page 2 of 2
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
DRAFT
June 11, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.923.9485
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Index
Philosophy of Governance ............................................................................... Draft 3 attached
Economic Sustainability
Affordable Housing
Environmental Quality
Sustaining the Aspen Idea ...................
Growth Management ........................
Sustainable Transportation System
Parks and Open Space.....
Historic Preservation .............................
.................................... Draft 2 attached
.............................. Draft 3 attached
................................ Draft 5 attached
Draft 3 attached
To be completed by others
To be completed by others
Attached (Provided in March)
Draft 3 attached
Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite ....................................
Draft 2 attached
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #3 -Aspen's Governance
June, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
ASPEN'S GOVERNANCE
The City of Aspen is a Home Rule Municipality in Pitkin
County, Colorado. The City also serves as the county seat.
According to 2006 Census Bureau estimates, the
population of the city is 6,365. The city is the commercial
center of the Roaring Fork valley and is located
approximately 200 miles southwest of Denver, Colorado.
The City of Aspen is world renowned for its summer music
and food festivals and its winter skiing on four mountains,
attracting visitors to the community year round. Although
there are just over 6,000 year-round residents, Aspen acts Regional Content Map
more like a large city than a rural community. This is
evidenced by the unique facilities and services within the
city: a world-class opera house, a music school, and a hospital. The City works cooperatively to provide
a number of services, such as fire protection, library, and sanitation services. "Special districts,"
described further below, provide the funding necessary to provide many of the services that local
residents expect. Though often referred to as a "resort," Aspen is first and foremost a "community" to
its residents. In 1970, the City became a Home Rule city to better serve its year-round residents.
Aspen's governance is detailed below, starting with the approval of its home rule charter.
Home Rule Charter. The Charter of the City of Aspen was approved by the voters of the city at a special
election held June 16, 1970. The Charter set forth the future framework of Aspen's municipal
government related to general council procedures, initiative and referendum powers of the people, city
administration guidelines, legal and judiciary appointments, municipal boards and commissions, city
finances, municipal borrowing procedures, public utilities, taxation powers, miscellaneous legal
provisions, and transition procedures. The Charter vests the people of Aspen with every political power
permitted to any home rule community under the Constitution of the State of Colorado.
Council-Manager Form of Government. Under the provisions of the Charter, a
basic council-manager form of government was established. The City is governed
by four councilmen and a mayor. All councilmen and the mayor are nominated
and elected at large from the entire City. The mayor also presides at council
meetings and possesses full voting powers of a councilman. The other four
~" councilmen are elected at large for four-year over-lapping terms. A majority of the
council (two councilmen and the mayor) are elected every two years, thereby
ensuring continuity of government with maximum political responsiveness to the
Mayor Mick Ireland voters. The mayor is recognized as the head of the city government for all
ceremonial and legal purposes.
Qualifications. Each councilman and the mayor must be an elector of the City when nominated and
elected, a citizen of the United States, and a resident of the City of Aspen for at least one (1) year. No
councilman or the mayor can be a salaried employee of the City during his term of office or perform
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -1
Conditions Report- DRAET 6/11/2008
personal services for the City for which he is compensated. The members of the council and Mayor do
receive compensation for their services.
Meetings. The City Council meets the 2nd and 4`" Mondays of each month. Below are the terms of
Aspen's current council:
Name Date Elected Term Expires
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor June 2007 June 2009
Dwayne Romero June 2007 June 2011
Steve Skadron June 2007 June 2011
Jack Johnson June 2005 June 2009
J.E. DeVilbiss June 2005 June 2009
Citv Manager. The council is the policy-determining body of the municipal government and is vested
with full legislative powers. The executive power is vested in the City Manager who is appointed by and
serves at the pleasure of the council. The manager is responsible to the council for the proper
administration of all affairs of the City placed in his charge. The organizational chart provided in the
appendix indicates the departments managed by the City Manager, Steve Barwick.
City Attornev. The city attorney is the legal representative of the City and advises the council and City
officials in matters relating to their official powers and duties. The council appoints a city attorney to
serve at the pleasure of council. The attorney must be an attorney-at-law admitted to practice in
Colorado. John Worcester is the City Attorney.
Municipal Judge. The city staffs a municipal court that is vested with exclusive jurisdiction of all criminal
and traffic causes arising under the ordinances of the city. The municipal court is presided over, and its
functions exercised by a judge appointed by the council for a specified term of no less than two (2)
years. The municipal judge must be an attorney-at-law admitted to practice in the State of Colorado.
Currently, Brooke Peterson serves as the Municipal Judge.
City Clerk. The City Clerk is responsible for maintaining public records, providing support activities to the
city manager and council, and managing municipal elections. The City Clerk is Kathryn Koch.
Municipal Elections. The biennial municipal election is set on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in
May. The Charter provides that all elections are to be non-partisan. An Election Commission ensures
that fair elections are conducted in accordance with the Colorado Municipal Election Law. Though
electronic voting is used in Aspen, the voting still results in paper ballots, a process certified by the State
of Colorado. Between 4,700 and 5,300 people are registered to vote, and approximately 2,000 residents
actually vote in the municipal elections.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance-2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Municipal Powers. The City has all of the powers granted to municipal corporations and to cities by the
constitution and general laws of the State of Colorado. The City may acquire property within and
without its corporate limits for any City purpose, by purchase, gift, lease, or condemnation, and may
sell, lease, mortgage, hold, manage, and control such property as its interests may require; and, except
as prohibited by the constitution of Colorado or restricted by the Charter. In addition, the City may
exercise all municipal powers, functions, rights and privileges, including the following:
Franchises and Utilities. The City has the right to construct, purchase, or condemn any public
utility, work or way. All powers concerning the granting, amending, revoking, or otherwise
dealing in franchises are exercised by the council.
Eminent domain. The City has the right to eminent domain as provided by the State of Colorado
constitution and statutes.
Authoritv to levy taxes. The council may levy and collect taxes for municipal purposes including
general ad valorem property taxes. It may also levy and collect special assessments for local
improvements. However, no income tax, sates tax or excise tax can be levied until such tax is
approved by the majority of the electors voting at a regular or special election.
Authoritv to borrow monev. The City may borrow money and issue the following securities to
evidence such borrowing:
(a) Short-term notes;
(b) General obligation bonds;
(c) Revenue bonds; and
(d) Local improvement bonds.
Limitation of Indebtedness. The City may not become indebted for any purpose in an amount which,
including existing indebtedness, exceeds twenty (20) percent of the assessed valuation of the taxable
property within the City, as shown by the last preceding assessment.
Restrictions on the Sale or Chance in Use of
Prooertv. The Council cannot sell, exchange or
dispose of public buildings, utilities or real property
in use for public purposes, including real property
acquired for open space purposes, without first
obtaining the approval of a majority of the electors.
Additionally, the City Council cannot permit the
change in use of any real property acquired for open
space purposes, other than for recreational,
agricultural or underground easement purposes,
without first obtaining the approval of a majority of
the electors.
There is a specific requirement that limits changes of
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance - 3
Aspen Open Space
Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
use of property acquired for open space purposes. Open space cannot be sold, exchanged, disposed of,
or converted to other uses other than for recreational, agricultural or underground easement purposes,
unless such open space is replaced with other open space property of equivalent or greater value as of
the date of the sale or conversion. The City Council must consider the monetary, environmental and
aesthetic values of such a decision, by resolution following a public hearing.
Relationship to Pitkin County and the Aspen-Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA). The purpose of
the Aspen-Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) is to assist the City and County in effecting the
planning, financing, acquisition, construction, development, maintenance, management, and operation
of affordable housing projects. The Authority is a political jurisdiction, separate from both the City and
County, but the executive director is responsible for any duties assigned to him or her by the City
Manager. An annual work program is submitted by the executive director to both the City Manager and
County Manager for review. Though the City of Aspen is the primary funding source for most affordable
housing projects, occasionally, Aspen and Pitkin County jointly fund housing projects through the
Housing Authority.
The Housing Authority (APCHA) reviews an annual work plan approved by the Board of Directors, which
is composed of five persons-two appointed by the City, two appointed by the County, and the fifth
person jointly named by the City and County. The Housing Authority Board acts as work-force housing
advocates by representing the views and perspectives of the larger communities of the City and County
and translating those views and perspectives into concrete recommendations to the City and County.
For day-to-day operations of the Housing Office and any questions regarding renting, owning, or
compliance, the Office staff can be reached at 970-920-5050. The Housing Office is located at 530 E.
Main St., Suite LL in Aspen.
Boards and Commissions. The City Council makes appointments to all boards and commissions. The
appendix provides a summary of the roles of the City's boards and commissions, eligibility requirements,
meeting times, membership and terms.
Taxing Districts. The County Assessor's office is responsible for the valuation and assessment of all
taxable real and personal property in Pitkin County. The tax levies which determine a household's
property tax bill are set by the tax levying boards of the local community college, the school, the County,
the City, and fire, water and sanitation districts. These boards and taxing entities establish their budgets
and proposed levies in the fall of each year at budget hearings.
Below are the formulas and methods the Assessor uses in determining one's Property Tax bill:
Actual Value x Assessment Rate =Assessed Value
Example: $1,344,720x7.96%=$186,640
Assessed Value x Mill Levy =Property Tax Bill
Example: $186,640 x 0.0399 = $6,157.25
Assessed value for commercial and undeveloped residential property is 29% of actual value. Assessed
value for residential property is currently (2007) 7.96% of actual value. The actual value for residential
Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
property is set to the market value of the property as of June 30th of the prior year. For commercial
property the actual value is set by taking into consideration comparable sales, construction costs,
depreciation, and the income approach to value. Since 1982 the Gallagher Amendment to the state
constitution has specified that developed residential property carry 45% of the property tax burden
statewide and non-residential property carry 55%. This is implemented by keeping the assessment rate
for commercial and undeveloped residential property constant at 29% of actual value while varying the
residential assessment rate. Residential property growth in the state has exceeded commercial growth
since 1982, and consequently the residential assessment rate has consistently fallen from 21% to its
current level of 7.96%. This has increased the tax burden on individual commercial properties while
reducing it on individual residential properties.
A property owner in the City of Aspen receives an annual tax statement that is paid in two parts: the
first payment is due by February 28th and the second by April 30`". A breakdown of the tax mill levy for
each district and municipality for 2008 is provided in the following table.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -5
Conditions Report-DRAFT
6/11/2008
TaxingDistricts (xAssessetlValue=Prop Tax) GeneralPUrpgSe
Aspen School District 8.62 Schools
City of Aspen 6.07 Municipal Services
Colorado Mountain College 4 Community College
Pitkin County 3.86 County Services
Open Space & Trails 3.76 Open Space Acquisition
Pitkin County Library 1.63 Library Services
Aspen Fire Protection District 1.52 Fire Protection Services
Aspen Valley Hospital 1.28 Medical Services
Healthy Community Fund 0.5 Health 8 Human Services and Non-Profits
Aspen Histodc District 0.3 Historic Site maintenance and Education
Aspen Ambulance District 0.28 Ambulance Service
Colorado River Water Conservation District 0.25 Water Quality Services
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District 0.17 Sewers
Qualifying senior citizens, surviving spouses of a previously qualified senior and qualifying 100% disabled
veterans may get property tax exemptions. For those who qualify, 60% of the first $200,000 of actual
value of their primary residence is exempted. The state pays the exempted portion of the property tax.
The application period is January 1 through July 15 of each year. For further information, contact the
Assessors office or visit their website at www.aspenpitkin.com/assessor.
Each municipality and district has its own boundaries where the taxes are assessed. The map included
in the appendix indicates the jurisdictions of the various taxing districts in the Aspen area.
Contact information and websites
The City Manager can be reached at 970-920-5212.
The City Clerk can be reached at 970-920-5060.
The City Attorney can be reached at 970-920-5055.
Municipal Court can be reached at 970-429-2681.
The municipal code and charter can be viewed at:
http ~//www.aspe n p itki n.com /d epts/38/citycode.cfm
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance - 6
H
L
W
H
X
D
Z
W
a
d
Q
r
r
V
m
C
O
Y
A
N_
C
A
m
C
d
d
N
Q
W
0
M
u
a
0
m
c
c
m
n
c
q
C
J
O
Y
W
071
N
m
V
O
Q
v
c
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
City of Aspen and Sanitation Districts
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance-8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Pitkin County Library District
s
~
~ ~ ~
~
.
~C"3t
g h ~
9~
" n
rv -:-k
t
=E
~`=
u
-V '~ ~ 1 ~ Z i.: I
T
~av
.
. r'~ K :.rS:
~~ v
j
~ N
"!" 'e 2 ff r~l "'
® H ..
h~~'i ~,M~.,
9
}s $~
t
v
h '
~
d.~~~
.
i 3
y,
~ x5?~. ~'~
~'krrc-
'~`
S
y4 T~.
~
k3 t ~" " ,~
}'
a
•
5 fy
+=5
.
+..
Legend
County Boundary N
- City Boundaries
Highway
® Major Road
Pitkin COUnty Library o 2.5 5 10 15 20
Miles
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance-9
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Aspen School and Historic Districts
_~
~.,~
n
~..,
~ F; :~.~
j~'~.n~..asr~.~s-. y,
~~
Legend '*~,~r
:: County Boundary N
- City Boundaries
Highway
---= Major Road
Aspen School District and Historic District o 2.5 5 to is 20
Miles
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group ~ Governance-10
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Aspen Fire, Ambulance and Hospital Districts
..'f Y
~" - A~ ~ 'YvW~a "4
v .
~ '~
,~
<~~rG
4 C ~ L ~R
t~ ,
~
~
q•
.
Y'
d
~ ~
~
r ~ r
'
. 5 Y+ a.. .eia'F ..A
l `fit X~1. ~,
€ - x %
; ~
a ~t 2
Gr:e
~
"
l .
S ~t
~ 4 y
~'~td
tit
~'4~ a d 3W ~i." Y.Y
4ix x"
i is
F ~
2 r F*
~
`~
'~ t
Legend ";~
~~ r
x
b "
County Boundary r
~
-~ ~
,
-City Boundaries
Highway ~)
Major Road
Aspen Fire District
Aspen Ambulance Distdct
Aspen Hospital Dist rict 0 2.5 5 10 15 p
Miles
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -11
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Summary of Boards and Commissions
Board of Adjustment
Must be a city resident to be a member. Review
and decide variances to land use regulations
including dimensional requirements and
permitted uses. To hear and decide appeals from
the denial of variance applications by the Planning
and Zoning Commission or the Historic
Preservation Commission.
Meetings: Thursdays 4:00 p.m.
Terms: 4 year terms
Members: 5 regular members, 2 alternates
Historic Preservation Commission
Must be a city resident to be a member. To
recognize, protect and promote the retention and
use of landmarks and landmark districts in the city
and to promote awareness of Aspen's unique
heritage. The HPC makes recommendations on
historic designations, historic inventory updates,
demolition and/or rebuilding on a historically
designated site.
Meetings: 2nd and 4th Wednesdays 5:00 p.m
Terms: 4 year terms
Members: 7 regular members, 1 alternate
Name Date Elected Term Expires
Charles Paterson, Vice Mar 1971 Dec 2007
Rick Head, Chair Oct 1982 Dec 2007
Mark Hesselschwerdt Nov 2000 Feb 2009
Peter McClain Feb 2005 Feb 2009
Jag Pagnucco Feb 2005 Feb 2009
Name Date Appointed Term Expires
Michael Hoffman, Jan 2005 Jan 2009
Chairperson
Sarah Broughton, Vice- Sept 2007 Sept 2011
chair
Alison Agley Aug 2005 Aug 2009
Brian McNellis Oct 2006 Oct 2010
Jay Matlin Sept 2007 Sept 2011
Ann Mullins Sept 2007 Sept 2011
Nora Berko Sept 2007 Sept 2011
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance-12
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
liquor License Authority
Must be a city resident to be a member. To grant or Name Date Appointed Term Expires
refuse licenses, to conduct investigations required gill Murphy, Chair June 1994 Aug 2010
bylaw and to levy penalties against licensees; to
promulgate rules and regulations concerning the Peler Helbum, Vice June 1994 June 2010
procedures for hearings before it. JeH Wertz, Alternate Jan 2005 Jan 2009
Meetings: First Tuesday Steven Goldenberg Dec 2001 Dec 2009
Terms: 4 year terms with a 2 consecutive term limit Lawrence Winnerman Dec 2001 Dec 2009
Members: 5 regular members, 1 alternate
Gary Esary
April 1996
Aug 2010
Planning and Zoning
Must be a city resident to be a member. Initiate Name Date Appointed Term Expires
land use code amendments; reviews final
LJ Erspamer, Chair
Feb 2007
Feb 2011
development plans for planned unit development
and specially planned areas; designation of an H, Stan Gibbs, Vice- Sept 2007 Feb 2011
Historic Overlay District; review and approve Chair
conditional uses, special review, development in Brian Speck Jan 2005 Jan 2009
environmentally sensitive areas, and growth
management applications. JimDeFrancia Sept 2007 Sept 2011
Dina Bloom Sept 2007 Feb 2011
Meetings: 1st and 3rd Tuesday Cliff Weiss Sept 2007 Feb 2011
Terms: 4 year terms
Members: 7 regular members, 1 alternate Mike Wampler Sept 2007 Feb 2011
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance-13
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Commercial Core and Lodging Commission (CCLC)
Need NOT be a city resident to be a member.
Makes recommendations on circulation, parking,
sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, signing, graphics,
alley improvements, malls; recommends methods
of funding these programs; develops incentives for
participation in these programs and reviews
programs that groups may sponsor to promote the
commercial core.
Meetings: 1st and 3rd Wed. at 8:30 a.m.
Terms: 4 year terms
Members: 7 regular members
Election of chair and vice-chair first meeting in
January.
Wheeler Opera House Board
Need NOT be a city resident to be a member.
Advises City Council with the planning and
management of the daily and long-term
operations of the Wheeler Opera House including
scheduling policy, priorities and rates for theatre
and commercial operations.
Meetings: 1st Wed. 4:00 p.m. at the Wheeler
Opera House
Terms: 3 year terms
Members: 7 regular members
Name Date Appointed Term Ezpires
Terry Butler, Chair Feb 1997 Jan 2011
Shae Singer, Vice-
chair Jan 2005 Jan 2011
Bill Dinsmoor April 1993 Dec 2010
John Stan April 1996 Dec 2010
Mark Goodman Dec 2003 Dec 2010
Don Sheeley Jan 2005 Jan 2011
Fred Ayarza Dec 2007 Dec 2011
Roger Haneman Dec 2007 Dec 2011
Name Date Appointed Term Expires
Ron Erickson July 2009
Pam Cunningham Aug 2001 Feb 2008
Brian O'Neil Aug 2002 Dec 2008
Cathy Markle Sept 2007 Sept 2010
Jane Battaglia Dec 2005 Dec 2008
Barbara Conviser Sept 2007 Sept 2010
Sarah Schultz, HS Rep Sept 2007 Sept 2008
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -14
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Housing Authority Board
MUST be a city resident to be a member. Makes
recommendations on housing guidelines, Name Date Appointed Term Eupirea
affordable housing action plans, any affordable Patrick Jones, City
housing master plans adopted by the city; reviews Director Feb 2007 2010
specific development proposals initiated by the
City or County; assists the city and county to Sherie Sanzone, Ciry
Director Jan 2003 2007
define the need, planning, undertaking,
construction, operation or financing of low, Marsha Goshom, July 2001 July 2010
moderate and middle income housing; assists the County Director
city and county, upon request, to purchase, Kristin Sable, County April 2004 Apri12008
acquire, obtain, options, hold, lease, sell or Director
otherwise dispose of any real or personal Ron Erickson, Jt. March 2005 Apri12009
property; and enforces all aspects of the
affordable housing program.
Meetings: 1st and 3rd Wed. at 5:00 p.m.
Terms: 2 year terms
Members: 7 regular members, 2 alternates: 1 city and 1 county
Open Space Acquisition Baard
Must be a city resident. Review open space
elements of comprehensive master and areas plans
including the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and
the City of Aspen Greenfrastructure Plan. Establish
relationships with local and regional governments
and trusts to more effectively discharge Board
responsibilities. Recommends acquisition of fee
interests in real property by expenditures for the
Open Space Fund.
Name Date Appointed Term Expires
Howie Mallory April 2006 Sept 2010
Fred Peirce Oct 2006 Oct 2010
Jesse Boyce 2004 Sept 2008
Arthur Ferguson July 2006 Sept 2010
Chadie Eckart Sept 2007 Sept 2011
Philip Jeffreys, Alternate Sept 2007 Sept 2011
Meetings: Meetings take place four times per annum.
Terms: 4 year terms
Members: 5 regular members, 1 alternate
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Governance -15
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #2 -Economics
June 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRCAssociates, Inc.
303.449.6658
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2005
ECONOMICS
Overview and recent history of Asoen economv. Shortly after approval of the 2000 AACP (and even
earlier, in winter months), Aspen/Pitkin County entered an economic slowdown that was marked by job
losses, declining retail and lodging sales, reduced real estate sales, reduced skier visits, and a sense of
declining downtown vibrancy. The slowdown was driven in part by broader national and regional
economic trends, including the bursting of the Internet/stock market bubble, the 2001 recession, a
slowdown in travel after 9/11, a period of drought and low snow years, and changing tourist
demographics. Local factors, such as increased competition from other resorts, an aging lodging base,
and a restrictive regulatory climate, may have also contributed to the slowdown. In part in response to
the sluggish economy, but primarily due a desire to steer development towards infill sites, reinvigorate
downtown vitality, and spur reinvestment in the lodging sector, selected provisions of the land use code
were relaxed and/or revised in 2003 through 2005 to encourage redevelopment in Aspen.
Aspen's economy began to rebound in 2004 and grew sharply in 2005, 2006, and (in some sectors) 2007,
with dramatically higher real estate sales, retail and lodging sales, and construction activity. Due to
concern that some new projects were inconsistent with the goals and vision of the AACP, a temporary
moratorium on new development approvals in several zoning districts was passed in 2006 (Ordinance
19, series 2006). Subsequently, zoning regulations applicable to those districts were revised and
generally made more restrictive.
In 2007 and into 2005, the Aspen economy was still robust, albeit exhibiting signs of plateauing or
slowing in the real estate sector and in overall employment and retail sales. At the same time, the
broader national economy was experiencing an economic slowdown, marked by sluggish GDP growth,
mortgage and credit crises, the bursting of the housing bubble, plunging consumer confidence, rising
energy prices, and slowing national travel (e.g. decreased enplanements and lodging occupancy rates).
In one bright spot, a weak US dollar bolstered international travel to the US, a pattern which benefited
the Rocky Mountain resort industry, including Aspen. Going forward, the extent and nature in which
these trends in the national business cycle will influence the Aspen economy in the near term future
remains to be seen.
In addition to cyclical fluctuations, Aspen's economy has also undergone structural change in recent
years, particularly with a shift to a stronger second home/real estate/construction emphasis, even as
traditional tourism (lodging, skiing, special events, etc.) remains a critical contributor to the economy.
In summary, Aspen's resort economy has performed well in recent years, rebounding from its 2001-03
slowdown. The economy also appears to have sustainable long-term competitive advantages on which
to build in the future. At the same time, subject to balance with other community objectives,
opportunities may exist to strengthen Aspen's economy further, and enable it to better serve both
tourists and residents. Further study is being undertaken and/or may be needed to better clarify the
nature of these potential opportunities and the strategies which might be used to bring about desired
change.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability -1
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Structural shifts in the Aspen economy. Some notable shifts in the Aspen economy in recent years
include the following:'
• Maturation of the ski industry and its participants.
• Shift from sole reliance on ski and visitor expenditures toward a more diversified economy that
relies on real estate activity, construction, and a growing retired orsemi-retired community.
• General shift to upper end consumer, second homeowners and repeat customers.
• Shift in retail climate to higher-end offerings and less shopping selection for locals.
