Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20090427CITY COUNCIL AGENDA April 27, 2009 5:00 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances a) Results of Second Community-wide Greenhouse Gas Inventory IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matfers maybe adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #25, 2009 -Amend the Wind Energy Purchase Agreement b) Resolution #26, 2009 - 2009 Concrete Replacement c) Minutes -April 13, 2009 VII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #9, 2009 -Supplemental Appropriations P.H. 5111 b) Ordinance #11, 2009 -Adoption of 2009 International Energy Conservation Code P.H. 5111 VIII. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #10, 2009 -Disconnection of Territory South of Airport -cont'd to 5111 b) Resolution #3, 2009 -Aspen Valley Hospital Conceptual PUD c) Ordinance #8, 2009 -Jewish Community Center at Silver Lining Ranch SPA Amendment d) Resolution #22, 2009 -Exemption From Vested Rights Lot 1 Boomerang Subdivision IX. Action Items a) Resolution #28, 2009 -Public Health Revitalization XI. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting May 11, 2009 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. V C ~ ~ ~ ~1~- ~V1 ~ ~; LL ~v ^ ~'L __ :. Yom' is _, i.:~ ~ ~ h.L ~xK ?' >; ;_' :~~< . ~ ~4}..>~y,, ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ 0 ~ ~ N 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~ Q~ .~ C ~ J--~ 0~ ~ ~'0_ N ~ ~~ m~ ~ ~ uI ~ L ~ C ~ O c ~ ~ C ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U In O ~ p1 ~ ~ ~ Ua1 ~ V ~ ~ ~. ~ N C F- Q_ ~ U d •C ~ a° ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ r t: , .\ ,\ 1 t, ~ ~ 4 CR ~ ~~1 • l ~, 'c~~'._Yq ,~J ... ~,~ t ` y r.~ tti)• ~ .t'• A Y. ~. ~; _ ~ ' ~ o K" t: . .'7i ' ~ ,M~r ar: ~_ ~~ s ~ ~ •iY ~. ~ i ~ ' ~ 1 i ~ I i ~ Y E~ ~ 1 PF`' ~. 1 . 6 I 1l \ ~ ~ . '~.\ g ~~ '~ , i ~~ YM '~ :y < ~n .,; '. C~~ U N fl.~0 Q j AC ~ ~ +~ ~~ C, ooQ Q~ rn , ~~a +~ 'L~ a , In ~", ~ C L~ N ~ C O Q ~~ ~ O ~ Q O a-+ N a p ~ 'p ~n ~ ra L 41 L1 O u N ? L p p U ~ JVfO3 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p vim'-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ a' O ~ N 'a ~ U i _ L .~..+ N C70(n(n~ 3~ ~ C z~ ~ L C ~ ro p p ~s ,C `~ ~ ~ 0 0 L ~ C C In aln ~•~ ~ Nom,..., aJ~l~- O 0 0 V 0 0 _~ N ~O ~ v 0 0 .~ X sL' O U ~ ~ U V ~ ~ ~ -p ~ 0 +.~ O 0 N .O ~ _N 0 O 0 'O ~ *' O N N 1011 ca ~ ~ ~ v ~ .~ ~ v 001 O ~ ~ U D ~ -N0 ~ p_ N 0_ 41 C N cv 0~~ 0 0 3 ~ ~ ~ O ~L., (~ C s- L- [v N .~ N O C O d1 L MEMORANDUM To: FROM: CC: CC: Mayor and City Council vi~- Phil Overeynder, Utilities and Environmental Initiatives Director Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney DATE OF MEMO: Apri117, 2009 MEETING DATE: April 27, 2009 RE: Additional Wind Energy Purchases for Aspen Electric Utility REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting that Council approve contract amendments to increase the amount of wind energy purchased through the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN). Staff recommends purchasing 5,000,000 kwh of additional wind energy and environmental attributes. This purchase would utilize funds set aside to increase renewable energy production and purchases. Staff further recommends that the purchase include 2,200,000 kwh of "environmental attributes" for any wind energy purchased in months where the total available supply exceeds the City's electric demands as explained in this memo and the attachment. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In March 2005, Aspen entered into an agreement with MEAN to increase wind energy purchases to approximately 28% of the electric utility's source of supply, thereby becoming one of the leading purchases of wind energy in the nation on a percentage basis. Council has consistently directed staff to acquire the maximum amount of renewable energy available consistent with physical limitations (electric power must be used at the time it is generated and the sum of all the City's power sources must equal the total demand during a given time). DISCUSSION: Based on the previous discussions during a work session with City Council, staff requested that MEAN set aside some additional resources from new wind projects located in Nebraska and South Dakota. These wind projects began production at the beginning of 2009 and the additional energy is available at favorable terms relative to developing a new project at another location. Aspen has yet to commit to purchasing any of the additional wind energy that moos has been reserved for Aspen. An amendment to the existing wind energy contract with MEAN is necessary to do so. In December 2008, Aspen's electric rates were revised to be effective April 1, 2009. Approximately $400,000 per yeaz from this additional revenue source has been directed towards increasing renewable energy use for the electric utility. Staff is requesting that City Council Page 1 of 3 purchase some of the allotment set aside by MEAN for Aspen's electric utility using a portion of this additional rate revenue. Limitations on Purchasine Additional Wind Enerav. Discussions between MEAN staff and City Council during the 2005 negotiations on the existing wind energy contract focused on purchasing the maximum practical amount of wind energy, consistent with the requirement to use the energy when it is produced. Because we now have three years of actual experience with the availability of wind versus the timing of the electric system demands, it is possible to give a more accurate picture of the maximum purchase consistent with this limitation. The attached memo fo'~n MEAN explains two different mechanisms to deliver additional wind at purchase levels of 5,000,000 or 10,000,000 kwh. During a work session held on March 17, 2009, Council concurred with staff s recommendation to purchase an additiona15,000,000 kwh. The option selected consists of 2,200,000 kwh of wind energy and 2,800,000 kwh of "environmental attributes." Relationship to Greenhouse Gas Goals. Aspen's electric utility has made substantial progress towards reduction of its greenhouse gas emissions. The 2004 emissions inventory identified 39,571 tons of C02 emissions for the electric utility. The 2007 emissions inventory identified 19,091 tons of C02. Because Aspen's goal has been to reach a carbon neutral utility, funds were budgeted to further increase renewable energy purchases and production (refer to Financial Impacts discussion below). At the recommended 5,000,000 kwh purchase level, the total electric utility C02 emissions would be reduced by an additional 19%. Purchase of Environmental Attributes. Aspen's past policy when purchasing energy has been to purchase both the energy and "environmental attributes" as a bundled commodity. Environmental attributes can be thought of as the carbon emission reductions avoided by switching from existing carbon based power to a renewable resource. These carbon credits have a separate market value and are often purchased by a third party in order to provide the additional funds necessary to make more expensive renewable energy sources cost competitive with traditional coal fired sources of power. The party that pays these additional costs is then able to claim the reduction in carbon emissions. The MEAN proposal (attached) has two options for dealing with time periods when the available wind energy is higher than Aspen's demand for electric power. Option 1 continues the existing policy of buying the entire bundled (energy and "environmental attributes) commodity, but at a higher cost to Aspen than Option 2. During the March 17 work session, council concurred with staff s recommendation for Option 2. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Beginning with the 2009 budget year, $412,000 in additional revenue is projected to be passed due to rate adjustments and water directed to reduce the remaining greenhouse gas emissions of the electric utility to zero If Council accepts staff recommendation to amend the wind energy contract with MEAN to purchase an additional 5,000,000 kwh of wind energy annually, it would utilize roughly $100,000 of the $412,000 additional revenue directed towards "greening" the electric resource mix. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: If Council accepts the staff recommendation to approve the proposed contract amendments, existing C02 emissions from other MEAN power sources will be reduced. Using 2007 emission factors for MEAN's power sources, the estimated reduction in Page 2 of 3 emissions would be 3558 tons C02 per yeaz. By comparison, the estimated emission reduction for the proposed Castle Creek hydroelectric plant (using higher 2004 emission factors) was estimated as 5167 tons C02 per yeaz. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the attached contract amendments. ALTERNATIVES: Two different levels of wind energy purchases are available and are described in the attachment. If the higher (10,000,000 kwh) purchase level were adopted, it would require a higher percentage of the funds set aside for renewable energy development. If this option were chosen, it is possible that plans for some of the locally developed renewable energy (geothermal, photovoltaic, micro-hydro, hydrogen generation, etc.) would be precluded due to budget limitations. Also increasing to the higher level would mean that approximately 43% (versus 35% for the recommended purchase) of the total energy requirements would consist of wind energy. This level of commitment to a single energy source raises concerns about whether the "energy portfolio" contains the right mix of energy sources to minimize risk if future problems are encountered in a given energy sector. An additional option is to take no action to increase wind energy purchases nor to further decrease carbon emissions through local renewable projects. This would maintain the additional rate revenue set aside for reducing the carbon emissions of the electric sector in the Electric Fund. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution # ~ ~ , 2009. CITY MANAGER ATTACHMENTS: February 19, 2009 Additional Wind Energy Purchase Proposal from MEAN Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purchase Between MEAN and City of Aspen Revised Exhibit A, Contract Wind Energy Amounts to the Second Supplemental Agreement for Wind Generated Energy Purchase Page 3 of 3 Aspen, CO Additional Wind Purchase Discussion/Options February 19, 2009 Backeround/historv Aspen, CO is a Service Schedule M participant of the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) and receives their total energy requirements (above their WAPA allocation, Ruedi output and Mazoon Creek output) from MEAN. Currently Aspen purchases 18,075 MWh of wind energy annually from MEAN and has expressed a desire to increase their wind purchase from MEAN. In consideration of this request, MEAN ran power supply costs analyses using assumptions for loads, Ruedi output and Maroon Creek output based on 2008 data, and with varying levels of additional wind energy purchases. The results of the power supply cost analyses revealed that at certain levels of additional wind energy purchases, there are some months in which Aspen would be purchasing wind energy in excess of their needs. Options To address the issue of Aspen's potential wind energy purchases in excess of their needs, MEAN is proposing two options to Aspen: Option 1-Additional Wind Energy plus "MEAN buy back" Aspen would purchase a desired level of additional wind energy at the then current MEAN wind energy rate (currently $46.00/MWh). If Aspen's wind purchases would exceed their supplemental energy requirements in a particular month, MEAN would "buy back" the excess energy not needed to serve Aspen's load at the then current MEAN base energy rate with credit given in the respective month of occurrence. Aspen would retain the environmental attributes associated with all of the wind energy purchased, including the environmental attributes associated with the portion of energy sold back to MEAN. An example of Aspen's purchase under Option 1 based on 5,000 MWh/yeaz of additional wind energy is below: September 2008 kWh Aspen Total Energy Requirements 4,621,257 Less Maroon Creek (219,634) Less Ruedi (2,459,566) Less WAPA allocation (374,770) Less current Wind purchase (1,386,015) Less additional Wind purchase 392 333 Net Energy Requirements (211,061) d U m O ° 10 s U ~ C 16 7 Qa aE~j m Q y `j C! W O O N ~ V C a~ O W W Y U °' a '~ a a O (00 f h N r~ O d O1N e ee~~ ~N~}} (O m < rN .- ~ O i ~ tdr . OI~N1~'7 t0 N D ~MN ON N M m< ~ ~ ~ n a - ~' - e a < f9 d W ~ A 9 y «3+ O = p ° ~ 3 a ~ W o = N N ~ O h t~ V MN~tp 47 W I~ O M W OT C G MNO'7 N.n- ~ .N- r <W C N ~ N ~ 43 NV3 D o~p N N. a N - C G C < < N~ f9 Q { N d d'O W t0 t0 O N r M O N r sT O ~M ~ V m . y. ( O O N N .p f d d' t 0 r ~ N Q l ~ T ~ Q N~ M N W N< ~ y~ _ ~ W m C m C o3+E o o O a s ,~ C~ w O t N ~ r N C~ y aN<rncpM M MN ~dN'N~ N n m u>w N m mM O m - ~ C y W OcO . y'ro C1 ( N p M NN f9 Mf9 N p C C MN ON< t ~ ~ [1 D O < N ~ a,~~ N O~ r N~ W O V O jp M ~O~N i O M ~,.~ ~ O~ t~ N < ~ m M M V ON W M.-N O 43 Q ~N M N M N< M L C d m v C . 3 s o U y a T N_ a °' m ~ o ~ o `o U C N ~~ a T C d ~ O O W U D. F ~3 ; E a`d Q m a °c a°om'w` ao my s '^ U~ 3 `o ooo ~~" ~` ~ C N m d E o~O D c¢Za m E E ~ ` ~ Q E - aaa3f-3~a a cc a' f'n C - < N M~ ~t1 f0 I~ W W~ ~ ~ ~ 'p ..I DN 0 d C O d N d U X d Y a a a ~ 3 ~ z~ U ~ O ~~ o c E ~ u C d d a n` t0 C d ~~ _- E c N .= Ol ~'a ~ d T U L ~ ~3 d d 'm% c T d n y n ~ d N ~ N .d aci Z N W Q c X d U ~ ~ m w U L ¢~ c c 3 n ya c d Z a d `- O RESOLUTION # ~. 5 (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF NEBRASKA (MEAD SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING ADDITIONAL WIND ENERGY PURCHASES FOR ASPEN ELECTRIC UTILITY AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN), a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that amended contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) regarding approval of contract amendments to increase the amount of wind energy purchased through the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN), including revised Exhibit A, copies of which are annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held Apri127, 2009. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purchase between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR WIND ENERGY GENERATION ATTRIBUTES PURCHASE ("Agreement") is made between the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, a political subdivision of the State of Nebraska ("MEAN"), and the City of Aspen, Colorado ("Aspen"), on this day of , 20 .MEAN and Aspen are sometimes referred to collectively as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party". WHEREAS, Aspen is a municipal corporation created under the Constitution of the laws of the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, Aspen has established by ordinance an electric enterprise ("Enterprise") having the authority to in all respects act as an enterprise under Colorado law, Colorado Constitution Article X, § 20; and WHEREAS, Aspen and MEAN have entered into an Electrical Resources Pooling Agreement (ERPA) and a Total Power Requirements Power Purchase Agreement, pursuant to which MEAN is to acquire and deliver to Aspen all of Aspen's supplemental electrical energy needs in excess of production from the Ruedi hydropower project and the Maroon Creek hydropower project plus the firm power and energy allocation supplied to Aspen by the Western Area Power Administration; and WHEREAS, Aspen and MEAN have entered into two supplemental agreements pursuant to which a portion of Aspen's supplemental energy requirements will be provided by MEAN in the form of wind- generated electrical energy; and WHEREAS, Aspen has requested to purchase and MEAN desires to sell wind energy generation attributes, in addition to the wind-generated energy which is the subject of the previously executed two supplemental agreements between Aspen and MEAN. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the Parties, the Parties agree as follows: DeTinition. For purposes of this Agreement, "Wind Energy Generation Attributes" means, with respect to a specified quantity of the wind-generated electricity generated, the right of a purchaser of such Wind Energy Generation Attributes to claim, under applicable energy generation disclosure and tracking laws and regulations, all of the non-energy attributes and value associated with the generation of such renewable power, including any green tags, tradable renewable certificates or similar renewable energy certificates, credits, values or premiums associated with such renewable energy generation; any output-based incentive, allocation, credit, value, set-aside allowance ornon-energy attribute relating to or arising out of the production of renewable wind energy generation, and emission and greenhouse gas reductions; whether any of the foregoing arises pursuant to existing or future energy generation disclosure and tracking laws and regulations, or existing or future certification, certification program, trading market or exchange. For the avoidance of doubt, Wind Energy Generation Attributes include, but are not limited to, any avoided emissions of pollutants to the air, soil or water such as sulfur dioxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), mercury (Hg), and any other pollutant that is now or may in the future be regulated under the pollution control laws of the United States; and further include any avoided emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and any other greenhouse gas (GHG); but specifically exclude any and all state and federal production tax credits, investment tax credits and any other tax credits which aze or will be generated by the resources from which the energy associated with the Wind Energy Generation Attributes was generated. The energy commodity value associated with any sale ofwind-generated electricity (that is, the energy itself without its Wind Energy Generation Attributes) is not included in the sale of any Wind Energy Generation Attributes hereunder, and Aspen shall have no rights or claims with respect to such energy commodity value unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in writing. Representations and Warranties. A. Aspen and Enterprise represent and warrant that this Agreement has been executed in compliance with or is otherwise not subject to Article X, §20, of the Colorado Constitution (commonly known as the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights or "TABOR") which requires voter approval of certain multi-yeaz governmental financial obligations. B. Upon request, Aspen shall provide an opinion of Legal counsel that this Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by Aspen or the Enterprise and that all financial obligations undertaken or assumed by the Enterprise in connection herewith are valid and enforceable against the Enterprise in accordance with their terms. 3. Obligations of the Parties. A. MEAN shall provide to Aspen, during the term of this Agreement, Wind Energy Generation Attributes for the amount of energy per month as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made part of this Agreement. B. MEAN will, upon written request from Aspen, provide certification that it has either generated wind energy or purchased Wind Energy Generation Attributes, during the term of this Agreement, in an amount equal to the energy per month as shown in Exhibit A. C. MEAN agrees that it will not sell the same Wind Energy Generation Attributes to any other party or use the Wind Energy Generation Attributes in any other manner. D. Aspen agrees to pay MEAN for the Wind Energy Generation Amibutes as set forth in this Agreement, and such obligation for payment shall survive termination of this Agreement. 4. Charges. A. Aspen will pay to MEAN $16.00/MWh for the Wind Energy Generation Attributes sold under this Agreement. The amount of the charges shall remain effective unless and until modified by the MEAN Board of Directors in its sole discretion. Written notice of changes in chazges shall be provided to Aspen and shall apply effective on the first day of the immediately succeeding term. B. Each month during the term of this Agreement, MEAN will include on Aspen's monthly power and energy bills and Aspen shall pay the amount due for the Wind Energy Generation Attributes sold under this Agreement during the month for which such bill is applicable. C. Payments for the Wind Energy Generation Attributes are due from Aspen to MEAN in accordance with Article XVI of the ERPA. Bills are considered paid when payment is received by MEAN. This Agreement may be terminated by MEAN in the event of nonpayment by Aspen. D. Should Aspen dispute any part of a final bill rendered by MEAN, Aspen shall timely pay the undisputed portion of the bill. When the Parties have resolved the disputed portion of the bill, Aspen shall promptly pay the agreed upon remaining portion of the bill. 5. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall have an initial term of one (1) year, commencing on April 1, 2009, and shall thereafter automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms unless and until written notice of termination by either Party is delivered to the other Party at least ninety (90) days prior to the end of the then-current term. 6. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by any court or regulatory body having jurisdiction over this Agreement to be invalid or unenforceable, then it is the intention of the Parties that in lieu of each such invalid or unenforceable provision, there be added as part of this Agreement a provision as similar in terms as possible to such invalid or unenforceable provision. The remaining portions ofthe Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect. 7. Integration Clause. This Agreement constitutes the complete agreement of the Parties relating to the matter specified in this Agreement and supersedes all prior representations or agreements, whether oral or written, with respect to such matters. No modification of the Agreement shall be binding upon either Party unless agreed to in writing and signed by both Parties. 3. Waiver. Any waiver at any time by either Party to this Agreement of its rights with respect to a default or any other matter arising under or in connection with this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver with respect to any subsequent default or matter arising under or in connection with this Agreement. 9. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the substantive and procedural laws of the State of Nebraska, excluding any conflict-of--law rules and principles of that jurisdiction which would result in reference to the laws or law rules of another jurisdiction. 10. Regulatory Approvals. This Agreement may be subject to the regulatory powers of any state or federal agency having jurisdiction. Each Party shall use its best efforts and shall cooperate with the other Party to obtain from all such state and federal authorities as may have jurisdiction, all authorizations, approvals, and orders to the extent required by law in order to enable them to validly enter into this Agreement and to perform all their obligations hereunder. 11. Force Majeure. No Party shall be liable for any failure to perform its obligations in connection with this Agreement where such failure results from any act of God or other causes beyond such Party's reasonable control (including, without limitation, waz, extreme weather conditions, strikes, fires, embazgos, actions of civil or military enforcement authorities) and which, by the exercise of due diligence, such Party is unable to prevent or overcome. Any Party that becomes unable to perform its obligations under this Agreement because of any such event shall immediately give notice to the other Party of the occurrence of such an event and shall promptly notify the other Party of the anticipated duration of such an event. 12. Changes in Regulations. Should changes in legislation or regulation, either state or federal, make performance by either Party under the Agreement commercially impracticable or impossible, the Parties agree that they will renegotiate the terms of the Agreement as they have been affected by such change in regulation or legislation. 13. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given with respect to this Agreement shall be given by mailing the same postage prepaid or given by facsimile or by courier to the addressee at such Party's address as set forth below. Either Party may change its address for the purpose of notice hereunder by giving the other Party no less than five (5) days prior written notice of such new address in accordance with the preceding provisions. To MEAN: Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska ATTN: Executive Director P.O. Box 95124 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509 Telephone: (402) 474-4759 Facsimile: (402) 474-0473 To Aspen: The City of Aspen ATTN: Telephone: Facsimile: 14. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor the rights or obligations of the Parties under this Agreement may be assigned or transfered by either Party without the prior written approval of the other Party, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, any assignment or transfer, whether by merger or otherwise, to a Party's affiliate or successor in interest shall be permitted without prior consent if such Party assumes this Agreement. 15. Arbitration. If a dispute between the Parties should arise under this Agreement, either Party may call for submission of the dispute to arbitration, which call shall be binding upon both Parties. The arbitration shall be governed by the rules and practice of the American Arbitration Association (or the rules and practice of a similar organization if the American Arbitration Association should not then exist), with the proviso that the arbitration panel shall, in all events, consist of (3) arbitrators, one chosen by each of the Parties and the third chosen by those two arbitrators. 16. After Termination. The applicable provisions of this Agreement will continue in effect after termination of this Agreement to the extent necessary to provide for final payments, payment adjustments and any other final expense reimbursements, and with respect to liability and indemnification payments and expense reimbursements from acts or events that occured prior to the date of termination of this Agreement. 17. Liability Limitation. Except as otherwise specifically provided for herein, neither Party, including without limitation, any of its employees or agents shall be liable to the other Party whether in contract, tort or otherwise, for payment of any lost profits, special, indirect, consequential, penal, punitive or similar damages. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWING.] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purchase to be executed in their respective names as of the date and year first above written. MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO OF NEBRASKA sy: Executive Director By: Attest: Title: Attest: K:Vzga1~ICVv1EAMERPA1Aspen_Wind Amibu[e Supp_final.doc EXHIBIT A, ENERGY AMOUNTS to Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purcbase between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado Month kWh Janua 292,000 Febru 201,000 Mazch 255,000 A ril 259,000 Ma 237,000 June 190,000 Jul 193,000 Au ust 181,000 Se tember 220,000 October 243,000 November 259,000 December 270,000 Annual Total 2,800,000 Effective date of this Exhibit A: April 1, 2009 Supersedes Exhibit A issued as of: N/A WHEREAS, the Parties have duly executed this Exhibit A to the Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purchase as of the date and year shown below. MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO OF NEBRASKA By: Name: Title: Date: By: _ Name: Title: Date: Vl b MEMORANDUM TO: FROM THRU: DATE OF MEMO MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and Council Tyler A. Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering. Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer Apri120, 2009 Apri127, 2009 2009 Concrete Replacement and Pedestrian Improvement Project Contract Approval SUMMARY: Staff recommends council approve the concrete replacement and pedestrian improvement contract with Heyl, LLC for the amount of $229,752.00. DISCUSSION: The 2009 Concrete Replacement Project combines Tabor funded pedestrian improvements as well as Curb and Gutter improvements into one project. These Pedestrian Capital improvements are an ongoing safety enhancement plan with the goal to develop and maintain safer pedestrian corridors in Aspen. Curb and gutter replacement functions throughout the City of Aspen to convey Stormwater and provide safe pedestrian facilities. The scope of the curb and gutter replacement is dependant on the scope of pavement replacement (mill and overlay). As the streets deteriorate the City replaces the pavement. Along with the pavement replacement, deteriorated curb and gutter is also replaced. It has been four years since City has replaced any pavement. As a result, many areas have accelerated in their deterioration. This project aims to update this important City infrastructure as well as complete Tabor projects City Council directed staff to complete in 2008. The 2008 Concrete Replacement Project was advertised for bid on March 30`h 2009. Five Bids were received and opened on April 13`h 2009. Bids were received from three Contractors as summarized below: Heyl Construction, Inc $229,752.00 Lyon Construction, Inc $334,397.25 Gould Construction, Inc $346,343.00 KECI Colorado, Inc $389,426.00 Aspen Digger, Inc $462,609.00 Heyl Construction Inc was identified by staff as the lowest qualified bidder. Heyl has submitted a bid of $229,752.00 for the construction of the project. BACKGROUND: Heyl Construction, Inc has experience in various City infrastructure improvement projects and has performed well in previous contracts. Staff recommends that it is in the City's best interests to award the final design contract to this vendor. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding Tabor funding for Pedestrian Improvement $200,000.00 ROW C&G Corrections (Account # 000.15.82002.86000) $444,400.00 TOTAL $644,400.00 Expenditures 2008 Concrete Replacement Project $229,752.00 Staff Administration $ 30,000.00 Contineency $ 40,000.00 TOTAL $299,752.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for $229,752.00 as mentioned above. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ~~, Series of 2009." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RESOLUTION # (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND HEYL CONSTRUCTION, INC SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING 2009 CONCRETE REPLACEMENT AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Heyl Construction Inc, a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Heyl Construction, Inc regarding 2009 Concrete Replacement and Pedestrian improvement Project, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch., duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held April 27th 2009 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION (Short Form) ~' THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into on , by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, hereinafter called the "City", and hereinafter called the "Contractor". THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and Contracts herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. Construction of Project. Contractor agrees to furnish all labor, materials, tools, machinery, equipment, temporary utilities, transportation and any other facilities needed therefor, and to complete in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner the Project as described in the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto as Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein as if fully set forth (the "Project"). 