• General shift of residence for the "working class" to downvalley locations.
• Growth in "Aspen locals" choosing to shop down valley.
• Renewed vigor of the Aspen non-profit and cultural institutions.
• A general trend to "resort suburbanization", in which the physical spread of resort influences
has widened, creating a downvalley suburbanization with multiple communities many miles
apart participating in the resort economy. As this has occurred at resorts across the West, the
core resort town has typically begun to specialize, with a focus on brand name/image, and
tourist accommodations and retail. Meanwhile, nearby support towns and downvalley
influence areas have typically specialized in providing workforce housing, local retail,
industrial/commercial space, golf communities, etc.
Kev strengths of the Aspen economy. Aspen's economy has several identified strengths:Z
• Longstanding, international reputation as a year-round destination resort.
• World class outdoor recreational amenities.
• Outstanding natural beauty.
• Diverse, well-funded cultural amenities.
• Robust non-profit sector.
• Small town character and charm.
• Geographic location which is remote, but serviced by a close-in airport, and access via four-lane
highway 50 miles from I-70.
• Mature, aggressive affordable housing program.
• Highly educated workforce.
• Large proportion of unearned income (derived from sources other than the local economy)
which can act as an economic stabilizer.
• Highly functional downtown layout which is comfortable for pedestrians and provides easy
connections to lodging properties and the ski mountain.
Kev issues in the Aspen economy. As Aspen's economy has grown, ebbed, and evolved over time, key
issues of concern have changed as well. In general, however, primary focus has been on ensuring that
Aspen fosters a "healthy, vibrant, year-round economy that supports the Aspen area community,i3 in
balance with other community and environmental values. In studies and analyses conducted since the
' "Aspen Retail Analysis', 2003; BBC Research and Consulting; "Report and recommendations of the Economic
Sustainability Committee", September 2002.
~ "Report and recommendations ofthe Economic Sustainability Committee", September 2002; "2001 City of Aspen
Economic Benchmark Report", Rural Planning Institute; "Aspen Retail Analysis', 2003; BBC Research and
Consulting.
' 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan, Economic Sustainability chapter, p. 31.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
2000 AACP, the issues listed below have at various times been identified.` Because of ongoing changes
in the Aspen economy, however, it should be noted that the nature and extent of several of these
economic issues may have changed, and their relative importance may have shifted. As such, an
updated economic assessment, perhaps as part of the Aspen economic history study currently being
undertaken by Economic Research Associates, maybe warranted, to better clarify issues and
opportunities in the Aspen economy.
• Retail sales leakai:e and low multiplier effect: The 2002 ad-hoc Aspen Economic Sustainability
Committee found that the Aspen/Pitkin County economy "has a low multiplier effect, with
income flowing out quickly because we lack a broad-based and complete range of economic
sectors ... There are several factors that cause the leakage of sales out of our local market area
and diminish the recirculation of dollars spent in the economy. These include the downvalley
location of construction companies/contractors and consumer shopping opportunities, the fact
that a significant number of employees do not live and spend money in Aspen, and the presence
of corporate owned retail facilities whose profits are extracted from the local economy."
While leakage of sales and business activity downvalley is undoubtedly still occurring, the nature
and extent of the outflow, and the degree to which Aspen can or might even want to host new
locally serving commercial infrastructure, have not been systematically studied.
Downtown vitality: The "2003 Aspen Retail Analysis", by BBC Consulting, investigated the
nature, causes, and solutions for a perceived lack of vitality and vibrancy of downtown Aspen at
that time. Identified symptoms of lost vitality included declining retail sales, a loss of unique
stores, too much focus on high-end stores, a lack of entertainment and declining nightlife, a lack
of incubator space for startups, high vacancies and rents, and too many ground floor real estate
offices. The study identified a variety of national, regional, and local trends contributing to
these trends, and recommended a variety of public and private sector initiatives to reverse
undesired patterns.
Since 2003, Aspen's retail sector has experienced a strong recovery, as measured by retail ales
volume. However, the degree to which other measures of downtown vitality (vacancies, store
diversity, etc.) have improved has not been documented, and may potentially warrant further
study.
• Affordable housing=. and workforce availability: As documented more fully in the Housing
chapter, affordable housing and workforce availability in Aspen and the Roaring Fork valley are
tight. To the extent that Aspen has difficulty attracting sufficient workers due to housing
shortages and a high cost of living, service and capacity levels could be impacted, limiting the
potential for economic growth.
Traffic congestion: Ta the extent that traffic congestion imposes time and monetary costs on
businesses and employees, particularly as downvalley commuting and supply linkages increase,
alleviation of traffic congestion may have a beneficial effect in workforce recruitment and
retention and business productivity and efficiency.
• Lod¢ing=, revitalization and chance; growth of timeshares: The September 2002 Economic
Sustainability Committee found that "Aspen has a deteriorating lodging and tourist facilities
inventory ... Not only has the number of available rooms decreased greatly, but also remaining
° See, for example, "Report and recommendations ofthe Economic Sustainability Committee', September 2002;
"2001 City of Aspen Economic Benchmark Report", Rural Planning Institute; "Aspen Retail Analysis", 2003; BBC
Research and Consulting.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 3
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
facilities are not perceived by the visitor as offering appropriate value for their pricing. Lodging
owners and potential developers do not perceive a sufficient return on investment to improve
existing facilities and develop new ones"
Since 2002, some lodges have been redeveloped (e.g. Christiana, Annabelle Inn, Limelight),
others have been built (e.g. Hyatt Grand), and numerous projects are under construction or
moving through approval stages. As such, the lodging sector has seen significant development
activity since September 2002, although some of the observations of the Economic
Sustainability Community may still apply on a more limited basis, particularly regarding
affordability and value relative to quality of accommodations.
Additionally, it should be noted a significant number of new and proposed projects have been
timeshare/fractional interest developments, and questions have been raised as to the economic
and fiscal contribution to the community of timeshare/fractional developments relative to
conventional rental lodging.
• Air access: The September 2002 Economic Sustainability Committee found that "the availability
of air access is too limited to support an appropriate level of tourism. There is a lack of
competition, caused in part by the inability of the airport to serve the current types of regional
aircraft used by other potential carriers."
Again, significant change has occurred since 2002. The Airport has installed improved flight
guidance technology, undertook runway rehabilitation in spring 2007, and is also now in the
midst of studying the potential for runway expansions Additionally, Frontier has begun serving
the Airport, in addition to United and Delta/Skywest. As such, while air access remains a critical
issue for the tourism economy, steps have been taken to address air service challenges.
Structure of the Aspen/Pitkin County economy -economic base analysis. Pitkin County's economy can
be broken down into three components: the direct basic sector, indirect basic sector, and local resident
services sector. Insight on the fundamental structure of the Aspen/Pitkin economy can come from an
understanding of these three sectors and how they relate to each together.
• The "direct basic" sector includes those industries which derive their sales or income from
sources outside of Pitkin County (such as tourism). As such, those industries are largely
responsible for the overall growth of the economy. Growth in the direct basic sector of the
economy tends to stimulate growth in the indirect basic and local resident services sectors as
well.
• The "indirect basic" sector provide supplies or business services to basic industries. Examples
include wholesalers providing food to restaurants; laundry services for hotels; etc.
• The "local resident services" sector is that segment of the economy supported by the purchases
of local employees, who spend their income in the local economy. Examples include sales to
local residents by grocery stores, general merchandise stores, auto repair shops, etc.
As illustrated in Figure 1 to follow, of the 21,588 jobs in Pitkin County in 2006, an estimated 62 percent
were in the "direct basic" sector, 14 percent were in the "indirect basic" sector, and 24 percent were in
the "local resident services" sector, according to the Colorado State Demographer.
Analysts have noted that the local resident services sector in Pitkin County is comparatively small
relative to the size of the direct and indirect basic sectors. This is a reflection of the fact that Pitkin
s See documents for Runway Extension Supplemental Planning Project at www.asoenairoortolannina.com.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability -4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFr 6/11/2008
County exists in the context of the larger Roaring Fork valley economy. Viewing the local economy as a
regional entity, it is apparent that much of the local resident services sector of the regional economy is
located downvalley from Pitkin County, consistent with the downvalley leakage noted previously.b
FIGURE 1
Pitkin CountyJobs by Sector, 2006
Source: Colorado State Demographer.
Within the "direct basic" sector, tourism (inclusive of second homes) is the dominant industry,
accounting for 68 percent of direct basic jobs (Figure 2 to follow). As such, tourism is the primary engine
of the Pitkin County economy. Of the 68 percent of direct basic jobs attributable to tourism, an
estimated 39 percent are attributable to "resort" activity (lodging, recreation, restaurants/bars), 19
percent are attributable to second home construction and real estate, B percent are attributable to
tourist services (primarily retail stores and personal services), and 2 percent are attributable to tourist
transportation. Trends in the health and dynamics of these sectors strongly influence the growth and
character of the Pitkin County economy overall, and are discussed in more detail later in this chapter.
Also contributing to the economic base of Pitkin County are regional center /national services (e.g.
business, education and health services), government', households with outside income (e.g. retirees,
households with dividend /interest /rental income, etc.)e, and a small amount of manufacturing,
mining, and agribusiness activity.
c City of Aspen Economic Benchmark Report 2001, Rural Planning Institute.
Includes state and federal government. Additionally, a portion of local government in Pitkin County is considered
a base industry in the Colorado State Demographer's framework, since it requires a larger number of police, fire,
etc. per capita than many other counties in Colorado as a result of the tourist population it serves.
e Jobs attributable to the spending of households with outside income is understated since it the figure nets out
local resident services jobs supported by the spending of workers commuting to work in Pitkin County. Pitkin
Lounty employs a significant number of commuters, who primarily spend their earnings within their County of
residence and not in Pitkin County.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 5
Conditions Report -DRAFT
FIGURE 2
Pitkin County "Basic" Jobs by Detailed Sector, 2006
Manufacturing,
Households with mining, agribusiness
outside income 3%
8% ~
Regional Center/Natl
Services
13%
Tour
Government
8%
13,2391obs
a :. ~as~v`~,r
~? i 5, i Fv
A~ . ,
/a~t~? Total Tourism lobs
ism: t~v_.ar'"6,996 Jobs (66%oi basic jobs)
2%
Tourism: Tourist
services (mostly
retailers and personal
services)
8%
~4 ~j..t:t~::u5~
Tourism: Second home
construction and real
estate
19%
Tourism: Resorts,
recreation, lodging &
eating/drinking
39%
6/11/2005
Source: Colorado State Demographer, "Economic Base Analysis',
http://dola.colorado.ROV/demon webapps/economic base analysis; supplemented by unpublished data provided
by personal communication with State Demographer's office.
Aspen dominance of Pitkin County economv. The Aspen area accounts for a dominant share of the
overall Pitkin County economy. Establishments located in Aspen zip codes account for approximately 73
percent of Pitkin County jobs covered by unemployment insurance on an annual average basis. (An
additional 15 percent are in Snowmass Village, 7 percent in Basalt, and 5 percent elsewhere or
unassigned.)9 Additionally, Aspen accounted fora 66.6 percent share of total 2006 state taxable retail
sales in Pitkin County. As such, economic trends noted in this report regarding Pitkin County as a whole
can in many cases be assumed to apply to Aspen as well, given Aspen's dominant presence in the
County's economy.
Emplovment Growth trends since 2000. Overall, Pitkin County jobs are estimated to have grown by 7
percent over the 2001- 06 period, based on estimates by the Colorado State Demographer (Figure 3 to
follow).
Looking at jobs by sector, above-average job growth has been experienced by administrative and
support services (up 63 percent; in part reflecting growth in temporary help services), the real estate
sector (up 32 percent), and "other services" sector (up 32 percent, due to growth in repair/maintenance
services, personal and laundry services, membership organizations and associations, and private
household employment).
' Colorado Department of Labor and Employment: QCEW Pitkin County Employer Address Files, July 2006 -June
2007; RRC Associates.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 6
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Job losses have been incurred in construction (-17 percent, likely due to the downvalley migration of
construction firms, rather than a drop in construction activity in Pitkin County, as discussed in the next
section), accommodations (-il percent), retail trade (-9 percent), and food services & drinking places (-5
percent).
These shifts in the makeup of Pitkin Countyjobs appear to indicate a growing real estate and service
economy (as noted earlier in this chapter), and slippage or restructuring in some sectors of the
traditional tourism economy.
FIGURE 3
Pitkin County Jobs by Industry Sector, 2006 vs. 2001
3,000
2,500
,,, 2,000
d 1,500
a
E
Z 1,000
500
0
a,`o~ lea a`yd' c~cAQ ~ ,A use e~~ Goz~` a~c.0~ ~cbSO 0~y°' \S5e a° Sao
~~°s ey~~z eaVCO ~'"~0 'DJ~ c'~~, ~C~aaO Fec\ a~ec ~~c P~~s e~~e v~~~s cP~~~o ores
~~a~e ec~ac ao PAP e~Q~ ? oa Sao ~p,2 .~c~
0 0
05 c\¢~`c~y~\~ya ~aV,ea~ ~+~Q\Q~.p \oca~cao Q
~0 ~~ Pa~\cy ~`~y Q`o~mSs
O~`
70%
60%
50°~
m
0
40°k
30°k „~°,
d
20°h ~
z
10% ~
0% g
d
a
-10°h
-20%
-30%
Source: Colorado State Demographer; RRC Associates.
`Retail trade employment for 2006 suppressed; estimated by RRC Associates based on trend in gCEW retail
employment.
Associates & EIk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 7
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Real estate sector. Economic activity associated with real estate is broken down into several sub-
categories:
Transaction-based activity (e.g. sales and marketing, legal, financial, etc.)
• Construction-based activity (e.g. planning, design, construction, etc.)
• Ongoing maintenance and support (e.g. interior and exterior maintenance, security, etc.)10
As an indicator of transaction activity, real estate sales volume in Pitkin County has grown dramatically
over the 2000-07 period, reflecting an active real estate market and appreciating property values (Figure
4 below). Aggregate sales volume (measured in dollars) more than doubled between 2003 ($1.13
billion) and 2006 ($2.64 billion). Consistent with this growth (albeit lagging in total increase), Pitkin
County real estate employment rose by 32 percent over the 2001-06 period, as noted previously.
A significant share of Pitkin County and Aspen transaction volume is related to residential property sales,
particularly second homes. The growth of second home demand has been fueled by national and
international economic and demographic trends, including the growth of high net worth households, the
movement of baby boomers into and through their prime second home buying years, and favorable
federal tax policies."
FIGURE 4
Dollar Volume of Pitkin County Property Sales, 2000 - 07
$3.0 $z.6a
$z.sz
.n $2.5 $z.24
c
O
.m $2~~ $1.60
v
~ $1.5 $1.30 $1.13
o $0.99 $1.06
~ $1.0
m
o $0.5
$0.0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Land Title Aspen. Includes all property types (residential, timeshare, commercial, vacant land,
etc.).
10 "Aspen Retail Analysis",January 2003, BBC Research and Consulting.
i' "The New Housing Crisis: Causes and Effects", Mayor Mick Ireland, September 2007. At
http://www.aspenpitki n.com/pdfs/depts/45/MayorHousing. pdf
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
As noted earlier, and as illustrated in Table 1 below, construction employment at firms located in Pitkin
County is estimated to have slipped 16.6 percent between 2001 and 2006. However, over the same
time period, construction employment at firms located in Garfield County is estimated to have jumped
16.9 percent. Construction employment in Pitkin and Garfield Counties combined is estimated to have
increased by 7.5 percent over the period. In both counties, construction employment dropped
significantly between 2001 and 2003, during an economic slowdown in the region. Construction
employment has since plateaued in Pitkin County (decreasing 1.3 percent from 2003 to 2006), but has
jumped in Garfield County (up 33.5 percent) and in both counties combined (up 24.0 percent), indicating
a resurgence of activity.
Because construction employment is reported by location of establishment rather than location of
jobsite, and because many construction firms located the region build in multiple jobsites across the
region, it is difficult to know exactly how many construction employees physically work in Pitkin County.
The picture is further complicated due to possible growth in downvalley firms serving upvalley jobsites,
and the possible migration of construction firms formerly located in Pitkin County to downvalley
locations. Consequently, non-employment measures of construction activity in Pitkin County (e.g.
valuation of construction) are likely to be more directionally meaningful of economic activity in Pitkin
County than employment measures. In particular, employment at construction firms located in Pitkin
County, which is down since 2001, may not correlate to other indicators of construction activity in Pitkin
County, which have likely increased over the same period.
TABLE 1
Construction Employment at Firms Located in Pitkin and Garfield Counties, 2001-06
Year Pitkin County Garfield County Combined
2006 1,550 5,585 7,135
2005 1,508 4,733 6,241
2004 1,571 4,241 5,812
2003 1,570 4,185 5,755
2002 1,687 4,277 5,964
2001 1 559 4y 76 6635
2006 vs 2001 -16.6% 16.9% 7.6%
2006 vs 2003 -1.33'0 33.5% 24.0%
Source: Colorado State Demographer website, at
http://dola.Colorado.gov/demog_webapps/jobs_sector_naics; RRC Associates.
Construction activity data to come from RPI's analysis.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability- 9
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Skiine• Downhill skiing and snowboarding, the primary driver of Aspen's winter economy, has largely
plateaued over the past two decades in Pitkin County, albeit with fluctuations year to year. In the most
recent reported season (2006/07), the four ski mountains in Pitkin County recorded a combined 1.45
million skier visits. While off 7 percent from the all-time peak recorded in 1997/98, skier visits in
2006/07 had clawed back 14 percent from a trough recorded in 2001/01.
The visitation drop from 1997/98 through 2001/02, and recovery since then, mirror trends in overnight
"destination" skier visitation at Colorado resorts generally. The decline in skier visits from 1997/98
through 2001/02 was driven by such factors as growing competition from other resorts, changing visitor
demographics and preferences, some poorer snow years, the 2001 national recession (and prolonged
Colorado recession), 9/11, and likely other national and local factors. The recovery since then in part
reflects a broader recovery in destination visitation and overall skier visits nationally, including strong
growth in both domestic and international visitation, in turn aided by an improved economy and the
continued participation of aging baby boomers in skiing, among other factors. Since 2000/01, Pitkin
County has accounted for relatively steady 11-12 percent of total Colorado resort skier visits each
season.
FIGURE 5
Pitkin County Lift-Served Skier Visits, 1990/91- 2006/07
S
Y
fA
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,aoo,ooo
1,200,000
1,000,000
600,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
Aspen Highlands Aspen Mountain Buttermilk Snowmass
Source: Colorado Ski Country USA.
AspenlSnowmass p 2006107
4-mountain total
Within Pitkin County, Snowmass is the dominant resort, accounting for an average of 54 percent of the
county's skier visits since 2000/01, with a relatively stable share each year. The other three mountains
combined have accounted for an average 46 percent share, with Aspen Mountain accounting for 23
percent, Aspen Highlands 14 percent, and Buttermilk 11 percent. The "multiple mountain' offering in
O 1990/91
^ 1991/92
^ 1992/93
^ 1993194
^ 1994/95
O 1995/96
^ 1996/97
^ 1997/98
^ 1998/99
®1999/00
^ 2000/01
^ 2001102
^ 2002/03
^ 2003/04
^ 2004105
^ 2005/06
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability -10
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2005
Aspen/Snowmass is a key attraction for skiers, encouraging the Aspen Skiing Company and the business
community to brand the resort as "Aspen/Snowmass" and emphasize the "Power of Four". The towns
and ski areas in Aspen and Snowmass share a highly complementary relationship, particularly with many
Aspen lodgers skiing at Snowmass, and many Snowmass lodgers visiting Aspen for dining and shopping.
The construction of the new Base Village in Snowmass will increase the bedbase capacity in the
combined region, and likely contribute to an overall growth in skier visits and tourism activity in the
County. Base Village, and the potential redevelopment of the West Village and Snowmass Center in
Snowmass Village, may also potentially modify the dynamics of Aspen -Snowmass tourism and skier
patterns. As Snowmass Village offers a more well-rounded "village" experience, it may retain a higher
share of the restaurant and retail spending by Snowmass lodgers which currently "leaks" to Aspen, in
addition to potentially encouraging somewhat more visitation and spending in Snowmass by Aspen
lodgers. However, insofar as it makes the overall area more attractive and competitive, the
development in Snowmass may also grow the overall "pie" of tourism activity for both communities.
Lodain¢ sector. Aspen's lodging sector has enjoyed very strong growth in revenue aver the past five
years. Since 2003, total annual taxable lodging sales have jumped by 49 percent (Figure 6 below).
Growth has been especially strong during the winter months (up 57 percent), but has also been strong in
summer (up 36 percent).
FIGURE 6
Taxable Lodging Sales, City of Aspen, 1995 - 2007
Annual, Winter, and Summer Totals
$160
N
o $140
~ $120
d $100
A
m $80
C
v $60
0
v $40
a
x $20
~ $0
^ 1995 ~ 1996 O 1997 01998 ~ 1999 B 2000 ~ 2001 m 2002 ~ 2003 ®2004 O 2005 O 2006 ~ 2007
Source: City of Aspen Finance Department. "Taxable lodging sales" includes taxable sales reported by lodging
establishments, which may include taxable items other than room rental (e.g. food service, if offered, and not
reported separately).
The very strong performance by the lodging sector in recent years marks a reversal from amulti-year
pattern of decline in the preceding years. Specifically, in winter, taxable lodging sales eroded
significantly over the 1997 - 2003 period, a pattern in significant part linked with decline in skier visits
described previously. In summer, taxable lodging sales dipped from 2000 through 2003, a pattern
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability -11
Annual total Winter (Jan -Apr, Nov -Dec) Summer (May -Oct)
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
coinciding with the national and Colorado recession, a slowdown in travel after 9/11, and the summer
2002 drought and fire season, among other factors.
Lodging occupancy rates exhibit strong peaks in both winter and summer, as illustrated in Figure 7
below. Aspen is notable for having among the strongest winter and summer lodging occupancy rates in
the western U.S. mountain resort industry. Aspen is especially distinguished by its comparatively strong
summer occupancy rates, which speak to the relative strength of its summer tourism economy, as
compared to other ski resort destinations. At the same time, the high occupancy rates, which approach
full occupancy on many holidays and weekends in both winter and summer, imply that Aspen's bedbase
is at many times approaching full utilization, which may serve as a limitation on future visitation growth
in peak seasons, assuming no or limited increases in capacity. By the same token, the occupancy
patterns also imply ample capacity inoff-peak months, and the potential opportunity to extend the
tourist season further into shoulder season periods.
Lodging occupancy rates have edged up steadily over the 2004-07 period, rising from 52 percent to 57
percent on an annual average basis, a growth of 5 percentage points (or approximately 10 percent). ey
contrast, taxable lodging sales have increased by a larger 35 percent over the same 2004-07 period.
Assuming a relatively stable lodging inventory, this implies a significantjump in average nightly room
rates charged, a pattern corroborated by other, private lodging data sources.
FIGURE 7
Aspen Lodging Occupancy Rate, 2004 - 2007 by Month
90%
BO%
70%
u 60%
N
2
_, 60%
C
n q0%
0 30%
20%
10%
0%
source: Aspen Chamber Resort Association, at htto~//www asoenchamber ora/Chamber-Info-Occuoancv-Reoorts-
p11046.cfm; MTRiP. Occupancy rates reflect both paid and unpaid stays in units available for short-term rentals.
Aspen's lodging sector has undergone a significant restructuring over the past 15 years. As illustrated in
Figure 8 below, the total number of "pillows" in Aspen accommodations units dropped by 27 percent
from 1994/95 to 2005/06. The "economy lodge" sector was particularly affected, with a 79 percent
drop in pillows, due to the closure of 24 lodging properties. Additionally, pillow counts dropped by 47
percent in the "moderate condo" sector and by 30 percent in the "property management" sector.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 12
Jan Feb Mar Apr May lun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Winter Summer
Avg avg avg (lun
(Dec- -Sep)
Marl
Conditions Report- DRAFr
6/11/2008
Losses were more moderate in the deluxe condo (-9 percent), deluxe lodge (-7 percent), and moderate
lodge (-1 percent) categories.