2. Plans and Specifications; Compliance with Laws. The Project is to be constructed and completed in strict conformance with the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto for the same approved in writing by the parties hereto. The Project shall also be constructed and completed in strict compliance with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations of all applicable governmental authorities, and the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4- 08-040. Contractor shall apply for and obtain all required permits and licenses and shall pay all fees therefor and all other fees required by such governmental authorities. 3. Payments to Contractor. In consideration of the covenants and Contracts herein contained being performed and kept by Contractor, including the supplying of all labor, materials and services required by this Contract, and the construction and completion of the Project, City agrees to pay Contractor a sum not to exceed ($ )DOLLARS or as shown on Exhibit "A". 4. Commencement and Completion. Contractor agrees to commence work hereunder immediately upon execution hereof, to prosecute said work thereafter diligently and continuously to completion, and in any and all events to substantially complete the same not later than ,subject to such delays as are permissible under the "Extension of Time for Completion" section of this Contract. CCS-971.doc Page: 1 5. Payment of Bills and Charges. Contractor shall pay promptly all valid bills and charges for material, labor, machinery, equipment or any other service or facility used in connection with or arising out of the Project, and shall obtain periodic releases from all subcontractors and material suppliers supplying labor or materials to the Project concurrently with Contractor's delivering any payment to such subcontractors and material suppliers. Contractor shall indemnify and hold City and City's officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns free and harmless against all expenses and liability suffered or incurred in connection with the claims of any such subcontractors or material suppliers, including but not limited to court costs and attorney's fees resulting or azising therefrom; provided that Contractor shall be excused from this obligation to the extent that City is in arrears in making the payments to Contractor. Should any liens or claims of lien be filed of record against the Property, or should Contractor receive notice of any unpaid bill or chazge in connection with construction of the Project, Contractor shall immediately either pay and dischazge the same and cause the same to be released of record, or shall furnish City with the proper indemnity either by title policy or by corporate surety bond in the amount of 150% of the amount claimed pursuant to such lien. 6. Releases. Contractor shall, if requested by City, before being entitled to receive any payment due, furnish to City all releases obtained from subcontractors and material suppliers and copies of all bills paid to such date, properly receipted and identified, covering work done and the materials furnished to the Project and showing an expenditure of an amount not less than the total of all previous payments made hereunder by City to Contractor. 7. Hierarchy of Project Documents. This Contract and the Proposal or Scope of Work appended hereto as Exhibit "A" are intended to supplement one another. In case of conflict, however, this Contract shall control both. 8. Changes in the Work. Should the City at any time during the progress of the work request any modifications, alterations or deviations in, additions to, or omissions from this Contract or the Proposal/Scope of Work, it shall be at liberty to do so, and the same shall in no way affect or make void this Contract; but the amount thereof shall be amortized over the remaining term of this Contract and added to or deducted, as the case may be, from the payments set forth in Pazagraph 3 above by a fair and reasonable valuation, based upon the actual cost of labor and materials. This Contract shall be deemed to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original Proposal or Scope of Work as amended or modified by such changes, whatever may be the nature or the extent thereof. The rule of practice to be observed in fulfillment of this paragraph shall be that, upon the demand of either City or Contractor, the character and valuation of any or all changes, omissions or extra work shall be agreed upon and fixed in writing, signed by City and Contractor, prior to performance. 9. Contractor's Failure to Perform. Should Contractor, at any time during the progress of the work, refuse or fail to supply sufficient material or workmen for the expeditious progress of said work or fail to perform any other provisions of this Contract, CCS-971.doc City may, upon giving notice in writing to Contractor as provided herein and upon Contractor's failure to remedy any such failure within 3 days from receipt of such notice, terminate this Contract and provide the necessary material and workmen to finish the work and may enter upon the Property for such purpose and complete said work. The expense thereof shall be deducted from the payments remaining under Paragraph 3 above, or if the total cost of the work to City exceeds the amount of such remaining payments, Contractor shall pay to City upon demand the amount of such excess in addition to any and all other damages to which City may be entitled. In the event of such termination, City may take possession of all materials, equipment and appliances belonging to Contractor upon or adjacent to the Property upon which said work is being performed and may use the same in the completion of said work. Such termination shall not prejudice or be exclusive of any other legal rights which City may have against Contractor. 10. Extension of Time for Completion. Time is of the essence of this Contract and Contractor shall substantially complete the work during the time provided for herein. However, the time during which Contractor is delayed in said work by (a) the acts of City or its agents or employees or those claiming under Contract with or permission from City, or (b) the acts of God which Contractor could not have reasonably foreseen and provided against, or (c) unanticipated stormy or inclement weather which necessarily delays the work, or (d) any strikes, boycotts or obstructive actions by employees or labor organizations and which are beyond the control of Contractor and which it cannot reasonably overcome, or (e) the failure of City to make progress payments promptly, shall be added to the time for completion of the work by a fair and reasonable allowance. Contractor recognizes, however, that the site of the work is in the Rocky Mountains at a high elevation where inclement whether conditions are common. This fact has been considered by Contractor in prepazing its Proposal and or agreeing to the Scope of Work. Furthermore, Contractor shall have the right to stop work if any payment, including payment for extra work, is not made to Contractor as provided in this Contract. In the event of such nonpayment, Contractor may keep the job idle until all payments then due are received. 11. Unforeseen Conditions. It is understood and agreed that Contractor, before incurring any other expenses or purchasing any other materials for the Project, shall proceed to inspect the work site and all visible conditions and that if, at the time of inspection therefor, the Contractor finds that the proposed work is at variance with the conditions indicated by the Proposal, Scope of Work, or information supplied by City, or should Contractor encounter physical conditions below the surface of the ground of an unusual nature, differing materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract or inherent in a work site located in the Rocky Mountains, Contractor shall so notify City, and City shall at that time have the right and option to immediately cancel and terminate this Contract or to instruct Contractor to continue the work and add the additional amount attributable to such unforeseen conditions to the payments due Contractor as set forth above. Page:3 It is agreed that in the event of any cancellation by City in accordance with this section, Contractor shall be paid the actual costs of the work done prior to the time of cancellation. In computing such costs, building permit fees, insurance and such financing and title charges as are not refundable shall be included; provided that supervision time, office overhead and profit shall not be included in such costs to be refunded to Contractor by reason of such cancellation. 12. Acceptance by City. No payment hereunder nor occupancy of said improvements or any part thereof shall be construed as an acceptance of any work done up to the time of such payment or occupancy, but the entire work is to be subject to the inspection and approval of City at the time when Contractor notifies City that the Project has been completed. 13. Notice of Completion; Contractor's Release. City agrees to sign and file of record within five (5) days after the substantial completion and acceptance of the Project a Notice of Completion. If City fails to so record the Notice of Completion within said five (5) day period, City hereby appoints Contractor as City's agent to sign and record such Notice of Completion on City's behalf. This agency is irrevocable and is an agency coupled with an interest. Contractor agrees upon receipt of final payment to release the Project and property from any and all claims that may have accrued against the same by reason of said construction. If Contractor faithfully performs the obligations of this Contract on its part to be performed, it shall have the right to refuse to permit occupancy of any structures by City or City's assignees or agents until the Notice of Completion has been recorded and Contractor has received the payment, if any, due hereunder at completion of construction, less such amounts as may be retained pursuant to mutual Contract of City and Contractor under the provisions of Paragraph 3 above. 14. Insurance. a. The Contractor agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense; a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Contractor shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to the terms of this Contract by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed in the Supplemental Conditions. If the Supplemental Conditions do not set forth minimum insurance coverage, then the minimum coverage shall be as set forth below. Such coverage shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to City. All coverage shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. In the case of Page:4 any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. 