FIGURE 8
Aspen Area Pillow Count by Lodging Category, 1991/92 - 2005/06
A
e
C
E
Y
f
0
s
v,
C
u
a
a
C
6
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
9,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
o%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
-90%
-60%
-70%
-BO%
-90%
0
N
0
e
n
N
a
m
N
Y
m
R
L
u
e
Y
N
6
1991/92 X1992/93 X1993/94 O 1994/95
~ 1995/96 1996/97 X1997/98 X1998/99
X1999/00 ®2000/01 02001/02 02002/03
X2003/04 ~2DD9/D6 ~~'^% Chg, 94/95-09/06
Source: Stay Aspen Snowmass. Data exclude pillows in Snowmass Village.
Retail sector. Similar to several other economic measures discussed earlier, the retail sector peaked in
2000, declined through 2002, before rebounding strongly through 2007. Specifically, total taxable retail
sales (excluding lodging and utilities) rose to a peak of $25$ million in 2000, before dropping 7 percent
to a trough of $240 million in 2002, and rebounding 36 percent to $327 million in 2007.
Figure 9 to follow illustrates trends in City of Aspen taxable retail sales by sector between 2000 and
2007. As shown, total taxable retail sales (excluding lodging and utilities) rose by 27 percent over the
period, netted across the 2000-02 decline and 2002-2007 recovery. Similar 2000-07 growth rates
occurred among the largest retail sectors, including restaurants and bars (up 22 percent), food and drug
stores (up 30 percent), clothing stores (up 24 percent), and sports equipment and clothing stores (up 23
percent). Stronger growth was recorded by general retail (up 68 percent), while losses were noted in
specialty retail (-8 percent).
The increase in retail sales noted here contrasts with the decline in restaurant and retail employment
noted previously (Figure 3), suggesting that firms have become more efficient in their staffing strategies,
have raised prices, and/or have realized other operational changes.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability -13
TOTAL PILLOWS Deluxe Condo Moderate Property Mg[. Deluxe Lodge / Moderate Economy Lodge
call property Property Condo Property Company Hotel Lodge/Hotel
types)
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
FIGURE 9
City of Aspen Taxable Retail Sales by Sector (excluding Lodging and Utilities)
2000 - 2007
~zooo tts^r° 3aa%
10°~
wo,ooo,ooo ~zom
690,000,000 ~~%Change 2000.07 62°/ BOX
$eo,ooo,ooo sevo
soX
$70,000,000 ~
49
%
$60,000,000 40X
$50,000,000 ~ % 30% 24% 23 % 30% 27%20X
$40.000,000
$30,000,000
o^r°
-e
$zo,ooo,ooo
$10,000,000
$g
-28% -zo~
'a~
A
a
'~
h
caOa~ ".~`'~~`~ °'\~ea a~~a~\ C+~~cp ~~a~` °'~o`~ `~'\~y~ Ga~cye aSQa\a`
\sa p~' yo`a°' ~F~ 9' Qa s~a~~ °a° ce°
Pa~aao Q aap r)P G ,~i~~QQ~' yQP' 1a V ~~`e%a
gC~'
Source: City of Aspen Finance Department.
Visitor transportation to Asoen. As illustrated in Table 2 to follow, air service is critical in transporting
overnight visitors to Aspen. In winter, fully 85 percent of overnight visitors fly at least part of their trip,
primarily direct to Aspen (39 percent), or to Denver followed by ground transportation to Aspen (36
percent), with an additional 11 percent flying to Eagle or elsewhere. Only 15 percent of overnight
winter visitors drive to the area.
0
~Oo
N
,d
N
0
,q
e 5
.~
c
r~
6
In summer, a preponderance of overnight visitors also fly to the region, again led by flights to Aspen (33
percent), followed by flights to Denver (21 percent). A larger 43 percent of summer visitors drive to the
area.
With 39 percent of winter overnight visitors and 33 percent of summer overnight visitors flying to
Aspen, it is apparent that securing adequate, affordable air service to Aspen has an important role to
play in any comprehensive tourism development strategy for the area.
While fluctuating year to year, annual enplanements at Aspen/Pitkin County Airport grew by 13 percent
between 2002 and 2006, to a total of 203,516 enplanements, as illustrated in Figure 10 to follow.
(Enplanements slipped in 2007, in part due to the closure of the runway from April 9 through June 7 for
runway rehabilitation.) Figure 10 also illustrates a strong winter peak and smaller summer peak in
enplanement volumes, reflecting the seasonality of tourism in the area, and the somewhat greater
reliance by visitors on flights to Aspen in winter than in summer.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 14
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
TABLE 2
Mode of Travel of Overnight Visitors to Aspen
Winter overnight visitors Summer overnight visitors
Fly to Aspen 39% 333'0
Fly to Denver 36% 21%
Fly to Eagle/other 114'0 3%
Drive other 15% 43%
TOTAL 100% 1004'0
Source: Aspen Skiing Company; ACRA; RRC Associates.
FIGURE 10
Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Enplanements, 2002-2008
35,000
30,000
„ zs,ooo
~ za,ooo
d
a 1s,ooo
°J 10,000
5,000
Q
Source: Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, www.aspenairport.com/
NOTE: Airport was closed April 9, 2007 through June 7, 2007 for runway rehabilitation.
Local servine economy. Insights from Ben's study on business change over past 15 years?
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Economic Sustainability - 15
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
(x10)
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #3 -Housing
June 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t s m e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.923.9485
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
HOUSING
Overview. Few community endeavors have been as fundamental to the evolution and sustainability of
Aspen as its housing programs. Since the 1970s, Aspen has recognized that employee housing in various
forms and produced through various methods is not only essential for meeting workforce housing
needs, but is also critical for maintaining the fabric and as market forces have intensified, the very
existence of the Aspen community. The programs and policies of Aspen/Pitkin County, supplemented
by voluntary employer and nonprofit efforts, have accomplished an enormous amount in this time,
delivering 2,769 employee housing units to date. Housing production has been carefully planned to
ensure opportunities for a broad spectrum of income and household groups, while striving to maintain
the character, charm, and social balance of Aspen.
And yet, housing remains among the most, if not the most, urgent issues facing the community. The
2007 Pitkin County Community Survey found that 72 percent of residents identify attainable workforce
housing as an important or very important issue, up from 54 percent in 2003. Similarly, the 2007
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Summit found consensus across a range of elected officials, business
leaders, and attending citizens that housing is an urgent priority, not only in light of employers' growing
desperation in staffing their operations, but also due to a convergence of trends which are exacerbating
the situation now and appear likely to intensify in the future. Among these trends are the continued
turnover and loss of the employee-occupied free-market housing stock; the aging and retirement of a
significant segment of the workforce in both free-market and affordable housing, reducing the housing
stock available to active workers; and dramatic increases in the price of downvalley housing relied on by
commuters. At the same time, ongoing escalation of Land and construction costs, coupled with a tight
land supply, make the provision of workforce housing more expensive and challenging. Available public
housing resources, including the City's 1% RETT and 0.45% housing and day care sales tax, and the
County's housing impact fee, are significant, but are unlikely to stretch far enough to meet all the
anticipated need in the valley's high cost environment.
Addressing these challenges going forward is likely to call for renewed creativity, resourcefulness, and
hard choices. As the update to the Aspen Comprehensive Plan gets underway, careful thought will need
to be given to the community's future vision, goals and objectives regarding affordable housing; to the
associated policies and strategies regarding how much, where, and when workforce housing should be
built; and to the tools, techniques and resources by which housing maybe provided.
.,
Housine themes in the 2000 AACP. The ~ rp
2000 AACP set forth a policy of constructing ,jq.
800 to 1300 additional affordable housing ;
units within the Aspen Community Growth
Boundary. This marked a change from the
1993 goal of housing 60 percent of the
workforce upvalley. The shift in emphasis
resulted from concerns that the 60 percent _
target could be unobtainable and might
represent an unacceptable level of growth
in light of the burgeoning size of the
workforce.
Little Ajaz: 14 affordable condominiums constructed in 2006.
liliC Associazes & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 1
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
The 2000 AACP also expressed a variety of other goals and policies, among which were the following
(paraphrased and non-exhaustive list):
Encourage development to occur within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and reflect
"good city form," in order to protect rural and open lands and to enhance the community's well-
being, economic viability, and partnership with the environment.
Encourage the public, private and non-profit sectors to work together in providing affordable
housing, and encourage greater participation by the private sector such that the burden of
providing housing not lie solely on the public sector.
• Plan new housing so as to reinforce and enhance a healthy social balance in the community,
inclusive of all income ranges, celebrating diversity, and avoiding inadvertent segregation.'
Promote high quality site planning and architecture in affordable housing to enhance the
character and charm of Aspen.
Since the adoption of the AACP in 2000, the community has been notably successful at creating
additional affordable housing. A total of 652 affordable housing units have been built since the AACP
was adopted, while a combined total of 833 units have been built or approved. An additional 17 to 337
units maybe built in projects currently in various stages of planning, resulting in potential net
production of 850 to 1170 units built, approved or planned since AACP adoption in 2000.
Assessment of current housine situation. As illustrated in Table 1 below, it is currently estimated that
Aspen has approximately 15,653 employees which are housed in 8,696 units. Approximately 32 percent
of these employees are estimated to be housed in Aspen area affordable units; 13 percent are housed in
Aspen area free market units; and 55 percent are housed in Snowmass or downvalley.
TABLE 1
Aspen Employees by Housing Unit Type and Location, 2000 vs. 2007
Housing Housing Emps & Units:
Employees Employees Units Units %Change
2000 2007 2000 2007 2000-07 % of2000 % of2007
Aspen area affordable housing -ownership 2,059 2,651 1,144 1,473 29% 15% 17%
Aspen area affordable housing -rental 1,427 2,336 793 1,298 64% 10% 15%
Aspen free market units that house employees 3,145 2,070 1,747 1,150 -34% 22% 13%
Snowmass and Downvallev 7 408 8595 4_,116 4,_,775 16% 53% 55%
TOTAL 14,039 15,653 7,800 8,696 11% 100% 100%
Source: "Memorandum: Materials for Housing Summit", 8/31/07, by Ciry of Aspen staff, APCHA staff and Mick Ireland
Note: Calculations assume a constant 1.8 employees per housing unit in all locations in both 2000 and 2007.
The Aspen employee housing mix is estimated to have changed significantly since 2000. The proportion
of Aspen employees living inAspen-area affordable housing is estimated to have jumped from 25
percent to 32 percent, a testament to the significant affordable housing produced over the past eight
years. By contrast, the share living in Aspen-area free market housing is estimated to have dropped
dramatically, from 22 percent to 13 percent, primarily reflecting the conversion of locally owned units to
second homes, and the unattainability of free market units for local employees. Taking affordable and
free market units together, the proportion of workers residing in the Aspen area is estimated to have
' It has been observed that not that not all income ranges are currently being served by affordable housing efforts,
insofar as very low-income Category 1 housing is very rarely built, and no housing is produced between the top of
the RO category and the bottom of the free market. Thus, there are gaps in the provision of affordable housing,
and there are currently no identified plans to address these gaps.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
decreased from 47 percent in 2000 to 45 percent in 2007, although the number of workers living in the
Aspen area is estimated to have grown by 6 percent in absolute terms. On net, this implies that the
substantial addition of affordable units over the past eight years has only slightly more than offset the
loss of free market units.
While the share of workers living in Aspen has edged down, the proportion commuting from Snowmass
and downvalley has risen from 53 percent to 55 percent. In absolute terms, the number of commuters
to Aspen is estimated to have increased 16 percent.
Consistent with the estimates above, an analysis at the broader Pitkin County level also indicates that
commuting to Pitkin County has increased steadily in proportionate and absolute terms over time
(Figure 1 below). Based on Census data, the proportion of Pitkin County workers commuting from
downvalley grew from 39 percent in 1990 to 45 percent in 2000, while growing by 47 percent in
absolute terms (from 4,799 workers to 7,076 workers).
More recently, over the 2000 - 07 period, the proportion of in-commuters is estimated to have risen
further, to 50 percent, while rising by 22 percent in absolute terms. Meanwhile, the Pitkin County
resident workforce is estimated to have roughly plateaued in recent years in absolute terms, as gains in
affordable housing have been offset by tosses in employee-occupied free-market units.
FIGURE 1
Pitkin County Employees by Location,1990 - 2007
D
'o
V
z
6
c
E
W
e
3
7990 7991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
70%
60%
50% ,e}E`
0
3
40%
U
s
30% a
`o
t:
20%
6
10%
0%
Source: US Census (1990 and 2000); RRC Associates estimates based on employment and population trends published by
the Colorado State Demographer and Colorado Department of labor and Employment (1991- 99 and 2001-07).
20,000
67%
16,000
55%
16,000 Spy.
14,000
50%
12,000 15%
10,000 39%
8,000
Number of Pitkin Co. workers Irving outside of Pitlcin Co.
6,000 Number of Pitlcin Co. workers living in PiSdn Co.
t Percent of Pitlun Co. wodcforce living outside Pitkin Co.
4,000
~ Percent of Pitlun Co. workforce living in Pitlcin Co.
2,000
ItRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 3
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFr 6/11/2008
Consistent with the estimated 22 percent growth in Pitkin County commuters since 2000, RFTA
"Highway 82 Corridor" ridership has increased by 22 percent over the same period, while Highway 82
traffic in Old Snowmass has risen by 18.5 percent (Figure 2 below). These correlated patterns speak to
the need to evaluate employment, housing and transportation issues in an integrated fashion.
FIGURE 2
Pitkin County Resident Workers & Commuters vs. Highway 82 Corridor Travel Measures
2000 - 2007
25,000
20,000
15,000
>°
5
a 70,000
5,000
Pitkin County Resident Workers 8 Commuters Highway 82 Comdor I ravel measures
ComelaG n between PitCo
22.5% commute 8Hwy 82 trave ~•4%
c 8.5%
X2000 0,
2001
2002
2003
€: 2004
o ~ 2005
m S ~ 2006
e 2007 ~
~2007vs.2000 °O a
x p' i m a
~'
Pitkin Co. workers Pitkin Co. workers RFTA Highway 82 Hwy 82 (at Old
living in Pitkin Co. living outside of Pitkin Comdor annual Snowmass) annual
Co. average daily ridership average daily traffic
25%
20%
°o
N
15% o
N
10%
U
5% I'u
a
0%
-5°k
Sources:
Workers: US Census (2000); RRC projections 2001-07.
RFTA ridership: Annual reported RFTA Highway 82 Corridor ridership, divided by 365.
Highway 82 traffic: CDOT permanent traffic recorder in Old Snowmass. (2000 data estimated by RRC Associates based on
3 months of data collection.)
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Most downvalley commuters to Aspen live in the Basalt to Carbondale corridor (72 percent of
commuters), while 16 percent live in or nearest to Glenwood Springs, and 11 percent live in New Castle
through Rifle, as illustrated in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2
Place of Residence of Downvalley Commuters to Aspen, 2004
24% Basalt
19% El Jebel
29% Carbondale
16% Glenwood Springs
S% New Castle
2% Silt
S% Rifle
100% Total downvalley commuters to Aspen
Source: "2004 Local and Regional Travel Patterns Study;' April 12, 2005. Prepared by RRC Associates, Healthy
Mountain Communities, and Charlier Associates.
Housin¢ issues: Pitkin Countv iob growth. Job growth in Pitkin County is one of the fundamental drivers
of the need for employee housing. As shown previously, Pitkin County and Aspen-area jobs are
estimated to have increased by approximately 10-11 percent since 2000. Key drivers of the economy
include second homeowner consumption spending, the construction and servicing of second homes,
winter and summer tourism, and residents' non-local sources of income, as more fully documented in a
2004 study commissioned by NWCCOG.Z
Going forward, the Colorado State Demographer projects substantial additional job growth in Pitkin
County. The second home boom, an historically important driver of local job growth, is expected to
continue, due to favorable demographic and economic trends.; Additionally, tourism-related growth
seems likely to occur with new lodging and fractional unit construction taking place in Aspen, as well as
the multi-yearttuildout of Base Village in Snowmass, among other possible projects.
Mitigation. Aspen and Pitkin County have regulations designed to mitigate the creation of incremental
new jobs associated with new construction, with the intent of enabling the community to "keep up"
with future increases in housing demand associated with such construction. To date, a total of 720
affordable "mitigation" units, or 26 percent of the total affordable housing inventory, have been
constructed in Aspen and Pitkin County pursuant to such requirements.
Housing issues: loss of Pitkin Countv emolovee-occupied free-market units. As discussed previously, it
is believed that Aspen's employee-occupied free-market housing stock dropped by roughly one-third, or
a decrease of approximately 600 units, between 2000 and 2007. This trend is primarily attributable to
' "Job Generation in the Colorado Mountain Resort Economy/', July 2004, Lloyd Levy Consulting with Hammer Siler
George, commissioned by NWCCOG.
' Among these trends are the continued passage of the baby boomers through their prime second home buying
years, and increasing wealth and affluence among the richest of the population. far additional insight, see "The
New Housing Crisis: Causes and Effects", Mayor Mick Ireland, September 2007, at
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/odfs/dents/45/MavorHOUSing.pdf. Also, "Job Generation in the Colorado Mountain
Resort Economy/', July 2004, Lloyd Levy Consulting with Hammer Siler George, commissioned by NWCCOG.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 5
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
the conversion upon sale of employee occupied units to second homes, or to occupancy by residents
unlikely to be employed in the area.° At a 2007 median sales price of $5.44 million for Aspen single
family homes and $1.36 million for Aspen multifamily units,s free market housing is generally far beyond
the range of affordability for local residents at prevailing wage rates. The loss ofemployee-occupied
free market housing is expected to continue in the future, as second homeowners or non-employed
residents continue to outcompete local employed residents for free-market housing.
Housin¢ issues: retirement. In a trend tied to the demographics of Aspen's workforce, a growing share
of Aspen employees are nearing retirement age, or are projected to enter retirement in the coming
decades. Assuming that a significant share of these residents choose to remain in Aspen, the net effect
will be that the existing affordable housing stock will house a reduced number of workers.`
Modeling conducted by APCHA staff indicates that perhaps 1,142 retirees will be living in APCHA's
existing affordable housing stock in 2032, up from 207 retirees today. It would take approximately 634
additional units in 2037 to house an equivalent number of active employees, assuming 1.8 employees
per unit (Figure 3 to follow).
As baby boomers age and retire, the same underlying patterns are likely to impact the free-market,
employee-occupied housing stock in Pitkin County and downvalley as well.
FIGURE 3
Forecast of Retirees Living in Affordable Housing
and Additional Units Needed to House Equivalent Number of Employees
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
Source: 2007 Housing Summit background materials. Estimates prepared by Housing staff.
Between 2003 and September 2007, approximately 600 properties in the county showed changes in ownership
tax mailings that indicate they have become second homes. This includes 266 single family homes, most of them in
Aspen. Source: "Memorandum: Materials for Housing Summit", 8/31/07, by City of Aspen staff, APCHA staff and
Mick Ireland, p. 5.
s "Market Snapshot by Area: Property Type Comparison', Pitkin County Full Year 2007, Land Title Aspen.
s A person cannot reside in APCHA housing unless they have worked in Pitkin County at least 1500 hours a year for
a period of four years immediately prior to retirement.
RI2C Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 6
2007 2012 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2047
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Housing issues: affordability ago in downvallev housing. Eagle and Garfield Counties have historically
housed a substantial share -currently estimated at SO percent (in Figure 1 above) of Pitkin County's
workforce. However, due to rapidly escalating housing prices, this resource is increasingly at risk. As
illustrated in Table 3 below, the median single family housing sales price currently stands at
approximately $1.1 million in Basalt (Pitkin County part), $590,000 in Carbondale, and $500,000 in
Glenwood Springs. The annual household income necessary to purchase such units is well into six
figures in each community, beyond the capacity of most dual income families.
TABLE 3
2007 Median Home Sales Prices in Selected Downvalley Communities
and Annual Household Income Required to Purchase
2007 Median Sales Pdee Income Required to Purchase"
Single Family Condo/Townhome Single Family Condo/l'ovmhome
Basalt (Pitkin Co. part) $1,099,900 $527,500 $347,589 $166,700
Carbondale $589,784 $375,950 $186,383 $118,807
Glenwood Springs $500,200 $311,050 $158,073 $98,298
New Castle $364,500 $234,400 $115,189 $74,075
Sill $318,000 $246,250 $100,494 $77,820
Rifle $297,500 $216,400 $94,016 $68,386
Parachute $229,650 $189,800 $72,574 $59,980
Source of sales price data: Basalt-Land Title Aspen. Carbondale thru Parachute-Garfield County Assessor, 20078ales Report,
http://www. Barfield-cou nty.co m/I ndex. aspz?page=806.
"Income required [o purchase assumes 5% down, 7.0% interest for 30 years, and 20%of monthly payment for property taxes,
insurance and HOA fees, with no more than 30%of household income used for housing payments.
R.RC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Increasingly high prices are also occurring west along the 1-70 corridor from New Castle through
Parachute. The growth in prices is due to many factors (varying by location), including increased
demand by Pitkin County commuters, second homeowner and retiree demand, and strong job growth in
Garfield County (fueled in part by the oil and gas boom in western Garfield County). Long term,
additional housing pressure could come from Rio Blanco County energy development, as well as
commuters to the Vail Valley portion of Eagle County.
Methods of Droducin¢ affordable housin¢. Affordable housing in Pitkin County has historically been
produced in five primary ways:
• Employer initiated - no requirement: These are units added to the inventory at employers'
discretion, with no government intervention. The Aspen School District, City of Aspen, Aspen
Valley Hospital, and Aspen Skiing Company have all undertaken employer-initiated housing
efforts.
Employer/aoolicantinitiated_-requirement: These
are units added to the inventory as a result of
government regulation of new development.
Known as "mitigation" units, these units are
intended to offset a portion new employment
created as a result of new development.
Public / private partnerships: These are units added
to the inventory as a result of a private entity
partnering with government, either as mitigation
units or through no requirement.
Nonprofit agencies: These are units created by
nonprofit agencies that focus on the creation of
affordable housing.
City /APCHA /County built: These are units built
through RETT funds and/or other income streams
dedicated to building community housing.
Housing resources and opportunities. The City's 1% RETT
and 0.45Yo housing/day care sales tax, and the County's housing impact fee, together generate
approximately $12.2 million in annual revenue for affordable housing development.'
It has been estimated that this level of funding can reasonably be expected to support approximately
296 for-sale affordable housing units over the next 30 years, assuming that bonds are issued in the near
future for immediate land purchase and that all units are constructed in Aspen's Urban Growth
Boundary. Concurrently, the Housing Summit work identified anon-exhaustive list of 12 sites in Aspen
with a potential for 402 additional affordable units.a
"Memorandum: Materials for Housing Summit", 8/31/07, by City of Aspen staff, APCHA staff and Mick Ireland, p.
13.
s Ibid, pp. 13-14.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report - DRAfT 6/11/2008
Alternatively, if housing development is pursued on less expensive downvalley land, housing production
could be 2.5 to 3 times as high, or 850 units. Hypothetically, if all land was free for all units to be built,
current resources could build approximately 1,360 units over the coming 30 years.
However, this housing production may not keep pace with the anticipated continued loss of employee-
occupied free-market housing in Pitkin County, as well as reduced housing of active employees
stemming from retirement, not to mention strains associated with the escalating prices of downvalley
housing.
The 2007 Housing Summit explored a variety of alternative, sometimes "out of the box" strategies to
address affordable housing needs, many of which were targeted at the specific contributing factors
(such as retirement). A summary of opinions regarding these (non-exhaustive) approaches is contained
in the Appendix.