1. Workmen's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -policy limit, and FNE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workmen's Compensation requirements of this paragraph. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall include coverage for explosion, collapse, and underground hazazds. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. 3. Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Contractor's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the services. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Contractor has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section 5.4.2.3 shall be met by each employee of the Contractor providing services to the City under this contract. c. Except for any Contractor Liability insurance that may be required, the policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City of Aspen and the City of Aspen's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City of Aspen, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City of Aspen, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Contractor. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. d. The certificate of insurance provided by the City of Aspen shall be completed by the Contractor's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits aze in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Aspen prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall CCS-971.doc Page: 5 provide that the coverage afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, ternunated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City of Aspen. e. In addition, these Certificates of Insurance shall contain the following clauses: Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance policies so effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all losses covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's insurer(s) may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's underwriters and insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the Contractor. The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies shall have no recourse against the City of Aspen for payment of any premiums or for assessments under any form of policy. Any and all deductibles in the above-described insurance policies shall be assumed by and be for the amount of, and at the sole risk of the Proposer. Location of operations shall be: "All operations and locations at which work in connection with the referenced project is done." Certificates of Insurance for all renewal policies shall be delivered to the Architect at least fifteen (15) days prior to a policy's expiration date except for any policy expiring on the expiration date of this Contract or thereafter. e. Failure on the part of the Contractor to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith. All moneys so paid by City shall be repaid by Contractor to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against moneys due to Contractor from City. f. City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. 15. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is destroyed or damaged by any accident or disaster, such as fire, storm, flood, landslide, earthquake, subsidence, theft or vandalism, any work done by Contractor in rebuilding or restoring the work shall be paid for by City as extra work under Paragraph 8 above. If, however, the estimated cost of replacement of the work already completed by Contractor exceeds twenty (20%) percent of the insured sum set forth in Paragraph 14 above, City shall have the option to cancel this Contract and, in such event, Contractor shall be paid the reasonable cost, including CCS-97Ldoc net profit to Contractor in the amount of ten (10%) percent, of all work performed by Contractor before such cancellation. 16. Notices. Any notice which any party is required or may desire to give to any other party shall be in writing and may be personally delivered or given or made by United States mail addressed as follows: To City: Aspen, Colorado 81611 To Contractor: subject to the right of either party to designate a different address for itself by notice similarly given. Any notice so given, delivered or made by United States mail, shall be deemed to have been given the same day as transmitted by telecopier or delivered personally, one day after consignment to overnight courier service such as Federal Express, or two days afer the deposit in the United States mail as registered or certified matter, addressed as above provided, with postage thereon fully prepaid. 19. Inspections; Warranties. (a) Contractor shall conduct an inspection of the Project prior to final acceptance of the work with City. (b) Contractor shall schedule and cause to be performed all corrective activities necessitated as a result of any deficiencies noted on the final inspection prior to acceptance. The costs of material and/or labor incurred in connection with such corrective activities shall not be reimbursed or otherwise paid to Contractor. (c) Contractor shall obtain, at City's expense, third party warranty contracts (to be entered into by City). CCS-971.doc Page: 7 20. Licensure of Contractor. Contractor hereby represents and warrants to City that Contractor is duly licensed as a general contractor in the State of Colorado, and if applicable, in the County of Pitkin. 21. Independent Contractor. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the pazties that nothing in this Contract shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. The Contractor shall be, and shall perform as, an independent the Contractor who agrees to use his best efforts to provide the Work on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of the Contractor shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. The City is interested only in the results obtained under the Contract Documents. The manner and means of conducting the Work aze under the sole control of the Contractor. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees including, but not limited to, worker's compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, aze available from the City to the employees, agents or servants of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of the Contractor's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of the Contract. THE CONTRACTOR, AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR, SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY MONEYS EARNED PURSUANT TO THE CONTRACT. 22. Assignment. This Contract is for the personal services of Contractor. Contractor shall not transfer or assign this Contract or its rights and responsibilities under this Contract nor subcontract to others its rights and responsibilities under this Contract, and any attempt to do so shall be void and constitute a material breach of this Contract. 23. Successors and Assigns. Subject to paragraph 22, above, this Contract shall be binding on, and shall inure to the benefit of, City and Contractor and their respective successors and assigns. 24. Entire Contract. This Contract contains the entire Contract between City and Contractor respecting the matters set forth herein and supersedes all prior Contracts between City and Contractor respecting such matters. 25. Waivers. No waiver by City or Contractor of any default by the other or of any event, circumstance or condition permitting either to terminate this Contract shall constitute a waiver of any other default or other such event, circumstance or condition, whether of the same or of any other nature or type and whether preceding, concurrent or succeeding; and no failure or delay by either City or Contractor to exercise any right arising by reason of any default by the other shall prevent the exercise of such right while the defaulting party continues in default, and no waiver of any default shall operate as a waiver of any other default or as a modification of this Contract. CCS-971.doc Page: 8 26. Remedies Non-Exclusive. No remedy conferred on either party to this Contract shall be exclusive of any other remedy herein or by law provided or permitted, but each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. 27. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action at law or equity shall be Pitkin County. 28. Attorneys' Fees. If either party to this Contract shall institute any action or proceeding to enforce any right, remedy or provision contained in this Contract, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to receive its attorneys' fees in connection with such action from the non-prevailing party. 29. Severability. Any provision in this Contract which is held to be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid shall be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid without affecting the remaining provisions, and to this end the provisions of this Contract are declared to be severable. 30. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the Contractor agrees as follows: The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, marital status, sexual orientation, being handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Viet Nam era veteran. The Contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and that employees aze treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Viet Nam era veteran. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places; available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 31. Prohibited Interest. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or the Town of Snowmass Village shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 32. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflict of Interest: a. The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an Contract or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingency fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the purpose of securing business. CCS-971.doc Page: 9 b. The Contractor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering of advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Contract or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. a It shall be a material breach of the Contract for any payment, gratuity, or offer of employment to be made by or on behalf of a Subcontractor under a contract to the prime Contractor or higher tier Subcontractor or any person associated therewith, as an inducement for the award of a Subcontract or order. The Contractor is prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed under this Contract to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal "anti-kickback" statutes or regulations. 