As noted in an 8/31/07 staff memo in support of the 2007 Housing Summit, "Aspen and Pitkin County
face a daunting challenge to meet future demands for affordable housing. Fortunately, we are a
community with impressive amounts of wealth, intellectual power, creativity, and energy the address
the situation."
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 9
Conditions Report- DRAFT
APPENDIX ITEMS
September 6 - 7,2007 Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Summit:
Selected Keypad Survey Results
6/11/2008
The 2007 Aspen/Pitkin Housing Summit was attended by 49 persons from the following groups: elected
officials from Pitkin County or Aspen (8 attendees), other elected officials and public staff (19), APCHA
board members (2), major employers (10), and concerned citizens (10). Participants took a live keypad
survey about numerous affordable housing issues. The survey results show strong consensus on most
(although not all) issues. Selected results are summarized below.
Problem Definition
• Respondents were asked "Relative to other issues we face (transportation, open space,
growth, etc.), the need to create affordable housing is...". Thirty-five percent thought it is the
most important issue, and another 40 percent thought it is more important than most others.
Twenty percent felt the issue is about as important as others, and 6 percent thought it is less
important than others.
• Eighty-eight percent of respondents thought that the lack of affordable housing in Aspen is a
"severe problem", and an addition 10 percent feel it is a "moderate problem".
• Eighty-eight percent of respondents thought it is likely or very likely that world and national
economic trends will create wealth that will generate further job growth in Aspen.
• Ninety-eight percent of respondents believe it is likely or very likely that free market units
currently housing workers will continue to be converted to second homes.
• Ninety percent of respondents thought it was likely or very likely that the continued conversion
of local residences to second homes would drive further job growth.
• Ninety-eight percent of respondents thought it is likely or very likely that Garfield County
energy sector growth will continue to impact Aspen's ability to hire enough workers.
• Ninety-two percent of respondents thought it is unlikely or very unlikely that Aspen can
continue to rely on downvalley housing.
There was unanimous agreement (100 percent) that there is a deficiency of affordable housing
in Aspen.
• When asked about the estimate of 1,000 workers in affordable housing leaving the workforce
and retiring in their homes, 67 percent thought that was likely or very likely to be an accurate
estimate, while 10 percent thought it was unlikely to be accurate. Twenty-two percent of
respondents were "neutral".
• Eighty seven percent of respondents disagree with the statement that "we shouldn't put so
much effort into building affordable housing because eventually the free market will create an
equilibrium between housing, jobs and wages."
Solutions, Mitigation and Financing
Seventy-eight percent thought voters should be asked to bond from the current revenue
stream in order to accelerate solutions such as land banking and new construction. Ten percent
disagreed, and 12 percent were unsure.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 10
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
• Respondents were largely against steps to limit job growth as a strategy to reduce housing
shortfall. Thirty-seven percent thought job growth should be controlled, 9 percent were
neutral, and 54 percent disagreed with controlling job growth. NOTE: THIS QUESTION WAS
ASKEDTHREE TIMES, WITH DIFFERENT RESULTS EACH TIME- WHO TO ASK TO FIND OUT WHICH
RESULTS ARE MOST REPRESENTATIVE?
• Respondents were divided as to the location for new affordable housing. Thirty-seven percent
thought all or nearly all affordable housing should be constructed within the urban growth
boundary; 20 percent felt it should be built exclusively within Pitkin County (either within or
outside of the UGB), and 44 percent felt it should be built throughout the valley near population
centers.
• Eighty-four percent of respondents agreed that the City of Aspen/Pitkin County should require
more housing mitigation on commercial projects. More specifically, 13 percent support the
current level of mitigation (60 percent). Twenty-eight percent support 80 percent mitigation, 10
percent support 90 percent mitigation, and 49 percent support 100 percent mitigation.
• Eighty-six percent of respondents support housing mitigation requirements on residential
development.
• Eighty-three percent of respondents believe elected officials should ask their staff to proactively
seek public-private partnerships for affordable housing projects.
• Respondents were divided on whether APCHA resources should be primarily focused on land
banking or new units. Approximately 27 percent would like to see funding primarily focused on
land banking, while 40 percent would like to see it primarily focused on new units. Thirty-two
percent would like to see an equal distribution between the two.
• Fifty-three percent of respondents think APCHA should use housing funds to build "continuum
of care" senior housing units. Twenty-six percent were neutral, and 21 percent disagreed with
using APCHA funds for that purpose.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - I l
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT _ 6/11/2008
APCHA Housing Inventory
- "Ownership-located in City of Aspen:
Category: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Resident Occupied
Studio: 2 8 11 17 0 38
One-Bedroom: 9 72 60 76 0 2 0 0 218
Two-Bedroom: 2 30 40 153 3 1 0 8 237
Three-Bedroom: 1 SI 60 77 6 4 4 5 168
Four-Bedroom: 0 5 1 19 0 0 D 5 30
Single-Family: 1 0 20 44 0 2 0 113 160
15 126 192 385 9 9 4 131 671
;t?=- :d
Ownership -located in Pitkin County:
Category: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Resident Occupied
Studio: 1 0 0 0 0 1
One-Bedroom: 0 5 5 2 1 0 13
Two-Bedroom: 5 12 7 25 19 68
Three-Bedroom: 0 4 2 32 4 14 56
Four-Bedroom: 0 0 1 2 0 3
Single-Family: 0 0 5 52 58 346 461
6 21 20 113 5 58 0 379 602
-. ,. -- . .. .. p .-
. _._
Ownershi Total 1473
. ..-. ^.r.* - .. .. ~, - ~ -..
,.~ s., ,_ :.-~ -.. ... _ x.
Category: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Resident Occupied
Studio: 42 57 77 3 92 271
- One-Bedroom: 13 119 102 7 30 271
Two-Bedroom: 9 70 143 3 112 337
Three-Bedroom: 0 17 26 0 6 49
Dorm Units 13 0 30 0 192 215
Single-Family: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
77 263 358 13 0 0 0 434 1145
,o:W~~f~..~w.
-. _ + -_.''; ~ .'. _' ..'.: RentalTotal 3296
2016 City Total 616 City Mitigation Units
753 County Total 104 County Mitigation Units
2769 Total 720 TOTAL MITIGATION UNITS
Notes: Inventory excludes affordable units managed by the Town of Snowmass Village Housing Office (374 units) and selected other
affordable units in the Town of Snowmass Village. Inventory also excludes Pitkin County rental "caretaker dwelling units' ('28 units as of
2004) and "employee dwelling units" ('"43 units as of 2004). Note that APCHA anticipates a loss of 228 rental units in the existing
inventory at Castle Ridge (80 units) and Centennial (148 units) upon expiration of affordability controls. "Category' refers to resident
income and asset eligibility limits (1=lowest limits / 7=highest). "Resident occupied" units have resident asset limits but no income limits.
Category: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Resident Occupied
Studio: 1 1 1 0 3 6
One-Bedroom: 8 4 16 0 3 33
Two-Bedroom: 5 5 27 19 9 65
Three-Bedroom: 1 2 16 3 2 24
Dorm Units 2 0 0 0 21 23
Sin le-Family: 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 12 62 22 0 0 0 38 151
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 12
Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT
Affordable Housing Progress toward 2000 AAGP Gaal
August 30, 2007
Affordable Housing Progress Towards 2000 AAGP Goa
AAGP eeq: 9Nte 1,109 new rmlls.
Ae pra)eM rwceprbye ti 3000 MCP •rw canntl•rM sloes 23000 eeepllen
nnewee s PrffiYe. Ptlwi•. gttl AtelY•tl^n unH.)
Sources: Cey of Aep•n Cmnmuney D•vgoPm•M D•p•rlm•m
Auasi 30. 2C0T
~atua ~ 2.2000 POtardlai Potential
adoptlon of aunt PMltltad Units <bw Units (Mph
Slu MCP Currant states UMts Units •dlmata) astlrnatr)
ep•n. ovVy Sot ore ecupMe to
srya.. Occyr4tl orwP•tl to
OurPnp•m• 3•eeenel un9•f cores. 05eup•tl tot
ueen PuD fn Treeq Un0•r Comt. Ceeupme St
A•pM NPm•ntls Untl•r Ceal. Oearpletl 132
NOM Fgfy Untl•r COnq. Oerupbtl TZ
Tor end a1•el Unar Conq. OcapNtl 13
Tmsroa Eslr•nelen PlggMg R•w•w Oeeup•^ 49
UYr DOntmOM Pimgmp ReNew Deapl•tl 38
DRACO Inc. Pre-PI•nntrg Oearplee T
Bsvglen Pm.PI•nMrg Oeapl•tl 19
Burarq•me P•m•ID Pre-Plemtlrg OragrNA i9
SipWMM Pt•-PLMNrg OSgrpMtl IS
clslgten• wA ocwpl•tl t
wtoum.•t Ohq•t r.rn ocaol.tl z
Aspen Alpe MIA Ocapl•tl 2
Tep ML@aWltlNirbn fUA Occupl•tl
o.gmtiyNl ww ocaPla 4
LbMmea SAnnWHglm NM Orapmtl 3
oberat•y.. plea IWA OcarpNtl za
LetN x tAA O d t.
Bwlbq•me Ptlss~On• Pre-PlaMiig q 9T
A~tln•WPve PhPa) tLA Under C•nq. 10
Imvbnres Tim•gten NM lhltlq coop. 1
Ref. @ Lee. m.e ta) wA urwer cenq, e
Oq•rulMgll P/rA Ulbq Cenq. ]
MgMllOtle WA lMOH COnq. 3
wnebgBw rarA UMer 4enq. 3
CneR FbYp WA tJneM Cenq_ '1
ACED u•s1•r Pbn NM Un0•r Cenq. 12
•10 8. Wq EM N/A IMHf Conq. ]
Rennelt•Wailn N/A Under Cenq. ]
)1• E. Nopklns ILA UMq Conq. ]
Bamereny Letl{R Nrl1 UM•r Cenq. ]
106 so.ogmmcn r.P. Lmaer coop. z
~•y 1 H/A UrrdM Canq. 3
Step• Ile•tller X Pn-PI•nnl.q APprnwtl 1
Alplrre Orow PMa 3 NA Apprewtl e
Eee LAlla WA APllrovee 4
Boeme/erla V•aM Lqa llaS Appr•vtl 2
APn rtla•tl•ht BuNtlYp NM Apprbvwtl 1
J•wlah COT.Cwtlq A1M APprewtl ]
Les t c•neemmiums rJrA wpprewa t
L.ebcm. wa+ ApPaewe ]
toot u•AV•. NrA A e t
Bulllrl9em•PMN3as Pre-PI•nmrtp Conc•quq Approvq o the
Letlpe @Aspen Wn. flrA Plglnet9 R•rnety 1T 30
ar•u9o+•Reeebel ebn wA PlgrnNy R•w•Vr a e3
Jerome PreresgenN WA Plsrmn9 R•New o ]
MMrr•rqub• tLA Pl~tnmp M41•ty o t]
Lq t L•ea• WA Plglnm9 R•N•w e t t
Twogl PMe• Tln•• Pro-PI•nnNg Pr~Plennbg 0 .0
Bunrm Rr true tJtA Pre-M.nmrq b e0
Mean Popery t3) wA NIA o ao
Tlh end Hsaem (LaRB) Pn•Plpnnirtp Qlac•rtlewM 0 P
AspM Mews t1) pre-PIMn1na DbeonlFtuM o 0
10l iMOplalt PnM• Pn-PI•nmry Dlwomkmea 0 O
ROPY Smnp rarA Daabmtwee b o
H Hou•e N/A DlceeMlnuee p o
Totals 64 '181 TT 33T
~~9~~z r•so9!wn we M+.r nm rro11n V VP
2 - E•t4nq• hem MCP
3 -Ben-eH unH p11i Alpine DrW a erb 48 00•Im•Y•f DbytlOM W H (n01 eoubN Capt4dt
Bulk sines adopffon of AAGP: 6S2
Bulk + Approved: 8~9
Bulk+Approved+LpwRarlye Esfitnate- 850
W
C
O
m
3
d
lD
Q.
Bulk+Approtred+High Ranpe Etetirtta6e 1170
6eneM C31•m utenp rtArr9MMCP/AN~Ia-OOwl.sn
Source: "Memorandum: Materials for Housing Summit", 8/31/07, by City of Aspen staff, APCHA staff and Mick Ireland, p. 3.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 13
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Map of Affordable Rental Projects (.pdf-to be attached when Word document is finalized)
Map of Affordable Ownership Projects (.pdf-to be attached when Word document is finalized)
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Housing - 14
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #5 -Environmental Quality
tune, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Graup, Inc.
970.948.0802
Conditions Report-DRAFT _ 6/11/2008
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Environmental programs are the City's hallmark. The City has had an environmental health department
since 1976 and has tracked air quality daily in order to protect the health of Aspen's residents and
visitors, as well as comply with Federal standards. Aspen has successfully addressed several
environmental issues over the years, including particulate matter (PM-10) air pollution, storm water
pollution, solid waste and recycling, and global warming. The City of Aspen Sustainability Report 2007
presents the most current snapshot of the many programs the City has undertaken to monitor its
environmental health.
The report can be found at: http•//www aspenpitkin tom/pdfs/degts/44/2007sustainability report.pdf
There are several departments and agencies that play a role in Aspen's environmental quality in addition
to the environmental health department. The City's engineering, building, water, electric, and parks
departments, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, County landfill, the City's Canary Initiative, and the
Aspen Ski Company all play important roles in maintaining Aspen's clean and pristine environment.
Aspen has been a leader within Colorado and nationally in advocating for environmentalism and
influencing other communities in finding solutions to environmental challenges. Because of its
leadership in environmental programs, Aspen has been the recipient of numerous awards, including
awards for its renewable energy mitigation program (REMP), recycling program, and traffic demand
management program.
Accomplishments since the 2000 AACP. Over the past decade, there have been a significant number of
new programs and projects completed with a goal toward improving the environmental health of the
Aspen community. Some of the projects were initiated by the City and others by special districts and
private business. These accomplishments, as cited by department heads and district leaders, are
highlighted in more detail under the Facilities, Capacities, and Accomplishments section below. In
addition to these system accomplishments, there are many new City programs (including the Canary
Initiative, Storm Water Impact Fees ,Renewable Energy Mitigation Program or REMP), the ZGreen
sustainability program, and the City's recycling ordinance, and one Aspen Ski Company program that
reflect Aspen's commitment to environmental sustainability. These are also highlighted in more detail
below.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-1
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/31/2008
Air Quality. In 1988 Aspen was
declared a PM-10 non-attainment
area, meaning that the City did not
attain the National Ambient Air 25
Quality Standards as set by the EPA. ~
PM-30 is the standard used b the ~
~ 5
EPA to measure levels of partkulate ~
matter 10 micrometers or smaller A
found in the air. These particles
0 5
pose the greatest health concern ~
because they can pass through the E
nose and throat into the lungs. Z -5
Figure 1
Number of High PM-10 Days, 1998-2007
According to one estimate, 83% of iggg tggg 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2006 2007
Aspen's PM-10 on a high pollution
day comes from traffic driving over Source: City of Aspen
EPA's health-based national air quality standard for PM-10 is 150 µg/m' (measured as
and grinding up dirt on paved roads, a daily averagel.
that then gets kicked up into the air.
The worst PM-10 levels in Aspen usually occur in February or March when the first warm spells come
exposing built up winter sand and dirt. The City has addressed the high PM-10 levels by instituting a
number of strategies, including increased RFTA frequency and availability in an effort to provide
attractive alternatives to driving alone; paid parking and resident permit parking; bus HOV lanes, carpool
incentives, in-town shuttles, street sweeping; and limits and controls on fireplaces, woodstoves and
restaurant grills;. As illustrated above, the number of high PM-10 days during 2007 was consistent with
2006, and has remained below the high levels seen in 1999 and 2000.
Figure 2
Average Daily Traffic, 1999-2007
U
d
w a.
U v
~ •c
c m
a
.~
24,000
23,500
23,000
22,500
22,000
21,500
21,000
Daily Traffic Counts. Average daily
traffic counts have been up and
down over the years, and often
correlate with local and national
events. These numbers have
remained stable due to increased
bus usage. However, the traffic
counts are only taken at Castle
Creek Bridge, and do not measure
the traffic entering Aspen via
McLain Flats Road and Power Plant
Road.
Source: City of Aspen I me resti ngiy, the n u m ber of
registered vehicles in Aspen has
remained fairly constant year to year while RFTA bus ridership continues to increase due to increased
trips from downvalley. Ridership in 2006 was up 10.2%from 2005. It is estimated that the RFTA system
saved 8,023 tons of C02 from being emitted into the environment in 2006.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality- 2
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
ADT
Aspen Existing Conditions Report - DRAF7 6/11/2008
Figure 3
Total RFTA Ridership, 1976-2006
5.0
4,5
4.0
3.5
0
E 30
T
a 2.5
n
z.o
K
t.s
io
0.5
0.0
^CiyRoups ^Va0eyRou~s ^GrandHogbackService
^ASC Routs ^Maroon Begs ^Music FesWaVBurGngame
p Airport ^ Glenwood TrolleylRitle Glnwd ^ Over
~ ~
a
N N
t
r
~ a
a
$ ~
w ~ & 8
- - ~ a ~ m rn ~ ~ ~ m 3 m m ~ ~ m ~ m
. ~ R R g . °., R R
Source: RFTA, Ciry of Aspen Transportation Department
Wing Co. Routes
alley Routes
Ily Routes
Water Ctuality And Storm Water Management. In 2007, the City placed new focus on stormwater and
the impact it has on the area's streams and rivers. In November 2007, the voters approved Referendum
2b that approved an $800,000 per year mil levy (or approximately $12 million dollars) to fund on-going
projects for 15 years to improve water quality. In addition to this mill levy, new development fees are
charged to offset pollution caused by construction sites. These funds initiated the development of the
City's Clean River Initiative.
Until recently, Aspen's stormwater runoff went untreated, directly into the Roaring Fork River, polluting
the river with motor oil, detergents, pesticides, fertilizers, sediment and any other material deposited on
the streets, parking lots, and rooftops in Aspen. The goal of the Clean River Initiative is to reduce the
pollution in local rivers caused by stormwater runoff. The Initiative consists of various capital and
operational projects and activities, including mechanical sediment removal structures; educational and
outreach programs; master planning; monitoring; and creating additional wetland areas along the River,
such as the Jennie Adair and Rio Grande Stormwater Facilities.
Sediment is the number one source of water pollution in Colorado. Sediment is carried to our rivers
through the stormwater system from disturbed land and sanded streets. Figure 4 below shows the total
suspended solids (an indicator of sediment load) levels in the stormwater outfall at Mill Street. The red
line indicates the national average for urban stormwater runoff while the bar chart portrays the levels
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Cluality-3
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
recorded in Aspen by date. The parts per million of suspended solids in the average stormwater
discharge from the City is 20 times higher than the national average for urban runoff.
Figure 4
Mill Street Outfall T55 Levels, 2003-2007
s,aoo
8,000
a
0 7'~
b
6,000
v
5,000
~ 4,000
w
c 3,000
u 2,000
o. 1000
a;37
~ mill street oudall
-«- national ag. (150)
3,815
alza
1,140 1,164 1,204
723
720
132 175 16
,S"~3v~9ro'" °~ `0~~~ ~~y~~Y~e~~av~~^~1 ye`t' ye`t'
Source:
The following map in Figure 5 depicts the habitat quality of the Roaring Fork River as it travels through
the City of Aspen. As the river runs through the urbanized area of Aspen, it is severely degraded. The
main factors contributing to this degradation include loss of riparian vegetation, loss of flow due to
diversion, extensive channelization, and sedimentation in excess of the River's absorption capacity.*
'Data was obtained from the Stream Health Initiative
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Figure 5
Mill Street Outfall TSS Levels, 2003-2007
UJ6°,1 ntXi W 106°56.Ui~P' w ]Ob°4 f.OD9' W 106°V8.
~\_ .y_ ~
~ x
1 ~ :. j ~~
_.
f r
f ~~
~:v_
~'" ~ >
i x. .
I
I , 'a~ ~ '~ - _. r ~'.
I ~F,, s ~ ~s "Y
~~ ~ t i ~~~ ~.,,.. 1 1 ti c
n
I ,kr+ ' ~ . ~ ) ~ ~J,
i• +' r i
i_
.. ,. M
~. -~ \ `Yew, .r, ~ }] .`
~ _
P ~ ' 4
~. ... ;. ~I Ii ` ~ .~; I 1
LEGEND '~ k ~ ~ , r . ~ ``
...~ t 1
HABITAT QUALITY r"
CATEGORIES J)if
HIGH QUALITY ;4't" '"~~
>,, ,
-SLIGHTLY MODIFIED i ~ ~' ~i ~' ff "~1 !k N z
Q MODERATELY MODIFIED // 1 .v ~ '~ ~Y• ll '_ ~ °o_
y ~ HEAVILY MODIFIED ~~,fg ` !~ fA
it -SEVERELY DEGRADED ~,' ~ ^~ ~
A. RIPARIYW HABITAT ~~~ .(
~AOUATIC HABRAT ~i '
~*«
Bn5f M4P®NAIiON(LL GeWIIMHIC ]OJ3 ~ _ , ..
;r;r ,+ C'
106"SLOiW' W 105°50 000' W 106°a4.OM°' W 106°na.000' w
The Engineering Department requires a Construction Management Plan and a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan for every development or redevelopment that disturbs the soil. The main objective of
the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is to identify "Best Management Practices;' that will minimize
erosion and sediment transport to area rivers and streams from the construction site.
In addition, the City employs a vigorous street-sweeping schedule to remove sand and sediment from
streets and roadways. The schedule includes sweeping of all designated areas at least once per week in
summer months.
The watershed basins for the City of Aspen are described in Figure 7 as their percent of the total Aspen
watershed basin. The sediment load discharged from those basins, as their percent of total sediment
load produced by Aspen, is shown as well. In 2007, the City Engineering and Parks departments
partnered on the Jennie Adair and Rio Grande Stormwater Management Projects, targeting two
watershed basins (West side and East side, respectively). Sedimentation vaults were installed at the
recycle center and near the entrance to the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES) to capture
Stormwater from the city and remove most of the heavier sediments. Jennie Adair Park was then
redesigned with a series of wetlands and ponds that serve to further clean the runoff before it enters
the river. After six months of operation, the Jennie Adair Stormwater vault removed 80 tons of
uca w
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-5
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
sediment and the constructed wetlands further removed 64 tons of sediment for a total of 144 tons of
sediment not discharged into the Roaring Fark River.
However, as
indicated in Figure 6,
the majority of the
sediment load from
the City (over 35%)
comes from the
Aspen Mountain
Basin that includes
the downtown area.
Currently there is no
treatment for this
area. To address this
problem, the City is
analyzing the
possibility of directing
Source:City of Aspen Clean Riverlnitiative a portion of the Mill
I am tryinB~B€E3r~Slafr„~EngTnker~ng to darifY;t#lls;aklle. Street flaw into the
Jennie Adair system and redesigning the Rio Grande Park area to include water quality features that will
filter and improve the quality of the runoff from the Aspen Mountain basin and downtown area.
In order to maintain adequate stream flows in Maroon and Castle Creeks, the City Water Department
continuously monitors stream flow, and adjusts operations to protect fish. Improvements to the Mill
Street well allows the city to use well water, if needed, to keep stream flows high enough for fish,
especially in winter when flows are low.
Global Warming and Energy Saving. In
2005, the city adopted the ambitious
Canary Initiative that identifies Aspen and
other mountain communities as the
"canary in the coalmine" for global
warming. The goal is to aggressively reduce
Aspen's carbon footprint to protect our
communities future, and to contribute to
global reduction of global warming
pollution. Global warming is caused by
greenhouse gasses, which trap heat in the
atmosphere. According to the EPA's US
Greenhouse Gas Inventory, in 2006 carbon
dioxide (C02) made up 80% of green house
gas emissions in the United States. C02
enters the atmosphere through the burning
of fossil fuels, solid waste and tree products.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental
Figure 6
Sediment Loading By Basin Size and Management Area
(waiting for further clarification on this graph from Trish)
Jenny Adair Wetlands
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
As a starting point, the City established a baseline global warming pollution inventory (also known as
greenhouse gas emissions inventory) that tells how much of Aspen's emissions come from
transportation, how much from building heating and cooling, and how much from other sources. That
information makes it easier to know where the best opportunities to reduce emissions might be, so that
the City can focus its efforts on the appropriate programs. The City hopes to reduce its greenhouse gas
emissions from its levels in 2004 by 30% in 2020, and 80% by 2050.
In conjunction with Aspen's Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory and Climate Impacts Assessment, the
Canary Initiative's Action Plan outlines steps Aspen can take to achieve necessary reductions in its
carbon emissions. More about this program can be found at http://www.aspenglobalwarminR.com.
Table 1
Summary of Aspen's greenhouse gas emissions 2004
Source Tons C02-emissions Percent
Air Travel 344,487 41.00%
Ground Transportation 211,175 26.SOYo
Electricity (buildings) 166,557 19.80%
Natural Gas & Propane (buildings) 106,754 12.70Yv
Landfill 11,577 1.40Yo
Nitrous oxide 325 0.04%
Total 840,875 100%
source: Aspen Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2004 For the City of Aspen's Canary Initiative
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. The chart above
shows the major sources of global warming pollution
(greenhouse gas emissions) for the City of Aspen in 2004. As
a destination resort it is not surprising that commercial and
private air travel -the town's economic engine -accounts
for 41 percent of Aspen's emissions. Ground transportation
(cars, trucks, buses, commuting, in-town travel), at 25.1%, is
the second-leading source. Nearly all of the emissions are
carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere from the
combustion of fossil fuels, with a very small percentage
coming from methane (landfill emissions) and nitrous oxide
gases (fertilizers). The total reflects millions of small and
routine acts of energy use such as turning on lights or
driving to the post office. The inventory includes energy
and emissions for tourists, second homeowners, and
locals who travel by car, commercial airlines, and private
aircraft to and from Aspen. The report also points out that
per capita green house gas emissions in Aspen are about
double the national average.
The following chart shows the amount in tons of
emissions by type of travel for ground transportation in
2004, clearly indicating that the majority of ground transportation emissions are created by
commuters on Highway 82.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-7
Aspen Existing Conditions Repor[ -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Figure 7
Aspen Emissions: Ground Transportation, 2004
Thousand Tons of C02
Pitlcin Counly, 0.2
Driving on
highway, 125.7
OA-road,
Tourislroad travel,
40.3
otAspen, 1.0
Driving around
bwn, 36.7
Aspen School
District, 0.3
ambulances, andJ LRFTA buses, 3.1
ASC,1.7
Source: Aspen Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2004 For the Ciry of Aspen's Canary Initiative
Transportation Ootions Program. There are multiple traffic/transit options offered by the City to
further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Besides providing one of the largest transit systems
in the state in RFTA, the city of Aspen has created multiple incentives for alternative
transportation through its TOP (Transportation Options) Program.
• Carpool Matching--City staff will help employers find carpool opportunities for employees
that allow them to use HOV lanes and park for free in town. Carpool matching events can
also be held at worksites.
• Emergency Ride Home-•TOP member employees are eligible for free emergency
transportation should an unexpected situation arise during the work day. Transportation is
provided by taxi and completely paid for by the City of Aspen. To be eligible, employees
must have used an alternative transportation mode (bus, carpool, etc) on the day the
emergency occurs.
• Transportation Information Boards--TOP employers are provided free transportation
information boards that display transit schedules, carpool matching applications and more.
• Construction and traffic email alerts--TOP employers receive email alerts of important
construction, road closure, or traffic news.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
• Monthly Newsletters-The monthly TOP Story e-newsletter provides all the important
transportation information relevant to local employers.
Other transportation-related services and programs include carpool parking, park and ride
areas, a car sharing program, electric car parking, and bike/transit access.
Hydropower and Wind Enerav. One of the main ways the City of Aspen is combating
greenhouse gas emissions is by owning and operating its own hydropower and wind energy
sources to create electricity, using as little coal as possible. The city also purchases wind from
power farms and contracts for non-carbon energy through the Western Area Power Authority
and the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska. Aspen will receive 83% of its electricity from
renewable wind and hydropower once the Castle Creek hydropower plant is completed in 2009.
Voters approved $3,920,000 in bond sales in 2007 to assist in the redevelopment of the plant.
The 11,774-square-foot plant would produce 5.5 million kilowatt-hours a year, which equates to
electricity for 655 typical homes in Aspen. It also would eliminate 5,167 tons of C02 emissions -
a .6 percent reduction in community-wide carbon emissions based on the 2004 gas emission
inventory.
Climate Impacts Assessment. Among the analyses the City has completed over the years is the
monitoring of weather patterns and changes that have occurred. The average number of frost-
free days per year in Aspen has increased by 22 days over the last 50 years, and the rate of
warming has been twice as fast in the last 25 years as in the previous 25 years. It is predicted
that if global emissions continue to rapidly rise, Aspen is projected to warm 14 degrees
Fahrenheit by the end of the century, giving it a climate similar to Amarillo, TX.
140
120
T100
a
n
0 80
60
40
Figure 8
Aspen Frost Free Days, 1958-2007
. y = 0.4421x +82.903
1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006
Source: City of Aspen
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-9
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Continued greenhouse gas emission growth
could end skiing in Aspen by 2100 as more
precipitation falls as rain rather than snow,
and winter starts later and ends earlier.
Vs.
The following chart indicates a dramatic drop
in the number ofbelow-zero days over the
last fifty years. According to the 2007 City of
Asoen Sustainability Reaort. the most recent
decade has had the longest summer, earliest
spring (last freeze), fewest really cold nights, and warmest nighttime temperatures since records
were kept.
40
30
A
a01.
o, 20
T
O
10
0
Figure 9
Number of Below-2ero Days, 1958-2007
y = -0.2379x + 21.526
^
'° ~~~ ~,:
1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006
Source: City of Aspen
Renewable Enerav Mitigation Program /REMPI. The City of Aspen and Pitkin County elected
officials adopted an advanced energy code in 1995 as a response to consumption of non-
renewable energy in new residential construction. It set strict standards for building envelope
and mechanical equipment performance. The energy code was the first of its kind to set a cap
on energy consumption, including consumption outside the home in snow melt and pools/spas,
and helped decrease the unregulated use of energy in very large homes. However, the program
only gave the owner and builder an onsite option to offset this additional energy use.
The next evolution of the energy code was the creation of the Renewable Energy Mitigation
Program, or REMP. This program continued to address consumption by allowing onsite
mitigation with renewable energy systems and introduced the option of an energy use payment
based on a recovery cost of 20 years of excess energy use. This payment option is paid at time
of permit issuance. The program provided a structure in which architects and owners could
rethink design to more efficiently allow for certain amenities. This program was designed and
implemented in conjunction with the City, Pitkin County, and the Community Office for
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-10
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Resource Efficiency (CORE). CORE is a local non-profit dedicated to promoting renewable
energy, energy efficiency, and green building in western Colorado.
REMP is designed to compensate for the excess emissions over the twenty year lifespan of snow
melt systems, pools or spa systems, and for houses with sizes greater than 5,000 square feet.
The REMP code includes a renewable energy mitigation payment option for homeowners who
choose not to install onsite renewable energy systems for their snow melt systems, pools, or
spas. The money raised through the payment option goes to a variety of projects that save
energy and reduce global warming emissions, ranging from energy rebates on efficient
appliances to paying capital costs for energy saving measures in large commercial buildings.
Since the program's inception in 2000, the REMP fund has raised almost $8,000,000 and has
revolutionized the way residential homes are designed and built in the Roaring Fork Valley.
Now, architects are adding features such as solar hot water, solar photovoltaic, and geothermal
systems to commercial and non-commercial buildings because of the influence of this program.
Asoen Skiine Company Environmental Leadership. In recent years, the Aspen Ski Company has become a
national leader in environmental programs and sustainability. Although they acknowledge that they
have a long way to go towards sustainability, their environmental programs create tangible action steps
to help reduce their impact on the environment. Among their efforts are their sustainability report,
green development, habitat protection and enhancement, on-mountain education, climate protection
and green purchasing efforts. A summary list of the company's environmental accomplishments
include:
• Committed to the first significant purchase of renewable energy certificates in the ski
industry;
• Established largest solar photovoltaic system in ski industry;
• Established the first ski-resort supported Environment Foundation using money donated by
its employees (almost $1 million given) to local environmental causes;
• Built one of the first of eleven LEED certified buildings in the world;
• Became the first ski resort to join the Chicago Climate Exchange;
• Developed the ski industry's first climate policy;
• Launched the first climate change education campaign in the ski industry;
• Became the first ski resort to fuel all of its snowcats with biodiesel;
• Built a small hydro-electric plant to power a portion of its operations; and
• Received numerous awards recognizing its environmental commitment.
More information about the Aspen Ski company's environmental programs can be found at
htto://www.asoensnowmass.com/environment.
Facilities. Capacities and Improvements.
Water System. The City of Aspen provides municipal water to all areas of the City and parts of
Pitkin County. Aspen has been very aggressive about reducing the community's demand for
water. The total demand for water has decreased in recent years due to an ambitious program
to find and repair main pipe leaks and because of a new conservation-based water rate system
in which users pay higher rates when they use more water. The money saved goes back into
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-11
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
conservation efforts. For instance, during the 2002 drought, over 1,100 Aspen water customers
received refunds for their contributions to meeting the City's targeted goal of a 10% reduction in
water demand. As illustrated in the chart below, water usage during 2006 totaled 1,106 million
gallons, a 13.8 percent decline from the level seen during 2000.
Figure 10
Annual Aspen Water System Use, 1995-2006
1,600
1,400
;,1,200
m
~ 1,000
800
0
a 600
0
2 400
0
200
Source: Ciry of Aspen
The Aspen water plant's main source of water is from Castle Creek and Maroon Creek. It also
receives water from three municipal wells, which are available to make up deficits in surface
streams during critical drought conditions. The water system collects, treats and distributes 3.03
million gallons per day on average. The peak water usage days tend to be in the summer -- in
the 2007 summer, the peak day water use was 7.1 million gallons per day. The City's water
plant, located off of Castle Creek Road, has the capacity to provide up to 22 million gallons of
water per day. However, connections to the system are limited by raw water availability during
critical drought conditions, not by the physical capacity of the water plant.
Considering raw water availability limitations, the system has a total capacity of some 18,250
equivalent capacity units (ECUs). The current inventory of connections to the water system
indicates that there were 17,100 ECUs connected to the system in 2007 leaving an additional
unused capacity of 1,150 ECUs. This unused capacity equates to approximately 600 additional
single-family residences. It should be noted that the Raw Water Supply Availability Study was
prepared in 1994, before the effects of water conservation efforts were apparent. The actual
capacity for additional connections would now be considerably larger than 1,150 ECUs,
considering the reduction in water usage for existing connections.
Wastewater Sewer Svstem. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) maintains its
business office, employee housing complex, and equipment storage and maintenance facility at
565 N. Mill St. (north of Clark's market and east of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies).
The old sewage plant located there was decommissioned in approximately 1983. The Sanitation
District recently received approval for a master plan for its facilities that included the
wastewater treatment plant expansion and employee housing. It also recently completed the
installation of a new outfall pipe that carries sewage from town out to the AABC along the Rio
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-12
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2005
Grande trail. The ACSD complex is composed of approximately 4.5 acres of land and the district
maintains approximately 62 miles of sanitary sewer.
All sewage from the city is transmitted by the collection system and trunk lines to the
wastewater treatment facility located at 400 Service Center Rd. in Pitkin County near the Aspen
Airport Business Center. That facility contains approximately 8.1 acres. With the new
expansion, the ACSD will have the capacity to treat up to 3.0 million gallons of sewage per day.
That translates to a total potentially served population of approximately 30,612 people (total
flow divided by 98 gallons per capita per day).
The ACSD has the capacity to
determine the number of
residents, workers and visitors in
Aspen on any given day due to
the "flush" counts. That is, the
amount of influent that flows to
the wastewater treatment plant
provides an indicator of how
"full" the community is on any
given day. In 2007, the district
had an average daily influent flow
of 1.48 million gallons which
represents an approximate
average daytime population of
14,362 persons. The peak Maroon Creek Wetlands
population estimate in 2007 was
again in the summer (July), with an estimated average population of 17,755 persons.
While the highest recorded "flush" count was in 2001, this does not necessarily indicate the
population peaked in this year. It is important in providing estimates over time to consider
improvements in water efficiency. An estimated 300 toilets per year have been retrofitted over
the past 15 years, replacing toilets that used approximately 5 gallons per flush with toilets using
1.5 gallons per flush. Additionally, similar efficiency gains have been made in clothes washers,
faucet and shower aerators and dishwashers. The ACSD keeps track of the monthly average and
peak day usage on an annual basis. This information is provided in the Appendix.
Stormwater System and Detention. The City of Aspen maintains approximately 9 miles of storm
sewers within its system (see storm system map in the appendix). To educate the public about
the hazards of improper waste disposal and the connection of the Stormwater system to local
waterways, the environmental health department affixed adhesive storm drain markers to city
storm drains. These markers explain, in English and Spanish, that the drain goes directly to the
river and warns against dumping paint, garbage, or other materials into these drains.
The City completed a Surface Drainage Master Plan in 2001 and updated it in January 2006 for
that portion of the City identified as the Aspen Mountain Service Area (2001 Master Plan). That
Master Plan evaluated the existing capacities of the storm sewers, curbs and gutters, roadside
swales, and streets to convey Stormwater flows through the City. It also evaluated the potential
additional flooding that could occur in the event of a mud slide off of Aspen Mountain during a
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-13
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
major storm event. The 2001 Master Plan recommended the construction of additional storm
sewers in several locations and set priorities for the construction of those improvements.
The 2001 Master Plan concluded that most of the storm sewer system has the capacity to
convey runoff events with a less than 2-year to a 10-year frequency of occurrence. Because of
the limited capacities of the streets to convey stormwater, the combined street and storm
sewer system has the capacity to convey between a 30-year and 50-year storm in most areas
and the 100-year storm in a few selected areas. This falls significantly short of the generally
accepted 100-year flood criteria for the safe passage of floods in a municipal setting. This
information is summarized in Table 2 for the Aspen Mountain Service Area.
The City's Master Plan recommended upgrades to the storm sewer portion of the storm
sewer/street system to carry the 10-year storm flow in all areas except the Francis Street
improvements, which would be less than the 10-year flow. Although this upgraded storm sewer
system, along with available Conveyance capacities of the streets, would fall short of the 100-
yearflood protection criteria in several locations in the city, it was identified as the preferred
option.
TABLE 2
Existing Storm Sewer/Street System Stormwater Runoff Capacity
(Absent Mud Flows off of Aspen Mountain)
Storm Runoff Capacity
(Frequency of flood Event)
Combined Storm
Storm Sewer/Street System Storm Sewers Streets Sewers and Street
System 1(Eastern Portion through Rio Grande Park)
Ute Avenue <2 yr. 10 yr. 10 yr.
Cooper Street 5 yr. 100 yr. 100 yr.
S. Original Street 10 yr. 10 yr. 10 yr.
S. Spring St. 2-SO yr 10-100 yr SO-100 yr
Syztem 2 (Central Portion to Mill Street Outfall)
Upper S. Galena Street 5 yr. 100 yr. 100 yr.
Durant Ave. 2 yr. 10 yr. 10 yr.
Mill Street 30-100 r 30-50 yr 100 yr
System 3 (Western Portion thru Jenny Adair Park)
Aspen St. 5. of Hopkins Ave. 10 yr. 30 yr. 50 yr.
Garmisch Street <2 yr. <2.10 yr. 5-30 yr.
Hopkins Ave. 10 yr. 10-100 yr. 50-100 yr.
Main Stree[ <2-10 yr. <2-5 yr. SO-100 yr.
W. Francis Street 2 yr. <2 vr. 2 vr.
Landfill and Recvcline Efforts. The landfill represents one of the sources of total greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. In 2004 approximately 11,577 tons of C02 emissions (C02-e) were released from the Pitkin
County Landfill. This accounted for approximately 1.4% of Aspen's total GHG emissions. Recycling efforts
prevented about 4,881 tons of C02-e (a reduction of 30% from usual waste emissions). In 2005, the City
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-14
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
of Aspen adopted a Waste Reduction/Recycling Ordinance aimed at increasing the recycling rate,
diverting yard waste (grass and leaves) from trash, and establishing a reporting system. The reporting
requirement will allow the City to calculate its recycling rate and therefore establish a baseline for
subsequent years. The goals of this ordinance, and corresponding outreach, are to make recycling an
integral part of trash service, more convenient for all citizens and ultimately increase recycling rates. The
success of this ordinance will help reduce GHG emissions through increasing recycling and diverting yard
waste.
Pitkin County maintains the landfill that is located northwest of Cozy Point Ranch off of Highway 82. The
2005 Materials Report indicates the materials taken to the landfill from alt parts of Pitkin County, not
just Aspen.
Table 3
2005 Materials Report
Material Tons
Trash 93,385
Aggregate (rock) 93,380
Conventional Recycling 5,173
Compost 5,135
Other Recycling 463
Household Hazardous Waste 21
Electronics 12
TOTAL 197,569
With the increased effort to recycle materials, the County landfill may fill up more slowly. The County
staff that operate the landfill have indicated that the amount of tons from construction demolition and
new construction debris is approximately 50~ of the non-aggregate (rock) tonnage brought to the
landfill, or approximately 52,000 tons in 2005. The other 50% is primarily household trash. They have
estimated that the landfill will reach capacity between 2033 and 2038, unless new programs and
technologies produce less waste. The county is currently working on a management plan that will
address capacity issues and that will continue to allow aggregate recovery and composting, even when
the landfill reaches capacity.
Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-15
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Soecial Environmental Events. Education is
a large part of Aspen's environmental
heritage. Over the years, the City has
created special events throughout the year
that celebrate the City's environmental
progress, including Arbor Day, Find
Another Way Day, Earth Day, and spring
clean up. As part of these efforts, the City
encourages all special events to minimize
their waste by providing on-site recycling
efforts. Six Zero-Waste events (Ride the
Rockies, Community picnic, Earth Day, Owl
Creek Chase, Food and Wine Festival, and
America Recycles Day) were held in 2007.
Issues and Conclusions. Environmental
considerations should continue to betaken into account in decisions related to growth, development,
and environmental stewardship. The health of Aspen's economy is directly related to the health of its
environment. It is important to establish and maintain a balance between economic growth and
environmental preservation. Every new resident, new job and new visitor has an impact. For example,
extending the Aspen airport runway may bring more tourists and visitors who generate additional sales
tax dollars, but the increasing number of jets will also bring more carbon emissions.
In terms of growth, the City will need to determine the real limitations of its water and wastewater
systems. Though Aspen's 2006 year-round population is estimated to be 6,365, it serves a daily
population of almost 15,000 and a peak population of 30,000 people. The water department has
estimated that at least 600 more single family residences could be served by the system with current
water usage levels. This number could change, however, given new technology and the level of
redevelopment and retrofitting of water fixtures. Additionally, while the Sanitation District estimates its
facilities can serve a "full" population of 30,612 people (residents, employees, and visitors) at Current
usage levels, advances in efficient toilets can and have changed the estimated population capacity of the
plant over time. Changes in technology, policy and social behavior will significantly impact the
estimated population capacity of the water and wastewater systems in Aspen.
Contact information and websites
The Environmental Health Department can be reached at 970-920-5039.
The Canary Initiative can be reached at 970-920-5071
htta://www.as oeneloba Iwa rm i n¢. com/whereCO2comesfrom. cfm
The Engineering Department can be reached at 970-920-5080
The Water Department can be reached at 970-920-5110
The Parks Department can be reached at 970-920-5120
RRC Assotia[es & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-16
Aspen Food & Wine Festival
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
http•//www aspenpitkin com
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District can be reached at 970-925-3601
http•llwww aspensan com
The Community Office of Resource Efficiency can be reached at 970-544-9508
http //www aspencore orR/
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-17
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Appendix Items
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Statistics
Monthly Average Daily Influent Flow,
1998, 2001, 2004, and 2007
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
8•
~a
)7
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Fwg Sep Oct Nov Dec
Source: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
'Peak year since 1992, in regards to influent Flow.
Monthly Total Influent FIow,1992-2007
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
/
/ { ~
\
~~ ~ ~\.
'0 21
_,__.~, 2
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-18
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Aspen Storm Svstem Map
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Environmental Quality-19
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #3 -Sustaining the Aspen Idea
June, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e;
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
SUSTAINING THE ASPEN IDEA
The Aspen Idea often includes the phrase: Mind, Body and Spirit. It is considered the blending of
thought, creativity, and action, and is attributable to Chicago industrialist Walter Paepcke and his wife,
Elizabeth, who began convening intellectuals, artists, and philosophers in the mining town of Aspen as
far back as 1949. The Aspen Idea goes hand in hand with the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, an
intellectual organization established following the success of the Goethe Bicentennial Convocation in
1949. The Institute's primary goals were to promote world peace and instill humanism in the world in a
post-war society. The Institute also gave rise to the Aspen Music Festival and the International Design
Conference.
Paepcke's Aspen Idea was envisioned for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world
to step away from their daily routines and reflect on the underlying values of society and culture. To
further this idea, he offered an environment where great leaders could convene while being influenced
by arts and culture and allowing athletic endeavors that would nurture their mind, body and spirit. Its
concept is so far-reaching, that educational seminars on the Aspen Idea are taught at major universities.
The influence of the Paepckes has been a factor in Aspen's economy for over half a century, and the
result of this Aspen Idea has been the creation of a year round internationally-known community that
brings visitors and intellectuals from far and wide.
Sustaining the Aspen Idea will continue to be a challenge for the community. The City is growing and
changing and is no longer a sleepy mining town, but a community desiring to sustain itself, and its ideals,
well into the future. This Chapter explores the current state of arts and culture brought about through
the Aspen Idea.
Arts. The Aspen area is home to numerous arts organizations and
events that provide the cultural and economic stimulus that
ensures Aspen's year round success. The influence of the arts is
far-reaching ,and it is important to note that Aspen has many
facilities for the arts scattered throughout the city, including, the
Red Brick Arts Center, the Aspen Art Museum, Aspen Music
Festival, the Community Theater and the Wheeler Opera House.
The City's premier arts venue is the Wheeler Opera House, which
is listed on both the State and National Historic Registers. Red crick arts center
Perceived as the "center of the arts" in Aspen, the historic
Wheeler Opera House hosts music, theater, dance, film, lectures and community events almost 365 days
a year. The Opera House was built in 1889 by Jerome B. Wheeler. The Wheeler was brought back to its
current Victorian splendor by the City of Aspen in 1984. Twenty-four years after its latest renovation,
the Wheeler continues to serve Aspen as a world class theater, performance venue and town meeting
place and is still considered not only the crown jewel of the town, but indeed the art and soul of Aspen.
The Wheeler Opera House maintains a vacant lot immediately adjacent to it, which has long been
thought of as an opportunity for expansion in the future. Aspen's past success in creating partnerships
will come into play as the City makes plans for the Wheeler Parcel.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea-1
Conditions Report- DRAFT
6/11/2008
The Wheeler is supported by a Real Estate
Transfer Tax (RETT), which enables it to be
used by local non-profit organizations at a
subsidized rate. The wheeler Opera House
and Second Floor Lobby are available for
rental throughoutthe year.
Box Office hours are 10 AM to 6 PM
Monday through Saturday and 10 AM to 5
PM on Sunday. Tickets can be purchased
by calling the Wheeler Box Office at
970/920-5770 orlogging onto
htto://www.wheelerooerahouse.com .
wneeler opera Rouse Economic Contribution of the Arts. Until
recently, the impact of the arts was little
understood. But in recent years, the arts and their impact have been studied in mare detail, identifying
its economic contribution to the community. It is increasingly apparent that the arts provide more than
a diversion for people enjoying the sights and activities of Aspen. Indeed, the arts have become the
primary attraction for a significant number of visitors and residents. While providing both enjoyment
and employment, the arts have evolved into a powerful economic engine that helps to sustain and drive
the economy of the area.
In July 2004, the Business Research Division of the Leeds School of Business at CU Boulder prepared The
Economic Imoact of the Arts on Aspen and Snowmass for the Red Brick Center for the Arts. The primary
purpose of the study was to quantify the summer and winter economic impact of selected arts
events/organizations in the Aspen area. The study also referenced findings from The Economic and
Social Imoact ofSecond Homes in Four Mountain Resort Counties of Colorado prepared by the
Northwest Council of Governments (NWCOG) and the University of Colorado from April 2004, exploring
the demographics of arts patrons. Among the organizations and events that were part of the study
were:
Anderson Ranch Aspen Santa Fe Ballet
Aspen Art Museum Aspen Theatre in the Park
Aspen Chamber Resort Association (Food & Wine Aspen Writers' Foundation
Magazine Classic) Heritage Aspen
Aspen Filmfest Jazz Aspen at Snowmass
Aspen Music Festival and School
The study revealed that the economics of Aspen's arts and events is substantial. The study calculated
that total audience expenditures average $313 million during the summer months and $4.8 million in
the winter months. This average annual total of $36.1 million in direct expenditures includes lodging,
food/drink, events, shopping, outdoor activities, and nightlife. The spin-off of secondary expenditures is
estimated to be an additional $21.7 million with a total impact (direct and secondary) of $57.8 million.
The great majority -- 83%-- of these expenditures are made from May through October.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea -2
Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT
The NWCOG survey provides a good snapshot of the typical arts patrons in Pitkin County. That survey
showed that full-time residents and second homeowners both share an interest in attending arts and
cultural events.
Attending concerts 85% 62%
Attending films 65% 57%
Attending the theatre 62% 52%
Interested in visual arts exhibits 45% 54%
Attending dance presentations 42% 28%
Attending galleries 38% 58%
Attending educational classes 46% 19%
Attending community lectures 51 % 32%
Source: Northwest Council of Governments Survey
According to the study, 71 percent of full-time residents rated arts and culture as important or very
important, and 69 percent of second homeowners gave the same rating.
The Economic Impact of the Arts on Aspen and Snowmass serves as background to Michael Strong's
study entitled The Arts in Aspen: Do We Need More Space? That study identifies the current and future
need for arts facilities and expansions in the Aspen area over the next several years. Strong's study
suggests that renovations and new construction at the District Theatre, Red Brick, Castle Creek campus,
the Aspen Institute, the Public Library, and the Wheeler, and the possibility of a new location for the
Aspen Art Museum, will positively affect every other arts organization in Aspen, and may relieve many
of the facilities issues that challenge the arts organizations.
Heritalze Education. The Aspen Historical Society is a 501c.3. non-profit entity that oversees and
maintains its five historic sites and provides heritage education to the Aspen community and its many
visitors. The five historic sites include:
• Wheeler-Stallard Museum
• Holden/Marolt Mining & Ranching Museum
• Ashcroft Ghost Town
• Independence Ghost town
• Lift One (Proposed Ski Museum) Site
The Historical Society maintains a staff of eleven people, led by its director, Georgia Hanson, and
maintains its offices at the Wheeler-Stallard House, at 620 W. Sleeker St. Until 2007, the Society
sustained itself by donations and grants, but in 2006, a new taxing district was approved as a way to
keep Aspen's history alive and accessible to residents. The Aspen Historic Park and Recreation District
just finished its first year. The mission of the District Board is to monitor tax dollars paid to the historic
district and to ensure that the dollars are spent within the parameters defined in their service district
plan. The funds are passed through the Aspen Historical Society which is governed by a separate Board
of Trustees. The Society's Vision Statement is:
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea -2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
The Aspen Historical Society actively preserves and passionately presents our local
history in an inspired and provocative manner that will continue to anchor our
community and its evolving character.
The Historical Society continues to depend on its
volunteers for the many programs it provides the
community. The Volunteer Program provides
opportunities for Wheeler/Stallard Museum Docents,
Walking Tour Guides ,Ghost Town Guides, Slide Show
Presenters, Archives & Collections Research and
Educational Kids Programming. The Historical Society
Archives provide an extremely deep amount of
information that is available for the community to
research. Back issues of the Aspen Times dating to the
1880s help paint a rich history of the community that is
also depicted in its ever-changing dioramas within the
museum. Theirwebsite
(http://www.aspenhistorysociety.com/home.htmi) offers
a significant amount of historic Aspen photographs that
are available to purchase.
Spiritual Sustenance. Aspen's residents and visitors will find
a wide selection of churches, synagogues, and organizations
to meet their spiritual needs. Below are the names, locations
and services provided on a year round basis.
Name Location Services Other Info.
Aspen Chapel 77 Meadowood Dr. Sunday 9:30 AM Art Gallery
Aspen Community Church 200 E. Sleeker Sunday 9:30 AM
Aspen Jewish Congregation 77 Meadowood Dr. Friday 6 PM
Christ Episcopal Church 536 W. North St. Sunday 8 & 10 AM
Christian Science Society of Aspen/Snowmass 734 W. Main St.
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 55 Moore Drive
Crossroads Church of Aspen 726 W. Francis St.
Jewish Community Center Chabad of Aspen 435 W. Main St.
Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses 55 Pyramid Road
St. Mary's Catholic Church 533 E. Main St. Sunday 7:30 & 10 AM Seasonal Mass at
M-F 7:00 AM 5 PM Sundays
Sat. 8AM & 5:30 PM at Snowmass
Chapel
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Aspen PO Box 2181
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea - 3
Historical Society Volunteers
Source: AHS website
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Many of these religious institutions provide human service assistance to the community (e.g. a homeless
shelter, AA meetings, etc.) and hold seasonal special events as fundraisers (Aspen Community Church's
pumpkin patch and St. Mary's St. Patrick's Dinner).
Aspen Institute. The Aspen Institute, founded in 1950, is an international nonprofit organization
dedicated to fostering enlightened leadership and open-minded dialogue. Through seminars, policy
programs, conferences and leadership development initiatives, the Institute and its international
partners seek to promote nonpartisan inquiry and an appreciation for timeless values. The Institute is
headquartered in Washington, DC, and has campuses in Aspen, Colorado, and on the Wye River near the
shores of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. Its international network includes partner Aspen Institutes in
Berlin, Rome, Lyon, Tokyo, New Delhi, and Bucharest, and leadership initiatives in Africa, Central
America, and India.
Aspen Institute events have attracted presidents, statesmen, diplomats, judges, ambassadors, and
Nobel laureates over the years, enriching and enlivening the Institute as a global forum for leaders.
Today the Aspen Institute seminar programs have expanded to include sessions such as Global Values
and Leadership and Pursuing the Good Life. The Institute supports 20 policy programs and
partnerships directed by leading policymakers and practitioners. The programs explore topics such as
prospects for peace in the Middle East; communications, media, and information policy; economic
opportunity; social innovation through business; the nonprofit sector; creating smart solutions to help
Americans save, invest and own; and community initiatives for children and families.*
*From the Aspen Institute's websi[e
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea -4
Aspen Ezisting Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Aspen Foundation and Nonorofits. The Aspen Community Foundation (ACF) was
founded in 1980 to improve the quality of life in the Roaring Fork area. Its mission
is:
Aspen Community Foundation builds philanthropy and supports nonprofit
organizations by connecting donors to community needs, building
permanent charitable funds, and bringing people together to solve
community problems."
In 2006, the Aspen Community Foundation's Funds granted $4,832,652 to 273
non-profit programs, and in 2007, they granted $7,048,411 to 322 nonprofit
organizations. The ACF maintains a list of 365 nonprofit organizations. Seventy-
seven percent (77%) of all grants funded nonprofits in Pitkin, west Eagle and
Garfield counties. The funds are distributed in three focus areas of education,
health and human services, and strengthening community. There are also funds
directed specifically for Latino programs.
Pitkin County's Healthy Community Fund is funded through a five year property
tax that is dedicated for the sole purpose of providing a stable funding source for health and human
services and community nonprofit programs (see Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite chapter). Below is a
chart from their annual report card that indicates where nonprofit funding comes from in the Aspen
area.
Volunteerism is a large part of
what makes the Aspen
community so strong. These
nonprofit organizations often
serve as opportunities for
residents and visitors alike to
meet and socialize while doing
good deeds for the community.
At every event in town, one will
find their neighbors and friends
volunteering to serve as
docents, ushers, ambassadors
and food servers. It is the
culture of Aspen to be involved,
and it is the Aspen Idea that has
helped to build this great
community of volunteerism.
Community Non-Profits Revenue Sources, 2005
Federal
1%
Pitkin County
Healthy
Community
Fund
1%
State
0%
In-kind
4%
All other local
goJts
4%
Local Individual
foundations donors
Source: Economic Impact of 2005 Healthy Community Fund
4%
State/national 27%
foundations
8%
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea -5
Photo by Aspen
Community
Foundation
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2005
Skiing in Aspen. Skiing, snowboarding and other recreational pursuits exemplify the "body" component
of the Aspen Idea. Aspen has a long association with skiing and in many ways has led the development
of the sport in the United States. This history has been well researched and documented in a number of
different articles and publications including Re-creation Throu¢h Recreation: Aspen Skiing from 1870 to
1970 by Anne Gilbert. That publication chronicles the history of skiing in Aspen over a century,
identifying many of the landmark events associated with skiing history in Aspen and the Roaring Fork
Valley.
Skiing went from being a necessary means of winter transportation and a local pastime during the
mining and early years of the 20th Century, to form a basis for Aspen's economic revival during the latter
part of the century. The publication suggests that while many other Colorado resorts relied on wealthy
businessmen to finance their development, none of these investors were comparable to Walter and
Elizabeth Paepcke and the role they played in Aspen. The combination of skiing, culture and intellectual
opportunities also attracted exceptionally educated outdoors people to Aspen, and encouraged more of
them to become year-round residents. The timing and size of Aspen's skiing growth also set it apart
from other Colorado ski areas. It was the first destination ski area to develop in Colorado. Aspen
Mountain, together with Buttermilk, Aspen Highlands, and Snowmass provided a wide variety of skiing
opportunities, and together with a town with a past, presented a unique community and resort
environment.
History of AspenlSnowmass Skier Yisits
1960167 •2006107
teoo.oo6 4s%
Ft Snowmass
autlermik
1,600,000 ='=-_-' Aspen HighWntls 40%
r_ Aspen MounUin
rwraz:4.pmrsnowmn..aww tAspenlSnowmass share of Colora0o total ~~s
Cob. •kNrrulb l•Y. M1Aa% ry ~-5~}y r a'
400.000
~;. '1111 11 11111111•••••••••••••••
" "' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
o%
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea -6
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
As summarized in Re-creation Throueh Recreation landmark dates in the history of skiing in Aspen
include:
1936, Swiss ski racer Andre Roch, who mapped out the first run on Aspen Mountain, conducts a land
survey of the Ashcroft area with the idea of starting a ski area on nearby Mt. Hayden. The Ashcroft
investors plans to build a complete resort are thwarted by the outbreak of World War II. In town,
Aspenites build aten-passenger "boat" tow, powered by an old mine hoist and truck engine, and cut the
first ski run, Roch Run, on the face of Aspen Mountain.
1941 In March, Aspen's first national downhill and slalom skiing championships are held. The U.S.
Army's 30`"Mountain Division begins training near Leadville at Camp Hale. Austrian native Friedl Pfeifer,
who had been teaching at Sun Valley, is a member of the 30th Mountain Division and skis Aspen
Mountain while on leave. After the war, Pfeifer relocates to Aspen and begins buying up mining claims
and surface rights.
1945 Walter Paepcke, president of Container Corporation of America, and his wife Elizabeth visit Aspen,
are taken with its charm and begin dreaming of it as a cultural center. Paepcke meets with Pfeifer and
they collaborate on Aspen's first chairlift; Pfeifer opens the Aspen Ski School.
1946 Aspen Ski Club hosts the first Andre Roch Cup, before the first chairlift on Aspen Mountain is
operational. Racers hike up the mountain.
1946 Aspen Skiing Corporation is formed. Lift 1 unofficially opens for skiing on Dec. 14.
1947 Lift 1 officially opens on Jan. 11 and is dedicated as the world's longest chairlift, with Pfeifer and
Paepcke in attendance.
19491nterested in the community's prospects as a summertime cultural center, Paepcke helps organize
the Goethe Bicentennial Convocation, a celebration of German culture, which would evolve into the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies and the Aspen Music Festival & School. Dr. Albert Schweitzer
gives the dedication address in what would be his only visit to the United States.
1950 Aspen hosts the first FIS World Alpine Championships in North America, giving Aspen international
recognition as a world-class ski area.
1958 Friedl Pfeifer opens Buttermilk Mountain. Whip Jones opens Highlands. William Janss, a former ski
racer and land developer, becomes interested in Snowmass and purchases the majority of the land at its
base -17 years after having first visited Aspen to compete in the National Alpine Championships.
1963 Aspen Skiing Corporation purchases Buttermilk Mountain from Pfeifer.
1967 Snowmass-at-Aspen, just 12 miles from Aspen, officially opens Dec. 17 as a joint venture of Aspen
Skiing Corporation and the Janss Corporation. There are five chairlifts and 50 miles of trails, including Big
Burn, Sam's Knob, Coney Glade and Campground.
1968 Elizabeth Paepcke establishes a wildlife sanctuary, which later becomes Aspen Center for
Environmental Studies. 1971 Elk Camp, the next area of Snowmass, opens.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea-7
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
1987 Aspen Mountain's Silver Queen Gondola, the longest single-stage gondola in the world, opens on
the 40th anniversary of Aspen Skiing Company.
1993 Whip Jones donates Highlands to Harvard University, which sells the area to Houston-based
developer Gerald Hines. Hines becomes a partner in Aspen Skiing Company, which assumes operations
of Highlands. Highlands becomes the fourth ski mountain to come under the management of Aspen
Skiing Company.
1996/97 Aspen Skiing Company marks its 50`h anniversary and enjoys aseason-long birthday
celebration. With more than 3,000 employees and 4,700 acres of ridable terrain across four mountains,
Aspen Skiing Company secures its status as a world-class winter destination.
1997/98 Snowmass celebrates 30 years of skiing and is considered one of the most convenient
destination resorts in the world, with 95 percent ski-in/ski-out accommodations, 3,010 acres of terrain,
20 lifts and 11 on-mountain restaurants. The Cirque lift opens, with an 800-foot vertical rise to an
elevation of 12,510 feet above sea level, giving Snowmass the nation's longest lift-served vertical rise
(4,406 feet).
1999 The new Sundeck restaurant at the summit of Ajax debuts in December with an expansive 22,000-
square-foot facility. A few months later it receives the U.S. Green Building Council's prestigious
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the rigorous greening of the
building. The new Cloud Nine high-speed quad delivers riders to the top of Cloud Nine, accessing
expanded intermediate terrain.
2000 The Aspen Institute celebrates its SO`"Anniversary.
2001 Peak Experience! Highland Bowl at Aspen Highlands opens all the way to the 12,300' summit.
Aspen Skiing Company announces that snowboarding will be allowed on Aspen Mountain starting April
1.
2002 The ESPN Winter X Games are first held in town, drawing the largest event crowds in the history of
Aspen/Snowmass.
2003 Aspen Skiing Company and ESPN announce the Winter X Games will return in 2004 for the third
consecutive year marking the first time a city has hosted an X Games event (summer or winter) for three
consecutive years.
2004 In January, Aspen Skiing Company and ESPN reached a landmark agreement keeping the Winter X
Games, the world's signature action sports event, in Aspen/Snowmass through Winter X Games XI in
2007.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea-8
Conditions ReDOrt-DRAFT 6/31/2008
Contact information and websites
The Aspen Institute
970-925-7010
http://www.aspeninstitute.or>;/site/c.hutWleMRKpH/b.487601/k.CCBC/The Aspen Institute.htm
Aspen Community Foundation
970-925-9300
http://www.aspencom munitvfoundation.orR/
Pitkin County Human Services Department
970-920-5766
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/16J
Wheeler Opera House
970-920-5770
http://www.wheeleroperahous.com
Aspen Historical Society
970-925-3721
htto://www.aspenhistorvsociety.com/home.html
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Sustaining the Aspen Idea-9
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Parks and Open Space
June, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRCAssociates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Cond'Rions Report 6/11/2008
ASPEN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Whether you seek a quiet neighborhood park with the sound
of rushing water, a large open space with mountain vistas, or
world-class recreational facilities, the City of Aspen Parks
system has something for everyone. The Aspen Parks
Department has made a commitment to its visitors to provide
a diversity of experience that all can enjoy. The natural beauty
that serves as a backdrop to each park, recreational facility,
and open space will inspire residents and tourists alike to
explore this wonderful system.
Accomplishments since the 2000 AACP. Since the 2000 AACP, the Parks Department's notable
accomplishments include the construction of the Aspen Recreation Center, the Community Campus, the
Aspen Golf Clubhouse & Championship Tennis facility, the skateboard park, Cemetery Lane Trail, Highlands
Trail, Terral-Wade Bridge, Highway 82 pedestrian improvements, Jennie Adair Park and storm water
improvements, the planting of over 2,000 street trees (strengthening the urban forest), rebuilding portions
of the Aspen Golf Course and a new irrigation system, restoring the Ute Cemetery, designing and
constructing the Maroon Creek Wetlands, and the acquisition of Smuggler Mountain. Many of these
projects were the direct result of goals and Action Items identified in the 2000 AACP. Several of these
projects were completed as joint projects with other City departments or the County, and many have
received state and national awards and recognition. These projects were designed, planned, and
completed in a sustainable nature, ensuring that design and products fit the environmental mission of the
community.
Facilities. Currently there are 34 acres of parks serving all neighborhoods, 42 acres of athletic areas and
fields, and 1,297 acres of open space and natural areas that serve ayear-round population of 6,365 or 0.22
acres per person. Aspen does not acquire parks to meet national standards; instead, the City decides if the
location, landscape qualities, and recreational attributes "fit" within the overall Parks plan when making
acquisition decisions. Parks are open from sunrise to 11 PM daily, and the Parks Department can be
reached at970-920-5120.
Trails. Currently, there are 22 miles of trails (paved and unpaved) within the community, making it one of
the largest systems in the state. An astounding average of 630 people per day used the Rio Grande trail
alone last fall. During the winter months, the Aspen Parks Department maintains one of the largest free
cross-country trail systems in the United States. The Nordic trail system consists of approximately 54 miles
of groomed ski and snowshoe trails connecting Aspen with the surrounding communities of Woody Creek,
Snowmass Village and Basalt. In the winter of 06-07, over 20,000 skiers used the Nordic trail system.
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/11/2008
• Go to http://www.aspenrecreation.com for a map of parks, trails, and open space in Aspen.
• Go to http•//www.aspennordic.com/ for a map of cross-country trails in the area.
Land Acquisition and Assets. Since 1996, the
City has purchased 953 acres of Open Space
in the Roaring Fork Valley for $25,384,038.
The City has partnered on acquisitions and
conservation easements with both the Aspen
Valley Land Trust and Pitkin County. The City
and Pitkin County have jointly acquired 445
acres, with the bulk of that acreage being
Smuggler Mountain, an acquisition of 269
acres, the City's share costing $13,050,709.
The Aspen Open Space and Trails Acquisition
Board recommends purchases of open space
to the City Council and is comprised of five
citizens and one alternate.
Parks, Open Space,
and Natural Areaslnventory
Other Properties
& Spi ' ' "
~$
According to the City of Aspen Impact Fee
Study and Update of School Lands Dedication
study completed in August 2006 by BBC
Research & Consulting, the parks and recreation assets that were eligible for inclusion in the impact fee
calculation totaled over $82 million.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 3
Conditions
se,ooo,ooo
s~,ooo,ooo
ss,ooo,ooo
z 55,000,000
o.
s+,ooo,ooo
L
ss,aoo,ooo
a
sz,ooo,ooo
si.ooa,ooo
so
8
6/11/2008
Property Acquisitions (1971-2007)
n F
~ ~ ~
e ~ ~ ~ x
~~ $~~ ~~
s
tt~xxst »a ~aa s: ~
x
~~g~~~~~~~~~~g~s~~~~~~~~~~~mmm~M~~~~S
a ~ a r~ a
o iii Z 5; c3 O
~~ o ~ a~~mb=og~~` ~a # ~x ~
~ ~~~' ~~~ ~ E~~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~
U E
S N Q
N ~
y ~ ~ ~
Parcels (sorted by year of acqulsl8on)
Special Events. The Parks Department is a huge sales tax generator for the City because it provides the
venues for major special events and activities that attract aworld-wide audience. Scheduled special events
in the park system include the Food & Wine Festival, Jazz Aspen, Ruggerfest, Motherlode Volleyball
Tournament, Arts & Crafts festival, and the New Year's Eve celebration. The Parks Department maintains
facilities to be able to accommodate special events, and also to have the facilities available for passive
recreation which is important to the community. The table below summarizes the estimated annual
attendance by event.
Event Attendance
EVENT (locations) ATTENDEES
Food and Wine (Wagner) 5,000/DAY
Motherlode (Wagner, Rio, Koch, Willoughby, Iselin, Rotary) 350/DAY/VENUE
Jazz Aspen (Rio) 3,500/DAY
Ruggerfest (Rio, Wagner) 500/DAY
July 4th 10,000/VARIOUS SITES
X-Games (Wagner) 10,000/DAY
Community Picnic (Paepcke) 3,000/DAY
Winterskol (Mall, Streets) 2,500/DAY
Arts and Crafts Festival (Wagner) 500/DAY
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/11/2006
Field Caoacitv. In addressing field capacity, the Parks Department has identified that current usage and
maintenance are critical factors in evaluating capacity. Based on these factors, the use of the City's athletic
fields for recreation programs and special events has reached its capacity. A study of the City's sports fields
was conducted by PRZ Consulting in November 2003. Since the completion of this study, the City partnered
with the Aspen School District and installed a synthetic turf field with lights at the Aspen Middle School in
an effort to reduce usage/maintenance impacts and improve capacity.
Issues. As far as the future is concerned, Jeff Woods believes that Aspen's competitive edge is its high
quality parks, open space, trails, recreation facilities and schools which are the key to keeping families in
the upper valley. However, he noted that as the down valley communities become more affluent and built
out, they will become more competitive with Aspen, making employees/workforce harder to find. Key
issues for this department include encouraging the Roaring Fork Valley's Hispanic community to better
utilize the amenities our Parks system, overcoming the severe strain of a commuting workforce, moving
forward with improvements to key facilities in concert with the voter approved storm water improvement
programs, and balancing special events, athletic, and passive recreational use of key turf areas.
The Parks Department can be reached at 970-920-5120. http•//www asoenrecreation.com/
RRC Associates 8 EIk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 5
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/11/2008
APPENDIX ITEMS
Inventory
Y
0 e
e
~ y
i }
W
y '~ ~bk i F Q° o p°, p°p ~
y ~ ,.
E
A
q O o .~ yl e
lI O e d
= i
Puk Acme beaeral Leeatlea Q
m •
P1 a
Imo ~
o p
SO A
~ ~ IS ~ ~y
~ o G
Ajaz Pazk Ute Ave 1
6 •
Aky Property
Spruce SL .
0.5 • 10
Anderson 1707 Cooprr St 7.2
Aspen Art Muserrm Gibson Ave. 0.7 • • • 10
Aspen Art Park Mill St.®RoanngFork 3
6 • •
Bass Park
Hopkins k Monarch .
0.4 • • •
Bugsy Barnard Park Hwy. 82 & Cemetery 2 •
Clapper Pazk
Hopkins/Fire Station
0.05 •
Conner Park Hopkins/City Hall 0.2 • •
Freddie Fisher Park RiversideDr.&Cooper 0.13 •
Glory Hole Pazk
Original A Ute
1
5 •
Henry Stein Park Slaughterhouse Brdg .
2 • • •
Herron Pazk
Neale SL
3
•
• • • 16
Hillyard Pazk
Bleeker SL ®4thA5th
0.3 • • • • • 13
Koch Park Gazmisch & Cooper 2 • •
Mollie Gibson Pazk
SBverlode Dr.
1
• • • • •
Newberry Park
Roaring Fork Trail
1.5
•
•
• • 3
Paepcke Park
Main St. & Aspen St.
2.5
•
• • •
Pioneer Park
Bleeker & 3rd.
0.1 16
SnyderPark Midland Ave 1 • • • • 4
Tot Lot Park Buena Vista Dc 2 •
Triangle Park
2nd & Smuggler
1.7 • • • 4
Ute Park Ute Ave. 3
Water Place Park
Doolittle Dr.
0
5
• • • 6
Wheeler Park
Hyman St®Wheeler .
0.1 • •
Willoughby/Lift 1 Aspen St. & Dean 0.8 • •
Yellow Brick School
Bleeker & Carmisch
0
8 • • • 29
. • • • •
7ota1 Par4 Acres 34,1g
0
a
a ~ $
~
a +~ a
a e ~ ~
V
~
i
y 3
E
~
e
M
A ~
d y
AtkleUo Araaa Cwneral Lontloa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ p
Iselin & Moore Pool Maroon Creek Rd, lg F
Moore Ball Fields
Adjacent to Schools
g • • • • • • ~
Plumtree
Hwy 82®GoIf COLLR
2
5 • • •
Rio Grande
Mill SI & Rio Grande .
Il • • • • 10
Wagner
Durant k Mall
2
5 • • • • •
.
Taal Athletic Areas 42
RRC Associates 8 Elk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 6
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/11/2008
en apace 9 AatuN Area
neral 7ncstion
Y!
y
G
@
y
Y
p
tl
~ B
e
e
Y
g
~
6
D
Y
y7
~
a
p
~
~
a
~
Y
S
S
Y
6
'~
F
Y
Y
0
i
t1
Y
N
M
9
~
a
Y
^~
a
Y
i
O
~
y
O
'~
0.
Aspen Mass Hwy 82 & Smith Way 35
AMell & Protection Smuggler Mtn 30
Barbee Shadow Mtn. Aspen St. 13.5
Burlingame Deer Hill/SH 62 200
Cozy Point Brush Cr, k SH 82 170 • • • ~
Cozy Poinl South Brush Cc & SH 82 ]29
Garfish King St. 0.5
Holy Cross Caztle Creek Bridge 1
Hummingbirds Smuggler Mtn 10
Hunter Valley Way Smuggler Mtn 10 •
Jenny Adau Rio Grande Tr ®P.O. 7.1 • • • '
Little Ajax W. Hopkins & 5th St. 1
Little Cloud Shadow Mtn.9th St. 22
Marolt/Thomas Castle Creek & SH 62 35
Maroon Creek Park Below Maroon Cr Brd 6 •
Mascot 99 Smuggler Mtn 9.3
Meadowlands Castle Cr ®Meadows 25
Moore Playing Fields Part of Moore Athl Fld 19
Proctor Below Gaaish, KingSt. 0.4
Red Butte Cemetery Ln. 700
Rotary Park Maroon Cr. Rd. 5 • • • • 10
Smuggler Smuggler Mtn 214 • • •
Thomas Castle Cc Rd.ddH82 47 •
Trueman Hallam & Monarch 0.35
Ute Cemetery Ute Ave. 2 • • • 6
Ute Mesa Ute Ave. 9
Total Acres Open Space & Natural Areas 1070.35
i C
u
~
d
O
o
,Y
\ ~
tl
~
0Y
A
y°
Y ~ tlY
. F 0
0 0
0 1` Q
G p
A
Y m
d
O'
i
~ u
~
din
5
e
p
+
0
Y
y
~
Ot6e[ Prop<rtiea & Special Ose General Locatlon y Iq p
a x b F. a B F 09 O
Mall Mill, Cooper, Hyman 2
Aspen I<e Garden Hyman btwn 2nd6r3rd 0.75
Red Brick Rec Center Hallam & Aspen St 0.75
Electric Substation Puppy Smith St. 1 • •
Golf Course
Parking Plaza Galena ®Courthouse 0.75 •
Parks Office Hwy82 & Cemetery I.n 3
Woods, Rafae4 Head Adjacent to Midland ROW
Total Acres Other Properties 6.25
RRC Associates & EIk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 7
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/1112008
City of Aspen Recreation Field Usage
What Where When Schedule Approximate
Usage
Volleyball
Crocs MotherLode Willoughby, Koch, Labor Day 5 days 700 teams
Volleyball Classic Wagner, Rio Grande, Weekend 1,400 players
Iselin, and Rotary Parks
Mission Beach Willoughby Park End of June 3 days 60 players
Volleyball Camp
"The Bobs" Willoughby Park Summer Wednesday and 12-20 players
volleyball group Sunday
Competitive, Willoughby and Koch Summer Nightly 12-24 players
Recreational and Parks
Junior Volleyball
Players
Aspen Recreation Department
Adult Softball - Iselin/Lower June-August Mondays 16 teams
Coed Moore/Upper 5:30 to 8:30 250 players
Moore/Rotary
Adult Softball- Iselin/Lower June-August Tuesdays 8 teams
Men's Rec Moore/Rotary 5:30 to 8:30 120 players
Adult Softball - Iselin/Lower June-August Wednesdays 8 teams
Men's Comp Moore/Rotary 5:30 to 8:30 120 players
T-Ball Triangle Park June-July Monday through 40 players
Thursday 12-fpm
Boys Baseball Iselin/Rotary/Upper June-July Tuesday/Thursday 95 players
Moore/Lower Moore 10:30 to 4
Monday/Wednesday
12:30 to 2
Gids Softball Upper Moore/Iselin June-July Tuesday/Thursday 40 players
9:30 to 12
Youth Track and Turf Field June-July 35
Field participants
Adult Soccer Turf Field June-August Monday/Wednesday 70 players
5:30-8:30
Adult Flag Football Turf Field September- Saturday 5-8pm 60 players
October
Youth Soccer Iselin/Rotary September- Monday-Friday 3:30 250 players
October to 6pm
Aspen United Soccer Club
Fall Soccer Club Iselin/Lower Moore Fall Variels 10 teams
/Upper Moore/Rotary/ 180 players
Rio Grand/ Wagner
Spring Soccer Club Iselin/Lower Moore Spring Varies 6 teams
/Upper Moore/Rotary/ 108 players
Rio Grand/ Wagner
Junior's Soccer Turf Field July-August gam-2pm 150 players
Camp
Does not include Aspen Middle/High School semester sports or Club Lacrosse
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report 6/11/2008
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #1 Parks and Recreation
February 2008
ocner
Propertles
(B acres)
Open Space & Parks
Natural Areas (34 acres)
~.,~ ,~ (1,070 acres)
~ `~~ ~~ Athletic Areas
i.,
~'„- ~ ~ ~ `, (42 acres)
L ~ .,i
~,. ,~, n
-T
a ,~r ~
_~ \~ ` ..
,}
1 i' t
~~~. ~. ~ +,rr ~ = ,
~ `, t ~ '
.:ice ~T ~", ) ~ ~ ~ '~-
*'^.. ~
\ ,_
a "-'r
~ "~ ~ r 1~ 7
~ ° p )b~ 1 1
I, ~ z- i
r y; ~ ~ _~
' ~~ ~~ 1~
ij \ r, T ~ '3- ~ ~. t.
:,/ ' ' r
~, ~~~~ ~t
,,Legend ;' ~ ~ I~ , ~~' % °~~ ~~„
( ~ ,
~-~ ~ .'~~, ~,~c~
'' ~ - ~~~
~~ umanG•awlOaDUrwary ~ ~ ~ ,~_ ~
~, ~ ~
i~ ~-< ty
C~ CI1y 6oumay ~ ~~~.ee- ~ >
~'
i7 ~~ Y ,
~.
~I" ~ 5u+nexM+I1
Roads ~ ~ ~
ParYS antl AlMetlc A2as,~ ` f
open space 0 015 03 O6 D9 12
Idles psis provided 61'the Gly of ASpen GIS Department
RRC Associates & EIk Mountains Planning Group Parks and Open Space- 9
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #3 -Historic Preservation
June, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Introduction. In the summer of 1879, silver prospectors from Leadville arrived in the Aspen area and
created a mining camp, soon to be known as Ute City. The next year, B. Clark Wheeler took the lead in
organizing the Aspen Town and Land Company which was incorporated in March 1880. In 1881 two
newspapers went to press, the Rocky Mountain Sun and the Aspen Times, which is still being published
today.
Aspen has been on the forefront of many things throughout its history: it was one of the first towns in
Western Colorado to have its own telegraph line; it reportedly had the first commercially-operated
hydroelectric plant in the United States; and it became Colorado's first town with electric lights.
By the time the Rio Grande and Colorado Midland
railroads arrived in 1887, Aspen was enjoying an
unprecedented boom. Silver production rose sharply,
and by 1892 Aspen had over 12,000 residents, making
it the third largest city in Colorado, behind only Denver
and Leadville. In the spring of 1893, the country
switched to a gold standard, significantly impacting
Aspen's economic and population boom. Within a
month, all of Aspen's mines shut down and by 1900,
the city's population dropped to 3,300 people.
Herbert Bayer
In the 1930s Aspen began its
second boom, this time with
snow, upon the development of Roch Run on Aspen Mountain. In 1938 Aspen
offered a boat tow up the mountain and served as the site of the Rocky Mountain
Ski Association Championship. During the war years, many of the 10th Mountain
Division ski soldiers from Camp Hale spent weekends skiing on Aspen Mountain.
Once the war ended, a few in the division returned to Aspen. The most prominent
of these soldiers was an Austrian named Friedl Pfeifer. Pfeifer partnered with
Walter Paepcke (see below) to further develop a ski area on Aspen Mountain. In
December of 1946, the world's longest chair lift at the time, Lift 1, opened and
offered lift-served terrain on Aspen Mountain.
Aspen took off again with the arrival of Elizabeth and
Walter Paepcke. As a Chicago industrialist who had
developed the Container Corporation of America,
Walter Paepcke and his wife are credited with
launching the community into a cultural renaissance.
Beginning with the 1949 Goethe Bicentennial
Convocation, Paepcke brought international attention
to Aspen by having Albert Schweitzer serve as a
keynote speaker. The Minneapolis Symphony
Orchestra provided music for the event, leading to the
creation of the Aspen Music Festival which still carries
Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation-1
Aspen Institute
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
on today. Among the organizations credited to the Paepckes are the Aspen Institute for Humanistic
Studies, the Music Associates of Aspen, and the Aspen Music School.
The Re2ulatorv Context. The City of Aspen Community Development Department has been committed
to preserving and restoring historical property and buildings within the City of Aspen for over 30 years.
To make alterations, additions, or to demolish any
structures that are currently on the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, or that are located
in the Main Street or Commercial Core Historic Overlay
Districts, a review must be completed by the City's
Historical Preservation Officer and possibly by the Historic
Preservation Commission. Development of these
properties requires the approval of either a Certificate of
No Negative Effect or a Certificate of Appropriateness
before a building permit or any other work authorization
Historic Hotel Jerome will be issued by the City. All work must comply with the
"City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines."
The City currently has a total of 280 designated properties. This includes properties that were created
through historic lot splits. Figure 1 below illustrates the total number of designations that have occurred
each year since 1973, excluding designations created through lot splits. The location of these properties
can be seen on the map in the appendix.
FIGURE 1
City of Aspen Historic Designations per Year, 1973-2007
70
60
e 50
e
40
ffi
0 30
B
20
10
0
N
~
~~.:. uw~yt s
~
^ ,~.~
`:& t 9 z'rvg . ~'t0 e,w(
ry1 r, ;.
4Tl S F en~1 a ' ~ N:
. t r t,~ ~~ t, s , 2 =w t , " t` t. 2 z
,.
a ~ m 3i m ~i obi m ~i ~ ~i iii m $i °m' 2fi $'i ~ a ~ m ~ $ N
Source: City of Aspen
Accomplishments since the 2000 AACP. Historic Preservation in Aspen includes notable
accomplishments in terms of physical preservation efforts as well as programs intended to educate the
public.
The Ute Cemetery restoration project was a joint project with the Aspen Parks Department and
was made possible by a grant from the State Historical Fund. The cemetery had become
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation- 2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAf7 6/11/2008
overgrown and nearly forgotten, but contained the remains of many Civil War veterans, noted
by their simple stone tablets. With funds from the state, missing gravestones were repaired,
family plots were put back together, and the historic landscape was maintained. A trail was also
added to the cemetery.
The Connor Cabins, located immediately east of City Hall is an excellent example of an adaptive
re-use of three small historic buildings. Under careful direction of the Historic Preservation
Commission, the three cabins were carefully rehabilitated and relocated on their original sites,
and now serve as prime commercial space. Immediately behind the cabins is a residential
development that allowed for the preservation project to pencil out.
The Historic Preservation Awards pro¢ram has evolved into an annual luncheon and
presentation recognizing exceptional preservation projects and inviting the public to become
familiar with these properties. One feature that makes these awards unique is that residential
projects in all neighborhoods in town, not just the Victorian-era West End neighborhood, have
been recognized. Over _ pllawards have been given to date to projects reflecting Aspen's
history from the Victorian era to post-WWII eras.
The recognition of the importance of Aspen's most recent history, referred to as the Post W W II
properties, has gained increasing attention in recent years. Many Post WWII properties have
been voluntarily preserved through the City's incentive programs. However, many important
buildings are facing demolition, and as a result, the City completed a Post WWII survey of
properties and in 2007 placed a moratorium on demolition of these properties (and a few
others) with the passage of Ordinance 48, Series of 2007. A map identifying these buildings is
included in the Appendix.
Facilities and Assets. The Historic Preservation office is located within the City's Community
Development Department. The office has two preservation planners on staff. Among the assets the
office maintains are 19`h and early 20th century fire insurance maps that depict the size, shape and
location of all buildings in Aspen at that time. The Historic Preservation office also has many old
photographs and recent photographs of inventoried and designated buildings. Files on each inventoried
and designated building are kept in the office for use by staff and are available to the public to research.
The Aspen Historical Society also has an extensive historic archive with many photographs.
The Historic Preservation Program is intended to guide the community in the preservation of key
properties that best tell Aspen's story. As such, the Historic Preservation office does not typically
acquire historic properties in order to preserve them. However, the City does own two historically-
designated buildings located in the commercial core-City Hall and the Wheeler Opera House. These
two buildings have been successfully maintained with the advice and guidance of the Historic
Preservation Office and with grants secured by that office.
Capacity. There is no limitation on the number of properties that can be inventoried or designated
within the City of Aspen. However, the designation process can be challenging. The community has
made it clear in the core values voting last summer (excerpts from which are in the Appendix) that they
believe preserving the historic character of downtown is the highest or top priority for the City.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation - 3
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2009
Issues. As properties are designated historic, it can be somewhat challenging to convince the owners
(who are not voluntarily designating) that there is economic value to designating their property. An
analysis of property values of both designated and non-designated comparable properties may help
convince owners to participate in the program. It may also be beneficial to conduct a cultural tourism
survey of visitors to the community to quantify the reasons for people to choose Aspen over other
resort communities and to verify that these visitors stay longer and spend more money in the
community. This information could help to educate the community about the benefits of historic
preservation.
Contact information and website
The Historic Preservation Officer, Amy Guthrie, can be reached at 970-429-2758. The Preservation
Planner, Sara Adams, can be reached at 970-429-2778.
htto://www.asoenoitkin.com/depts/41/main historic.cfm
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation-4
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Appendix Items
Aspen's Core Values Voting Results July 19, 2007
I would like to see preserving the historic character of downtown as the City's ...
Responses
Percent Count
Highest priority 31.65% 113
A top priority 34.45% 123
One of many priorities 29.97% 107
A low priority 3.36% 12
Don't care 0.56% 2
Totals 100% 357
The city should have a stronger role in the design of buildings to make sure they relate to the
existing character of downtown Aspen.
Responses
Percent Count
Strongly Agree 36.88% 118
Agree 33.44% 107
Neutral 6.56% 21
Disagree 16.25% 52
Strongly Disagree 6 88% 22
Totals 100% 320
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation- 5
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
City of Aspen, Historically Designated Properties
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation- 6
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
City of Aspen Ordinance 48
Identified Potential Historic Properties
~. ~- Disclaimer: The properties identified on this
' map are those included in Ordinance No. 48,
~~"~ Series of 2008. They are not designated historic
~ , properties, but are considered as potential historic
~,-~ ' ~1t resources only.
r'
4 `F i
t t
_ i ,
~ ~~ ~~~~~1--{ ~,; - Lam, V~ti.~ `, {
r -, ~ F ~ r F `'~- ~ r. . `\\ `,~J ^
_~~
c.,,/ ~.-~~ ~- ~~ ~ ,,_. ~. i
~~: ~ I ~ J t_7 ~
~ r ~~ ;,- ~ ;;~~ t~ , ,,
s` ~-~ -~. r -- 1
U
`~ ~
t'~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ 5 ` ` '`~1-~' ~ r~'~.
Legend ~~, ``~___ ~:~--~-'`~ (`~.
_ . ~~ iii ~`.
- Roads ~~ ~~%
5 h ~ ~
-Potential Historic Properties ®~iles
OO.OS.1 0.2 0.3 10.4 ~
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Historic Preservation - 7
Existing Conditions Report
The 2008 Aspen Area Community Plan Update
Draft #2 -Planning for the Lifelong Aspenite
June, 2008
T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e
RRC Associates, Inc.
303.449.6558
Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc.
970.948.0802
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite
Many of the services provided in Aspen serve the diverse needs of local residents. This Chapter groups
the services under the heading, "Planning for the Lifelong Aspenite" since Aspen has programs designed
to support the needs of residents throughout their lives. The topics covered in this chapter include
health care, day care, schools, emergency services, senior services, and recreation services. The purpose
of this chapter is to identify existing services that serve all residents of the Aspen community throughout
their lifetime, and identify issues of capacity and service levels that will need to be addressed in the
upcoming years.
Not all of these services are provided by the City of Aspen. For instance, the hospital, schools, and some
emergency services are separate taxing districts with the bulk of support coming from property taxes
from districts that are larger than the City. For this chapter, we interviewed Nan Sundeen, Director of
County Health and Human Services; Shirley Ritter, Director of Kids First; Daryl Grob, Fire Chief; Tim
Anderson, Recreation Director, and Steve Aiken, Golf Director.
Health Care.
Aspen Valley Hospital (AVH) is a twenty-five bed community hospital that is located approximately 0.37
miles from the City of Aspen roundabout on Castle Creek Road. Although orthopedics and sports
injuries are a primary focus of AVH, a full range of services is offered. AVH has board-certified specialists
in 25 different fields of medicine, is fully accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of
Healthcare Organizations, and is affiliated with VHA (a nationwide organization comprised of nonprofit
community hospitals) and the Aspen Valley Medical Foundation. AVH is also designated a "Critical
Access Hospital."
The mission of AVH is to deliver extraordinary healthcare in an environment of excellence, compassion,
and trust. Their current capabilities/facilities include:
• Emergency Department with 100% of the physicians board-certified specialists
in emergency medicine
• Level III trauma center
• Immediate-response ambulance system
• FAA-approved helipad
• Diagnostic Imaging Department with CT scanning, MRI, dedicated
mammography equipment, nuclear medicine, state-of-the-art ultrasound, and a
digital connection to Denver
24-hour lab and blood bank
• Progressive physical therapy services
• Three birthing rooms
• Three-bed intensive care unit
• Fully-supported, state-of-the-art, digital operating rooms (inpatient and
ambulatory)
• Outpatient specialty clinics (neurology, gastroenterology, oncology, urology,
rheumatology, allergy, and pulmonology)
• Cardiopulmonary rehabilitation program
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -1
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Master Facilities Plan (MFPI. AVH has recently drafted a master plan for the expansion of the
hospital facilities, and is currently in the land use review process before the City of Aspen
decision-makers. The land use application indicates that the current 30-year old facility is no
longer adequate to support the efficient delivery of high quality, state-of-the-art healthcare to
which the Hospital is committed. The MFP will guide the expansion and facilities upgrade for
the Hospital for approximately the next 20 years
Since the Hospital was built three decades ago, much has changed in the way healthcare is
delivered. The Hospital was originally built as an inpatient facility. One dramatic trend reflected
nationwide is the shift toward outpatient services. In 1977, the Hospital experienced 11,665
outpatient registrants. As of 2007, that number had tripled to 34,291. The new facility will
allow for greater efficiencies, patient privacy, and appropriate "mix" of patients. Outpatient
services will be reconfigured in keeping with contemporary hospital design standards and the
utilization patterns of the local population.
Volume comparisons for the Hospital are consistent with national norms, showing a shift from
inpatient to outpatient services:
1977 2007
Admissions 1,716 1,630
Births 112 286
Inpatient surgeries 440 464
Same-day surgeries 177 864
Outpatient registrations 11,665 34,291
EKGs 120 2,505
Physical therapy patients 548 1,954
Emergency roam visits 4,857 9,193
MRI scans 0 1,265
CT scans 0 9,222
Nuclear medicine exams 0 865
The entire Hospital property totals 23 acres of land. Parcel A includes Lot 1, the Schultz Health
and Human Services Building, and Lot 2 is developed with the 21-unit Mountain Oaks affordable
housing project for Hospital employees. Parcel C is roughly 19 acres and is the focus of the MFP.
The Site Context Plan below shows that Parcel C supports the Hospital facility, Whitcomb
Terrace/Pitkin County Senior Center (formerly Castle Creek Terrace) assisted living, Pitkin
County Senior Center, the ambulance barn, the helicopterflight deck, and the Hospital chief
executive officer's single-family home. The south end of the property is more intensely
developed with the Hospital facility surrounded by roadways and surface parking. The north
end of Parcel C is less developed with an open meadow and the CEO residence.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite-2
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Figure 1
Existing Aspen Valley Hospital
.___ NORTH
~I .,.,, .. ~\;,\
1 I v.. e.. ~,\ `
i ////JrJr''
lO `,\,
~\•,
~~
i K Ee
~~ ...... ~..:.~ i
ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL JANUARY 2008
MASTER FACII (TIES- srre coNTrxTruN
Currently, there are 25 patient beds in 16 rooms in the Hospital. Future phases will increase the
number of single occupancy patient care rooms to 27 rooms and add 4 rooms to ICU. The table
below reflects the existing and new square footage proposed in the MFP for Parcel C:
Table 1
Existing and New Square Footage
Existing Floor Additional Floor Total
Area Area Build Out
Ambulance Barn 3,830 3,630
Whitcomb Terrace/ Senior Center 17,206 17,206
CEO Residence 3,500 3,500
Hospital 70.700 113.837 184,537
Valley Hospital Master Facilities Plan Land Use Application
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -3
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
The graphic included in the appendix indicates the future phases of proposed development at
the Aspen Valley Hospital.
Medical Practitioners. The types and number of medical practitioners are indicated in Table 2
below.
Table 2
Psychology & Psychotherapy 6
Orthopedics & Orthopedists 11
Obstetrics, Obstetricians, Gynecologists, Midwives 4
Cosmetic & Plastic Surgeons & Surgery 2
Dermatologists & Dermatology (Skin Diseases) 1
Optometrists 8 Optometry: General 2
Dentists 15
Orthodontics & Orthodontists 1
Chiropractors 9
Source: Aspen Times Business Directory
Child Care. There are a total of fourteen licensed child care facilities in Pitkin County, including one
located in Redstone, one that serves school age children only, and one that is primarily for visitors.
There are a total of 353 spaces for infant through preschool care in Pitkin County, not including the
Aspen Elementary School Extended Day or Camp Snowmass (mostly for visitors).
Table 3
Capacity of Existing Licensed Child Care Facilities in Pitkin County
Total Infant spaces 27 8%
Total Toddler spaces 70 20%
Total Preschool spaces 256 72%
Total all spaces 353 100%
Source: Kids First
According to the Pitkin County Child Care Needs Assessment completed in June 2006 by Healthy
Mountain Communities, based on Kids First data and the child care demand model developed for this
assessment, the demand for child care in Pitkin County is 95% of current capacity. However, that study
indicated there was a total capacity of 411 child care slots, and the current capacity has dropped to 353
slots. The conclusion is that finding day care in Pitkin County is very challenging, and maybe at capacity.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -4
Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT
6/11/2008
Table 4
Estimating current childcare demand (revised) Year 2005
People in Pitkin County 15,983
Children 0 to 5 in Pitkin County 948*
Commuters into Pitkin County 8,404
Children ages 0-5 of commuters (8404x0.16) = 1344.64
Children who are candidates to use child care in Pitkin County (residents & 2293
commuters) (948+1345)
Pitkin County children in child care (948 x 0.250) 237
Commuter children in child care (1345 x 0.30) 403.5
Commuter children in Pitkin County child care (403 x 0.37) 149.11
Estimate total number of children in Pitkin County child care (237+149) 386
Current child care spaces in Pitkin County (ages 0 to 5) 411**
Estimated capacity (Enrollment as a percent of total child care spaces) (3861411) 94%
Source: 2006 Pitkin County Child Care Need Assessment
*The current number according to the State Demographers Office is 1,054
'* Since 2005, the number of child care spates has dropped from 411 to 353, a decrease of approximately 16%, making the
child care situation even more difficult for working families.
What is interesting to note is that the need for childcare among Aspen residents is not growing. In fact,
Aspen's population is aging (median age in the county is roughly 40) and requiring less need for child
care. However, external factors such as increased employee housing, rising costs in neighboring
communities, oil and gas costs, and overall job growth in the area could, in fact, indicate some increased
need among Aspen residents. At the same time, the Latino population in both Pitkin and Garfield
County is increasing, and will likely continue to increase since the number of children born to Latino
mothers has grown, from 51 in 1990 to 351 in 2004. Hispanic births have also represented more and
more of the overall births, from 10.5 percent in 1990 to 43.7 percent in 2004.
The conclusions of the Pitkin County Child Care Need Assessment indicate that more of the workforce
will be coming into Pitkin County for employment over the next 20 years, and that this workforce is
more likely to be younger and have children than residents of Pitkin County. As a result, it is expected
that the number of children of out-of-county workforce will likely increase in Pitkin County child care
facilities, while the number of Pitkin County children will likely decrease. Although the Assessment
indicates that the increase in the number of people in the workforce with children ages 0 to 5 will
increase the demand for child care services beyond current capacity by approximately 2012 it no waitlist
information is considered, with the reduction in spots, the argument can be made that the child care
system is at capacity and an increase in the number of child care slots will lead to an increase in
enrollment, particularly at the infant and toddler age levels.
Based on these conclusions, the assessment made the following recommendations:
1) Locating child care facilities closer to commuters' place of residence or place of work. This approach
would allow more people with young children to use transit for their daily commute;
2) Increasing the capacity of child care facilities in downvalley locations where most commuters live*;
3) Pitkin County and the City of Aspen should both explore possible ways to create space that could be
used for a child care program as they conduct their individual capital plans. This employer-based
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite - 5
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
program approach is already becoming a practical necessity of the local school districts and Valley
View hospital as a tool to recruit and keep quality employees; and
4) Pitkin County and the City of Aspen and Snowmass Village should all consider space possibilities for
child care programs in publicly funded affordable housing programs.
The need in Ga~eld and Eagle Counties is even greater than in Pitkin, and efforts are ongoing to
increase capacity in the entire region. If Aspen wants to competitively attract a strong workforce, then
having childcare near the workplace, in Aspen, is equally important. The Table below compares the
three county's childcare capacity by age group.
Table 5
Demographic Estimate of Need for Childcare
Total Additional
Children in Children in Total Children Children in Need of
Total Children Licensed Care Licensed Care in Licensed Licensed Child
0.5• Aae birth - 3 Aae 3.5 Care 0.5 Care""
GARFIELD
Schools. Similar to the trends in childcare, the Aspen School District enrollment has also increased with
most of the growth coming from outside the District. As illustrated below, overall enrollment has
increased, with more than half of the increase coming from children living out-of-district and enrolling in
Aspen District Schools. (Note that a small percentage of these children do live in Pitkin County:
however, a larger percentage live in Eagle or Garfield Counties) The School District Board recently
capped out-of district students due to space constraints.
Table 6
School District Enrollment: Out-of-District & In-District Students
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
In-District 1,000 1,083 1,137 1,142 1,189 1,220
Out-of-District 236 328 405 412 415 392
Total 1,236 1,411 1,542 1,554 1,604 1,612
'Source: Pkkln[ountvChlldca rc Needs Assessmen t by Healthy MOUntaln Communities 6/7/2006
The Aspen Public School District (RE3) maintains one elementary, one middle, and one high school. This
system is augmented by an additional private elementary school. The Aspen High School was
completely renovated and enlarged in 2003, and the Aspen Middle School is currently completing an
expansion. The Middle School currently has 461 students enrolled, with 47 full-time teachers. The
Student to Teacher ratio is 19:1.
Aspen High School's athletic classification is AAA. Aspen High School is a 4-year, public school accredited
by the State of Colorado. Currently, 520 students attend Aspen High School in grades 9 -12. There are
50 certified staff members at AHS, 35 of whom hold Master's degrees and 1 of whom has a Doctoral
degree. The average teaching experience is 12 years.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite-6
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Table 7
2006-2007 School Facilities and Enrollment **
Graduation Rate: 97.7%
Dropout Rate: 2.1
White Dropout Rate In Relation to White Pupil Count: 0.4%
Hispanic Dropout Rate In Relation to Hispanic Pupil Count: 12.8%
All Other Races -Dropout Rate: 0%
2006-2007 Suspension Rate: 1.3%,
Expulsion Rate: 0.1%
2006 Average Teacher's Salary: $51,608
2006 Average Teachers Age: 40
2006 Percent with Master Degree or Higher: 62.4%
2006 Average Teaching Experience: 12 Years
2006 Expenditures for Instruction per pupil: Aspen $8,190
2006 Total Expenditures per pupil Aspen $12 182
Waiting on updated data from the school district.
rollment
Table 8
District Capacity (based on
ina Size Potential St
Aspen Elementary 120,000 Sq. Ft. 550 49/ auro
Aspen Middle School 100,000 Sq. Ft. 650 418 64%
Aspen High School 85 000 Sq Ft 600 499 83%
With the expansion of the middle and high school completed, it appears that the elementary school may
be next in terms of needed expansion as they are currently at 90% capacity.
Emereency Services.
Emergency services are provided by a multitude of departments and organizations. In addition to the
list below, the Aspen Ambulance Service and Child Welfare Services are available 24/7.
Communications. The Aspen-Pitkin County Communications Center (APCCC) is a joint City-
Countydepartment that serves as the 911 Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) for many
municipalities, fire districts, and Emergency Medical Service agencies in the Roaring Fork Valley.
APCCC sends responders from these agencies to problems occurring anywhere from
Independence Pass to Marble, and from Mt. Sopris to Ruedi Reservoir. The APCCC is staffed and
operational 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. APCCC receives 911 and non-emergency
telephone calls from the public, determines the priority and scope of the request or situation
and then dispatches the appropriate law, fire or EMS support. In addition, the APCCC
coordinates, supports and maintains many systems including the 911 information database, the
incident management system, and Pitkin County Jail security.
Police Department. The Aspen Police Department is a department of the City of Aspen and
consists of 35 employees, 28 of which are certified peace officers. The Aspen Police Department
is organized into 4 divisions: Patrol Division, Community Safety Division, Investigations Division
and Administrative Support Division. The Chief of Police is Richard Pryor, and the department is
located at 506 East Main Street, Suite 102, in the basement of the Pitkin County Courthouse
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite-7
Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Building. The Police Department shares some facilities with the Pitkin County Sheriff's office and
is in need of more space for locker rooms, evidence rooms and a safe space for investigations
centered around children.
Pitkin County Sheriff's Deoar[ment. The SherrifYs department shares space with the Aspen
Police Department who they also partner within investigations and emergencies. There are 27
employees within the department, 3 administrative personnel and 1 Animal Safety Director.
The department does investigations, patrols, and is responsible for detention (jail). The Sheriff is
Bob Braudis and the office is located at 506 East Main Street, Suite 101 in the basement of the
Pitkin County Courthouse Building.
Aspen Fire Protection District. Aspen is served by the Aspen Fire Protection District, a separate
government entity that responds to emergencies within the Aspen area. The district is primarily
a volunteer district with 42 volunteers, three non-firefighting employees and three career
firefighters. There are two fire stations that serve the Aspen area-one at 420 E. Hopkins
Street, which is currently being reconstructed, and a new 15,500 s.f. substation facility at the
Aspen Airport Business Center.
Emeraency Manaaement. Pitkin County has an emergency management system and
coordinator in place to help plan, prepare, mitigate, and recover from natural and human-
caused emergencies and disasters.
Public Safety Council. The Public Safety Council (PSC) was created to bring together all first
response agencies (such as Law and Fire Departments) and other supporting agencies (such as
American Red Cross and Community Health) every other month to discuss public safety issues in
the Roaring Fork Valley. The PSC meets the first Wednesday of February, April, June, August,
October, and December. The meetings are held at rotating locations within the valley and run
from 8:30 -10:00 a.m. Call (970) 920-5234 for locations and agendas.
Mountain Rescue. Mountain Rescue-Aspen is a volunteer organization dedicated to saving lives
through backcountry rescue and mountain safety education. It was incorporated in 1965 as a
non-profit organization and is one of the oldest search and rescue teams in the state. They are
accredited through the Rocky Mountain Region of the Mountain Rescue Association and work as
a volunteer arm of the Pitkin County SherifYs office, providing search and rescue services for
Pitkin County and mutual aid for other counties in Colorado.
Their SO-member team annually donates thousands upon thousands of person-hours serving
Pitkin County's community and visitors. These hours represent time away from families to
attend meetings and trainings; to educate the public with annual community avalanche
seminars; to teach children what to do if they are lost through the national "Hug-A-Tree"
program; and to engage in search and rescue missions.
Unlike other emergency response agencies, there is no tax base or public budget for Mountain
Rescue. They are 100% unpaid volunteers who raise the funding needed each year through the
solicitation of public donations and applications for local and state grants.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite-8
Aspen Existing Conditions Report -DRAFT 6/11/2008
Senior Services. Approximately 15% of Pitkin County's population is considered senior, 60 years or
older. This number is increasing as more baby boomers reach retirement age.
Table 9
Pitkin County Population estimates (July 2006)
2006 Population
Total Population 16,409
Square Miles 970
Population 60+ 2,465
Population 75+ 447
Poverty 60+ 136
Minority 60+ 43
Rural 60+ 1,278
Poverty & Minority 60+ 25
Source: Based on estimates from the 2000 census, as provided by NWCOG
Senior services are provided by Pitkin County, whose office is located in the Senior Center on Castle
Creek Road, adjacent to the Aspen Valley Hospital. The mission of the Senior Services Department is to
provide services and programs that enable seniors to remain as independent as possible within the
community and to maintain a quality of life consistent with their personal expectations. The activities
and services provided by Senior Services are open to residents and visitors over the age of 60. The
senior center remains a very active facility for the community's seniors, but has outgrown its space and
is currently looking for a new location within the community that will better serve this growing
population.
Senior Services taps into the energy and expertise of the Aspen community and beyond for support and
cooperation in providing a wide range of programs. Local town governments, foundations, an
endowment fund, business and fraternal organizations, charitable entities and private donors
supplement the basic County funding to enhance the quality and variety of services and activities.
Senior Services focuses on four major program areas: transportation, nutrition, fitness and activities,
and tax relief, care counseling and advocacy.
Care Counseling. Navigating the various systems and services for medical, financial, physical and
emotional care needs can be challenging at any age. Pitkin County Senior Services created this
program to guide and assist seniors and their families in identifying and securing services and
care appropriate for their unique needs. The Senior Care Coordinator worked with 40 Pitkin
County seniors in the first year of the program. The Care Coordinator's services are currently
available at no cost to Pitkin County seniors over age 60 and their families.
Comprehensive Continuous Care Services. Senior numbers are growing in Pitkin County, yet
there are limited care facilities for seniors. Many elderly Pitkin County residents end up leaving
their community due to the lack of elderly care facilities. Senior Services is working to provide
comprehensive continuous care services for seniors to allow them to remain independent and in
the community. They recently completed a Senior Housing and Care Needs survey which should
serve as the foundation for a future continuous care facility for seniors in Aspen. They are
hoping the Aspen Area Community Plan Update will help to identify an appropriate location for
such a facility in the future.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for aLifelong Aspenite -9
Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Youth Services. The Aspen community offers a wide variety of services and programs for its youth._The
Aspen Valley Ski/Snowboard Club is located adjacent to the Aspen High School and maintains a ski lift
from the club to the Highlands Ski Area. The Aspen Youth Experience provides programs for Latino and
at-risk youth in the Roaring Fork Valley. The Buddy Program, headquartered in the Red-Brick Center,
provides youth mentoring throughout the valley. The Aspen Youth Center is anon-profit, drop-in youth
center open to local and visiting youth who are in grades 4-12. The Aspen Youth Center is located in the
Aspen Recreation Center (ARC) and is open during the school year from loam-6pm for all 4th through
7th grades and from loam-Spm for all 8th through 12th grades. Daily passes are $5, monthly passes are
$80, and a summer pass is $150. High School students are admitted free!
Recreation Services.
Facilities. The City of Aspen Recreation Department has four major recreation facilities that it
provides programming for. These include the 83,000 sq. foot Aspen Recreation Center (that
includes NHL ice, pools, fitness, climbing tower, concession stand); the Aspen Ice Garden (ice
facility only); the Red Brick Recreation Center (10,000 ft. gym space) (climbing wall, gymnastics,
fitness programs, centralized operations of adult and youth sports and programs); and the 6 clay
tennis courts and all tennis programs at the Aspen Golf and Tennis Club. The Aspen Golf
Department manages the municipal golf course. The current cost for the operations of all
Recreation facilities and programs (except golf) is about $1,750,000. About 76% of this budget
covers the cost of payroll, 18% is for utilities, and the rest is for materials and supplies. The
Recreation Department maintains 26 full time employees and 6 year round shared employees (6
months with Parks or Golf, and 6 months with ice for example). In addition, anywhere from 50
to 100 part time employees round out the staff, many of whom are hired seasonally, with
summer being the busiest season.
Asoen Recreation Center. The Aspen Recreation Center, or ARC, was completed in 2004 as part
of the Community Campus Master Plan designed by the City Parks Department. Annual visits to
the Aspen Recreation Center are approximately 225,000. This includes paid daily visits, pass
visits, spectators to events such as hockey games, private rentals, and patrons using the lobby
areas to enjoy a snack or watch their children on the climbing tower. Total paid Guest Visits are
approximately 15, 000 annually.
The majority of visitors to the ARC are Aspen residents (64%) while 12% are out-of-area visitors.
Though Snowmass Village maintains its own recreation center, 6% of ARC visitors are from that
community. In 2008 the City will categorize all Aspen and Valley residents as locals, which will
make it easier for staff to track and will likely generate more down valley user.
Table 10
ARC Visits by Location (where visitors come from)
Aspen 64%
Surrounding Pitkin county 9%
Basalt 6%
Snowmass Village 6%
Carbondale & Further 3%
All Others 12%
100%
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -10
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Table 11
Breakdown of ARC Visitor Sales
Daily Admission--Resident 22%
Daily Admission-Guest 16%
Resident 20-visit pass 11
Resident Annual Pass 10%
Discounted 6 month resident 9%
Resident Monthly Pass 6%
Resident 6 month Pass 6%
Discounted 20-visit Pass 5%
Discounted annual pass 5%
valley resident 20-visit 4%
Discounted Monthly Pass 3%
Valley 6-month, valley monthly, valley annual 3%
100%
Note: The Discounted passes are deals (15% off) the City provides to the School
District in exchange for use of their facilities; the SkiCo employees in exchange for
advertising; and the ACRA members in exchange for marketing. The highest discounted
pass sale is the 6-month pass which is primarily generated during the winter months
from the SkiCo employees coming from out of town.
It costs the City more to operate the ARC than revenues generated as fees. The recovery
percentage of revenue vs. cost is 57%. Fees could be raised to make this recovery percentage
higher, but City Council prefers to keep fees affordable to the locals. For example, the use of ice
costs the Recreation Dept. $300/hr. to operate, but they only charge the local youth $177/hr.
with the Council providing $40,000 to $45,000 for in-kind grants to those same groups using the
ice.
Use of the Facilities. Only about 1% of the pool usage is by competitive or lap swimmers. While
they are one of the lowest percentages of users, they are the most vocal in requests. The
highest group of pool users are those using the fun facilities, such as the lazy river, slide and
zero-entry pool, which seems to draw the users who pay the most.
Ice is underutilized as there is little demand for morning ice, and the arena only operates until
9pm or lOpm at night during peak seasons. Users are vocal about the need for more ice, but
they don't want to use the facilities past lOpm or early in the mornings. To fill the need for
more ice, these off hours must be utilized and the Recreation Dept. is willing to discount ice as
its more efficient to operate existing facilities rather than deeply subsidizing another sheet of
ice.
Fitness is booming in all recreation facilities as the private clubs are becoming more exclusive
and more costly to the local residents.
Socio-Economic Imoact._Throughthe identification of numbers of participants attending events held in
or on City facilities, and by using ACRA cost estimates for pricing, the use of the City's recreation
facilities are close to $2 million in economic impact to the community of Aspen. Many of the large
events are held during the off season when rooms are available at discounted rates. For example:
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for aLifelong Aspenite -11
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFT 6/11/2008
Junior Hockey hosts the Fall Face Off Hockey Tournament over 3 weekends in the fall. This brings in 90
to 100 out-of-town teams. This single tournament alone is estimated to bring $1 million to Aspen I Even
with these key events, the Recreation Department finds that the guest base using the facilities is very
low for the total number of guest visits in Aspen and they are seeking to grow this market.
While the Latino population does not use many of the City programs, this population does take
advantage of the ARC and often brings the entire family for a day.
Golf. The Aspen Golf Club has been certified as an Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary since 1998. At that
time the Aspen Golf Club was one of only five golf courses so designated in the State of Colorado.
Certification in this program is awarded to those golf courses that demonstrate the highest degree of
environmental stewardship.
Since 2001 the Aspen Golf Club made the following changes and upgrades to its facility. These changes
and improvements have been implemented with environmental stewardship as its focus:
• Anew clubhouse
• New tennis courts
• Rebuilt golf holes
• Installation of naturalized water features
• Installation of native grasses and wildflowers
• New signage
• Installation of wildlife corridors and buffers
• New irrigation system
• Changing sources of irrigation from raw river water to treated effluent water
The conversion for irrigation using treated effluent water best exemplifies this environmental
stewardship. The new system allows for superior playing conditions, while saving 60 million gallons of
water annually. Further, fertilizers are significantly reduced through the use of effluent water as it is
filtered an additional time through the turf on the golf course, providing organic compounds to assist
the growth of turf.
The number of rounds of golf played at the Aspen Golf Club has varied through the years with a high of
35,736 rounds in 2002, and a low of 23,791 rounds in 1999. The rounds in 2007 were only counted
through September, which resulted in 22,452 rounds. Table 12 indicates the number of rounds played
over the last ten years.
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -12
Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Interestingly, the greens fees and passes sold was in a steady decline from 2002 (when several more
down-valley courses came on line) through 2006, but then made an up-turn in 2007.
Table 12
Aspen Golf Club Green Fees and Passes Sold, 2002-2007
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
GF $667,922 $653,042 $514,884 $481,484 $347,140 $572,000
ACRA $37,990 $83,160 $80,760 $66,010
Punch Upgrade $27,050 $33,120 $23,687
Jr. $22,100 $21,200 $21,000 $22,700 $23,626 $24,360
20 Punch $289,802 $253,230 $237,993 $236,775 $183,601 $173,065
Season $62,460 $58,320 $70,200 $54,810 $165,109 $207,600
TOTALS $1,107,324 $1,102,072 $924,837 $885,466 $719,476 $982,999
Table 13
Aspen Golf Club Rounds Played, 1997-2007
(April 1 - November i)
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007*
9 holes Local 5,558 5,078 4,883 4,986 5,337 6,852 6,153 6,048 5,543 5,490 3,938
18 holes Local 16,135 15,947 14,921 17,627 16,255 19,517 19,296 11,493 18,219 12,221 11,834
9 hole RG 2,085 1,669 1,364 2,041 1,426 1,600 2,063 1,574 2,231 3,033 2,426
18 holes RG 6,426 5,244 2,623 4,309 2,174 7,767 7,878 7,327 4,337 4,858 4,254
TOTAL ROUNDS 30,204 27,938 23,791 28,963 25,192 35,736 35,392 26,442 30,330 25,602 22,452
Note: 2007 is through September only
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -13
Aspen Existing Conditions Report-DRAFT 6/11/2008
Contact information and websites
Aspen Valley Hospital
0401 Castle Creek Rd.
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-1120
htt p://www. avh a s pe n. org/
Kids First
215 N. Garmisch, Suite 1
Aspen, CO 81611
970-920-5363
http://www.aspen pitki n.co m/d epts/50/
Aspen school District
0235 High School Road
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-3760
www.aspenkl2.net
Communications
SO6 E. Main St. (Basement)
Aspen, CO 81611
970-90-5310 or 911 in emergencies
http://www.aspe n pitki n.com/d epts/34/
Police Dept.
506 E. Main St. (Basement)
Aspen, CO 81611
970-920-5400
h tt p://ww w. a s p e n p i t k i n. c o m /d e p t s/ 53 /
Aspen Fire Protection District
420 E. Hopkins St.
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-5532
Mountain Rescue
630 W. Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
970-920-5310 or 911 in emergencies
http://www.mountai nrescu easpen.org/
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -14
Aspen Existing Conditions Report- DRAFr 6/11/2008
Senior Services
0275 Castle Creek Road
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: (970) 920-5432
Senior Care Management Program (970) 920-5432
http://www.aspen pitki n.com/depts/27/
Recreation Department
0895 Maroon Creek Rd.
Aspen, CO 81611
970-544-4100
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/56/Aspen Recreation Center
http://www.aspenrecreation. com/
Aspen Golf Club
3995 Highway 82
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-2145
http://www.aspenrecreation.com/pages.cfm?categorylid=5&contentid=277
RRC Associates & Elk Mountains Planning Group Planning for a Lifelong Aspenite -15
June 13, 2008
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
At the request of Councilmembers J. E. DeVilbiss and Jack Johnson,
there will be a special City Council meeting Monday, June 16, 2008 at 6:00
p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, Colorado.
The agenda for this meeting will be:
Taping of work sessions
ck son
i
DeVilbiss
Notices delivered to:
J. E. DeVilbiss
Jack Johnson
Steve Skadron
Dwayne Romero
Mick Ireland
City Manager Steve Barwick
Attorney John Worcester