33. Payments Subject to Annual Appropriations. If the contract awazded extends beyond the calendaz yeaz, nothing herein shall be construed as an obligation by the City beyond any amounts that may be, from time to time, appropriated by the City on an annual basis. It is understood that payment under any contract is conditional upon annual appropriation of funds by said governing body and that before providing services, the Contractor, if it so requests, will be advised as to the status of funds appropriated for services or materials and shall not be obligated to provide services or materials for which funds have not been appropriate. 34. Illeeal Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101. a. Purnose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. b. Definitions. The following terms aze defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. b. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. CCS-971.doc "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. c. By signing this document, Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Contractor does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien; and (ii) Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens. d. Contractor hereby certifies that: (i) Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Contractor has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Contractor does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Contractor has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Contractor shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Contractor shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Contractor is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. CCS-97Ldoc Page: I1 (iv) Contractor shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Contractor shall: (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Contractor's violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Contractor operates as a sole proprietor, Contractor hereby sweazs or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Contractor (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. CCS-971.doc Page: l2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract For Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: City Engineering Department ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney CONTRACTOR: By: Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. doc CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION (To be completed if Contractor is a Corporation) STATE OF COUNTY OF On this day of me appeared SS. personally known, who, being by me first duly sworn of 19 ,before _ to me did say that s/he is and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors, and said deponent acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Address My commission expires: ccs-v~i.ao~ BID PROPOSAL FORM Project No. 2009-026 BID DATE: April 13, 2009 PROJECT: 2009 Concrete Replacement and Pedestrian Improvements PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY: f71= ~L Lf.~'~S~/-/L~i'a+~ 7illCr CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL TO: The Governing Body of the City of Aspen, Colorado The undersigned responsible bidder declares and stipulates that this proposal is made in good faith, without collusion or connection with any other person or persons bidding for the same work, and that it is made in pursuance of and subject to all the terms and conditions of the advertisement for bid, the invitation to bid and request for bid, all the requirements of the bid documents including the plans and specifications for this bid, all of which have been read and examined prior to signature. The bidder agrees to keep this bid open for Sixty (60) consecutive Calendar days from the date of bid opening. The Contractor agrees that construction shall start immediately following a mandator}c pre-construction conference held by the Engineering Department, which also constitutes the Notice to Proceed. Submission of this proposal will be taken by the City of Aspen as a binding covenant that the Contractor will finish construction within the time specified in the Special Conditions of this contract document. fihe City of Aspen reserves the right to make the awazd on the basis of the bid deemed most favorable to the City, to waive any informalities or to reject any or all bids. The City hall not pay the Contractor for defective work and/or for repairs or additional work required for successful completion of the project. All work not specifically set forth as a pay item in the bid form shall be considered a subsidiary obligation of the Contractor and all costs in connection therewith shall be included in the prices bid for the various items of work. Prices shall include all costs in connection with famishing the proper and success completion of the work, including famishing all materials, equipment and tools, and performing all labor and supervision to fully complete the work to the City's satisfaction. Poor quality and workmanship shall not be paid for by the City. Such work product must be removed immediately and replaced properly at no cost to the City. All quantities stipulated in the bid form at unit prices aze approximate and are to be used only as a basis for estimating the probable cost of work and for the purpose of comparing the bids submitted to the City. The basis of payment shall be the actual amount of materials famished and work done. The Contractor agrees -cc~ Telephone number: g7o - c1~5/- 35<orf Fax number: 97~- 98~- 3~0 3 Attested by: Subcontractor & Material Supplier List Name: Phone #: Address: °2~~ e-~ l0'~ CR~2bor~~t~lG ~ Service or Product: ~'oncrt.~e S.aoliEQ Name: 1~~M10' t~t~r~/1. ~,S-~~rt ,Phone #: J~/f 5- 77.~~ Address: ~/7 Co~o~fo ~ 5~- <0/ Gle~wmcl ~ inaS . ~6 Service or Product: L~ ~~~o ~ie,2 Name: Address: Service or Product: Name: Address: Service or Product: Name: Address: Service or Product: Name: Address: Service or Product: Phone #: q6 3.~ CYO Phone #: Phone #: Phone #: CC1-971.doc Page 87 "CC1 ~U ~-.. ~- ~ ~ '~ * i ='~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor & City Council THRU: Don Taylor, Finance Director FROM: Don Pergande, Budget Officer " DATE: April 20~h, 2009 pp,~ RE: First Reading: Adoption of Budget Supplemental -Ordinance No. J (Series 2009) this item will be discussed on Monday, April 27~h, 2009 Staff is requesting an amendment to the. City's 2009 budget that increases the city-wide total expenditure appropriation from $102.3 .to $110.8 million, (See Attachment A). Net of inter fund transfers, budget authority increases from $78.8 to $88.3 million. Interfund transfers are required appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations. Attachment E provides a detailed listing of budgeted 2009 interfund transfers. The exhibit below outlines the supplemental request's impact on the City's overall appropriation authority. The reference attachments provide itemized listings of requested supplemental budget authority. CITY OFASPEN - 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET Description Amount Location 2009 Adopted Budget: $102,280,120 See Attachment A Total New Requests: $1,638,720 See Attachment B Total Central Savings: $149,560 See Attachment C Total Departmental Savings: $1,745,640 See Attachment C Tota1100%carryforwards: $11,721,650 SeeAttachmentD Budget Cuts: ($4,356,350) See Attachment G Technical Adjustments: ($2,348,250) See Attachment F Total Budget Requests: $8,550,970 See Attachment A TOTAL ORDINANCE: $110,831,090 See Attachment A Less Interfund Transfers: $22,504,490 See Attachment E NET APPROPRIATIONS: $88,326,600 See Attachment A As noted in the chart above, this supplemental is substantially comprised of annual carry-forward appropriations. These requests are for projects previously appropriated, and for which cash reserves are set aside. Different categories of requests include: • Attachment B: "New Requests' of $1,638,720 include requests for formal appropriation of funding issues previously reviewed by Council during this fiscal year, new requests, and capital requests that have gone beyond the two year automatic re-appropriation time frame provided by the City's Asset Management process. Narrative justification of each new request is provided as part of this memorandum below. • Attachment C: "Manager 10% Carry-forward Savings' of $149,560 which represent 10% of operating budget savings from all departments of the City in previous years. These one-time appropriations are allocated the City Manager's office (See Attachment C) for use in addressing mid-year issues with citywide implications. • Attachment C: "Departmental 50%Carry-forward Savings' of $1,745,640, which represent 50% of. previous year operating budget savings for individual departments. Departments are allocated these amounts as a reward to finding efficiencies in their operations that allow them to meet their operating goals while spending less than their total appropriations. These one- time appropriations can be spent on items related to the department's mission (See Attachment C). • Attachment D: "Departmental "100% Carry-forward Requests": These requests are for operating items and capital improvement projects budgeted in 2008 that require completion in 2009. Requests total $11,721,650. This category includes the City's personal computer and workstation replacement programs -which keeps the City's computer technology new and efficient, and re-appropriation of ongoing capital projects. Attachment D details these requests by department. • Attachment E: This attachment details all budgeted interfund transfers of the City for 2008 of $22,504,490 in total. Interfund transfers are required appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations. • Attachment F: This attachment details all of the technical adjustments in 2008 of ($2,348,250) in total • Attachment G: This attachment is a high level summary of the request in this supplemental ordinance; including the ($4,356,350) of Council's approved budget cuts made in the work sessions held in 2009. New Requests General Fund City Contributions- The City Contributions Department is requesting $324,500 in total. $200,000 is for additional marketing for the City of Aspen through ARCA. This request is funded by $170,000 from the General Fund's Departmental savings, $15,000 from the Wheeler Fund and $15,000 from the Parks and Open Space Fund. $124,500 is to fund ACRA at the original forecasted amount of the 1% lodging tax. As the economic conditions have changed so has the forecasted amount the 1% lodging tax for 2009. This additional funding request was calculated by using the 2009 projects presented to Council in the March 24th work session. This request will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. Planning Deportment -The Planning Department is requesting $37,330 ih total. The funding is for the Aspen Area Community Plan. The City and County have been jointly working on an update to the Aspen Area Community Plan. On March 3, 2009, City Council and the Board of County Commissioners gave their approval to take additional time for adoption of the updated AACP. City and County staff anticipates a revised timeline will take adoption into October of 2009, and will require additional work beyond the original scope of work. See memo for additional details on this request. The County will reimburse the City for $33,333 of this request and the remaining $3,997 will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Engineering Department- The Engineering Department is requesting $9,980 in total. The funding is for survey work for the BMC West property annexation and for the North Spring Street ROW. See memo for additional details on this request. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Police Department- The Police Department is requesting $25,590 in total. $10,240 is requested for the use of a DUI enforcement grant of $10,240. It is only available for use paying overtime for DUI enforcement shifts, under the terms of the grant. The police department has previously participated in this grant, and council has approved. See memo for additional details on this request. $15,350 is requested for the use of Federal Justice Assistance Grant (The Edward Byrne JAG), which is funded through the FY 2009 Recovery Act Justice Assistance Grant. The grant is to be used to pay for law enforcement programs, including technology improvement programs. $15,350 has been dedicated to the Aspen Police jurisdiction. See memo for additional details on this request. Streets Department- The Streets Department is requesting $4,330. The funding is for formal appropriations of the additional annual operating expenses, including preventative maintenance and additional fuel costs approved on May 12, 2008. These funds are being requested since the construction of flush truck is completed and the vehicle is due to arrive. These funds were to be requested during the 2008 budget process, but were delayed until the completion of the flush truck. This will bean on-going expense. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. GIS Department- The GIS Department is requesting $11,800. The funding is for additional maintenance costs associated with the enterprise license agreement with ESRI. This acquisition created efficiencies in the City of Aspen and County Departments yearly operating expenses related to the use of information in the GIS data base. This is an ongoing request. See memo for additional details. This request will be 100% offset by the City and County Departments. SO% will be offset by the County reimbursement and SO% by subscription fees paid by the City of Aspen internal Departments. Special Events- The Special Events Department is requesting $65,000, in total. $65,000 is requested to expand marketing efforts by the Special Events Department. $50,000 is an ongoing request and $15,000 is a onetime request for 2009. See memo for additional details on these requests. These requests will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. , New Requests All Other Funds Parks and Open Space Fund- The Parks Fund is requesting $15,000 in total. The funding is requested for $15,000 of the $200,000 additional ACRA marketing for the City of Aspen. This request will be funded by the cash reserves in the Parks Fund. Wheeler Fund- The Wheeler Fund is requesting $15,000 in total. The funding is requested for $15,000 of the $200,000 additional ACRA marketing for the City of Aspen. This request will be funded by the cash reserves in the Wheeler Fund. Housing Development Fund- The Housing Development Fund is requesting $340,020 in total. $10,000 is requested to fund maintenance at the 312 W. Main St. City owned property. $5,000 is requested for general maintenance on city owned properties. $325,020 is requested to complete work on the Annie Mitchell housing project. See the memos for additional details on these requests. This request will be funded by the cash reserves in the Housing Development Fund. Stormwater Fund- The Stormwater Fund is requesting $35,000 in total. The funding is requested for the Drainage Criteria Manual Project that is estimated to cost $145,000; $110,000 will be funded from the 2008 unspent budget authority and the balance of $35,000 from the unrestricted fund balance in 2009. See memo for additional details on this request. Water Fund- The Water Fund is requesting $26,000 for the Zgreen business outreach program. This request is funded by 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. See memo for additional details on this request. Electric Fund- The Electric Fund is requesting $195,490 in total. $170,490 is requested for improving energy efficiency of affordable housing units. This request is funded by 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. $10,000 is requested for the 2030 challenge. This request is funded by 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. $15,000 is requested for home energy auditing equipment for use by fledgling energy audit contractors. This request is funded by 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. See memo for additional details on all of these requests. Truscott Fund- The Truscott Fund is requesting $53,000 in total. $10,000 is requested to upgrade the electrical system, $20,000 is to resolve safety issues related to the roof in 600, 700, and 900 buildings, $15,000 is to purchase video surveillance systems; $8,000 is for energy audit. See memos for additional details on all of these requests. The Finance Department has determined that the Truscott Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Employee Housing Fund- The Employee Housing Fund is requesting $75,000 to complete roof repairs and improvements to the Water Place housing units, improvements were initiated in 2008. This request will be funded by cash reserves. See memo for additional details on this request. Asset Management Capital- The Asset Management Capital fund is requesting $405,680, in total. $160,280 is requested for the purchase of an additional flush truck for the Street's Department. The use of the CDOT Grant funding for the purchase of the flush truck was approved by Council in November of 2007. This is a request for the formal appropriations of the funding. $116,035 will be paid for by a CDOT grant and $44,245 will be paid for from the Street Department's departmental savings. See attached memo for details on this request. $50,000 is requested to complete the city hall roof repairs. See memo for additional details on this request. $35,000 is requested for the formal appropriations of the new aerial photography and related GIS base layer data for the Aspen Area approved by Council in 2008. See memo for additional details on this request. $600 is requested for remaining expenses on the Council Chambers remodel. See memo for additional details on this request. These three requests will be funded from cash reserves in the AMP Fund. $149,800 is requested to purchase the CIP Software package approved by council in March of 2009. 50% of the total will be paid for by the Finance Departmental Savings and 50% of the total will be paid for by capital projects budgeted in 2009. Technical Adjustment The technical adjustments are a reduction of $2,348,250 in total. The details related to all of these adjustments can be found on attachment F of this packet. ORDINANCE NO. _/ (Series of 2009) AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND EXPENDITURES OF $2,583,260, A REDUCTION IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $350,600, A REDUCTION IN THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FUND OF $1,539,480, AN INCREASE IN THE WHEELER OPERA HOUSE FUND OF $723,560, A REDUCTION IN THE CITY TOURISM PROMOTION FUND OF $214,000, AN INCREASE IN THE TRANSPORTATION FUND OF $154,210 AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND OF $519,400, AN INCREASE IN THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION FUND OF $380, AN INCREASE IN THE KIDS FIRST FUND OF $50,640, AN INCREASE IN THE STORMWATER FUND OF $185,160, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE CAPITAL FUND OF $219,380, AN INCREASE IN THE WATER FUND OF $2,253,150, AN INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC FUND OF $806,250, AN INCREASE IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND OF $2,835,730, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKING FUND OF $53,700, A REDUCTION IN THE GOLF COURSE FUND OF $29,910, AN INCREASE IN THE TRUSCOTT FUND OF $242,550, AN INCREASE IN THE MAROLT FUND OF $1,650, A REDUCTION IN THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSUARANCE FUND OF $1,240, AN INCREASE IN THE EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND OF $76,650, A REDUCTION IN THE HOUSING ADMINASTRITION FUND OF $19,140 AND A REDUCTION IN THE SMUGGLER FUND OF $330. WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current yeaz revenues and/or unappropriated prior yeaz fund balance available for appropriations in the following funds: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FUND, WHEELER OPERA HOUSE FUND, CITY TOURISM PROMOTION FUND, TRANSPORTATION FUND; HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION FUND, KIDS FIRST FUND, STORMWATER, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE CAPITAL FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND, PARKING FUND, GOLF COURSE FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE FUND, EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND, HOUSING ADMINISTRATION FUND AND THE SMUGGLER FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers must be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 Upon the City Manager's certification that there aze current yeaz revenues and/or prior year fund balances available for appropriation in the: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FUND, WHEELER OPERA HOUSE FUND, CITY TOURISM PROMOTION FUND, TRANSPORTATION FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION FUND, KIDS FIRST FUND, STORMWATER, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE CAPITAL FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND, PARKING FUND, GOLF COURSE FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE FUND, EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND, HOUSING ADMINISTRATION FUND AND THE SMUGGLER FUND: the City Council hereby makes supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A. Section 2 If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR POSTED ON FIRST READING on the 27th day of April, 2009. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY ADOPTED AFTER PUBLIC HEARING on the 11th day of May, 2009. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor John Worcester, City Attorney a .. :~ L X w m a ppO ,,, m r o o rn o In r ~ o w o N e m ~ ~ ~ n v ~ o C m VVV ~~~ l C m w m M< O q ~ O m ~ I O O 9 U ~ m ] C~ n C W ui I~ V' r t~1 N - m N O m N m m C N O f~ O m ' O Cl 1[ n ~ a C C W m ~ IO r N I A V ~ O O m m m O m< m N N N r _ ~ w ~ N IC! Ip w m a N< " N w C m N w w w IN f9 ~ O M tli w pI m O m w V w w w w w w w ~ ~ O w ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~p O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O t7 I(l m N O m O O N m O O O C'I O m m ` O < 10 lp O m f0 C C1 m r r V m M m a r n rn m ~n w m a m m m G ~ ~ 9 r m o 0 o v ) m N O t0. r O m N Of m M r O N m ' ~ IO C ~ y d m Y r m ~ f O O r O! Q O O A Cf t7 r m t7 N ~ N m ~ C t7 m N 1p O O f7 10 01 t7 r N N m m r N m m N ~ r ~ t7 N e E 9 .~ O t m C) N O th R N < i ro N m ~ ~ r w M t7 O ~ M p Q d J N O N m< [h m N ~ OI m w w O w w w w W w I'1 w w ~ N 6IO w w w w w w w Nw w ~ N W i pI m K r t9 IR O W ~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ol O w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 ~ 0 0 a 0 ~ o a c o 0 ~` 0 0 a m m N m m m o o m c m V N O N O ~ w ~ N n o w~ N i ~ `~ ~ N¢ N W m N~ O Oi th t0 N C') O> (V ~O O C) m N C t9 ~ w N O m E Ol N m C Ip ^ ') N N m w w N ' N w M V In n N m 9_ C N N N N !~ N N w f9 ~ w f9 w w p a ~ ~ O O ~ N 6 d m a N w w w N ~-~ n w m ' q~f O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N b N O m O O n ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O N ~ Q ~ N c V m m m o r m m rn N I[l V O N C C) O r m M m O m O N < C] C C'f r m r f0 C d ~ N t 7 O) m t0 Ip Ol Ol m ~ N O O m N r ~~~ N V N V Ifl 9 r ~ ~ V V m m N N t~0 R i f In0 ta+f O ~ N m~ N^ m m m ~ ~ fD N V C o 9 w" C) w m Ol (7 ~ CI r N m M < MMM.]]] r r Ip m !7 M w iy w f9 H _ ~. ~ C N w N 19 f9 w w f9 w N w w w w w f9 w w w N ~ m LL m G w w O N r ~ n a r 1A M a w~ ~ m C a O) m O O O O N O O N O O O O O m O O O N O t7 m O) m < O O m O O m O O) O OI Q ,p O 0 1 t7 m O N O r t7 m Yf m r O m 0 O< t0 m m m r m O d. Zp ~ m J m O m O N O l0 C Ol N C m r C9 ~ < < m m (O N Ip r 0) m (7 O (7 d' O N m m Cl < m N !'! (O N m m 0 O .` C p1 E m 9 N o t 'f O N t7 N r N v o m N e a a m n m m <n m o m N a < vI < m m M w m e o ~ O N I/7 r ~' ¢ > J R vi ai r .- pi w t•1 ~ tD w f9 w f9 N w N w w f N N ~ pI ~ CI w N f9 w w f9 M w p w w tli f9 w O Q o w ~ ~ w 6 N Q rn o 0 0 o m o o q' m a o 0 a 0 0 o v o o r o w w~ a m o p~ w MI 0 N 0 w oln~ 0 w ~ ~ a 0. 19 a m ~ r w o v m w (~ W O N O m N N wl w m i0 O n O N r O O C ¢ m N o m N m a m v a ~ m o rn m m m m N rn ~ n ~ C d~ c ° m ~~ w w N ~ w w~~ » m 0 0 w w o Q. am > w `~ w w W ¢ N ~ c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o vI O 0 0 0 0 0 0 n m o ~n m m 0 e 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m ~ ~ m ` d r N ~ o m o 0 rn r m r m o V a m < m a N N r O v~ m m ) r N M m W N 10 N J m ~ lp t o c'i ui ri n Of C ~ vi < < <O Ol N V1 f0 n D7 < m O N V O p Q R < th N m ~"~ C W 9 f 7 O m m m O N O m ~(I O N m m< N m V O I~ m ~ N ~ ~ ~ O o O ~ O r ~ O J . ~ w N ~ ~ n C1 < a N Vi w f9 N « d~ m w N f9 w w w M w H w 19 M w w f9 w M O ~ ~ F w N W w 9 G m m l0 r O O r O O N r N O M O V O! O m m N m N t7 V m m m m n t7 N O n r _ J V m of h ) m w 0 N O O < m r m O t7 M m N C'1 W m 4/ N t"1 m m N O O ~' m 9 10 ~ N V O O O m ~ N! ~ N m O~i m m R V r H N t7 r O m < N m 1f1 < r d t") m m N {+1 C~1 dl U J a m t N m ~ O < m W~ r w w m r w N _ Yf ~ tr1 r ' C d nj c N ~ t7 ~ ~ H H Ol N m N w w w f9 Ci N w w N ~ ~ C d d w w w w w w w w O O D] C w H III W W d m N C O N C O N C 9 LL J LL ,d_, ' 9 C N IL J 9 T ~ 3 ~ U m N J C I~ Q LL ? J 7 LL 7 0 J LL U lL 9 C C a m 9 IL 9 m q C a' ~ LL LL LL 7 ~ a E A > d C N > U U v 7 C C ~ O O~ Q L d a p O m 0 C p LL 9 d N LL m y LL Iy ~ O Z ~ 4 7 0 9 m J C 9 9 Z C n W N 9 T IL j ~ IL C O t T ~ O t C a 9 m ~ rn xo E~ Ea W 9 c ~ m m J N U .p 9~ rn 9 at LL a m 5 c 1O c H c . m C C J E C ~ LL O 9 C q iy LL LL C N C ~ LL d ~~ O t d N~ ~ d ~ N N a y ~ LL m 9 C 6~ LL C m 00 ~ (L O d d a ~ 6 ~ LL LL .>. W 9 IL J C ~' C ~ d 0 ~ O ¢ E Q ` ~A 0 ~ Ot d~ U, > J d O n y~ m 9 LL i n y p d o m ~ 6 ~ m d d ~- C d p N = m J Ln x J W d N d C 9 9 2 ¢ H Z d .J an ~ d W m 0 2 3 o O n ' C U O C O O O m q 0 ~ N Q ~ C U LL N fn N N d V 3 v .y ~ m ?~ E a a a a ~ ~ a ~ «~ p C ~ '~ N° a d na y ` J J a J (~ c H m a J '~ d i c J m d L '~ o `m 9° J m m J m d J c t° m m m o E d w ~ J 5 E E ww J m r o E xrn p w Q J Z ¢c7 m a3UHxw3m m o o m a a m w ~ac~r 3 m City of Aspen Attachment B J 20095upplemental Budget New Funding Requests All Requests are one-time unless otherwise noted. Department /Fund New Repuest Description Amount Subtotal by Dept. General Fund . , _ City Contributions TBD Council decided to fund ACRA's yearly allocation from the 1% lodging tax at the $124,500 originally forecasted amount of $624,500. Using the 2009 projeRions presented to Council in the March 24Th work session the new forecast for the 1% lodging tax is [o yield $1,000,000, half of this, $500,000 is allocated to ACRA. In order to bring ACRA back to the original forecast the General Fund needs [o pay ACRA from the General Fund reserves $124,500. TBD This isa request for $200,000 for additional marketing with ACRA. $170,000 is $200,000 - funded from the General Fund's departmental savings. The remaining $30,000 is equally frpm Wheeler and Parks Funds. Subtotal, City Contributions $324,500 Planning 001.13.47501.82900 Additional Funds are requested for the AACP to continue website development, $37,330 fund public outreach, and print the 2009 AACP update. $33,333 of this request will be reimbursed from County. See memo for additional details Subtotal, Planning $37,330 Engineering Department Survey work for the BMC West Property Annexation and for the N. Spring Street $9,980 ROW. See memo for additional details Subtotal, Engineering $9,980 Police 001.3131700.82900 The Police Department is requesting appropriations to use a DUI enforcement $10,240 grant pf $10,240 (grant revenues will match expenses). It is only available for use paying overtime for DUI enforcement shifts, under the terms of the grant. The police department has previously participated in this grant, and council has approved. See memo far additional details. 001.3131200.83999 The Police Department is requesting appropriations to use a Federal Justice $15,350 Assistance Grant (The Edward Byrne JAG), which is funded through the FV 2009 Recovery Act Justice Assistance Grant. The gent is to be used to pay for law enforcement programs, including technologylmprovement programs. $15,350 has been dedicated to the Aspen Police jurisdiction. See memo for additional details. Subtotal, Police $25,590 Streets Department 001.41.411000.83700 With the addition of the CMAq flush truck additional annual operating expenses, $4,330 including preventative maintenance and additional fuel costs, estimated at $4,330 will be incurred. The purchase of the CMAOflush truck, along with the additional operating expenses was approved with reso #42 On May 12, 2008. These funds are npvi being formally requested since the construction of flush truck is completed and [he vehicle is due to arrive. These funds were to be ' requested during the 2008 budget process, but were delayed until the completion of the Flush truck. This will be an on-going expense. Subtotal. Streets $4,330 GIS Department 001.60.60000.82999 ELA acquisition in February of 2008. See memo far additional details. This $11,800 request is 100%offse[ by reimbursements from [he County and internal CRy subscription fees. This is an ongoing request. - Subtotal, Streets Department: $11,800 Special Events TBD On going special events -See memo for additional details $50,000 TBD One time special events-See memofor additional details $15,000 Subtotal, Special Events $65,000 SUBTOTAL, GENERAL FUND: $478,530 An B. New Requests Page t City of Aspen Attachment B 2009 Supplemental Budget '' New Funding Requests All Requests are one-time unless otherwise noted. Department /Fund New Request Description Amount Subtotal by Deot Parks'and Open Space Fund _.. .: ~ ~ ~- `~,wl .. TBO This request is to fund $15,000 of the $200,000 of additional ACRA marketing for $15,000 [he City of Aspen Subtotal, Park and Open Space Fund $15,000 Wheeler Fund - TBD This request is to fund $15,000 of the $200,000 of additional ACRA marketing for $15,000 [he Ciry of Aspen Subtotal, Wheeler Fund $15,000 Housing Development Fund TBD 312 West Main St, maintenance-See memo for additional details $10,000 150.23.55110.` Property maintenance -See memo for additional details 55,000 150.23.23120.' Annie Mitchell housing project-see memofor additional details $325,020 Subtotal, Housing Development Fund - $340,020 Stormwater Fund 160.94.81116.86000 Contract approval was received in December 2008. The Drainage Criteria Manual $35,000 Project is estimated to cost $145,000, $110,000 will be funded from [he 2008 unspent budget authority and [he balance of $35,000 from the unrestricted fund balance in 2009. See memo far additional details. Subtotal, Stormwater Fund $35,000 Wafer FUnd. 421.43.43500.80012 Zgreen husiness out reach program. This request is funded by 2008 REMPfunds $26,000 awarded by CORE. See memo for additional details Subtotal, Water Fund $26,000 Electric Fuhtl r - 431.94.46409.86000 Imprgve energy efficienry of affordable housing units. This request is funded by $170,490 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. See memo for additional details 431.94.46409.86000 2030 challenge-This reques[is funded by 2008 REMPfunds awarded by CORE. $10,000 See memo for additional details 431.94.46409.86000 Home energy auditing equipment for use by Fledgling energy audit contrastors. $15,000 This request is funded by 2008 REMP funds awarded by CORE. See memo for additional details. Suhtotal, Electric Fund Truscott Housing Fund '. 491.01.45043.82999 The current electrical system can not accommodate the load required to run the $10,000 _ new heat tape installed qn the new roof at the Truscott 100 building. There was also the need to run new heat tape over area above the 600, 700, and 900 buildings where poor design was causing cornices and ice dams that posed a health and safety issue. The new heat tape needed a licensed electrician for • completion. See memofor additional details. 491.94.82114.86000 Poor design and lack of heat tape had caused a major safety issue above portions $20,000 of the roof over the 600, 700, and 900 buildings. Cornices and ice dams hung over pedestrian traffic that posed a health and safety issue. See memo for additignal details. TBD Truscott would like to purchase a video surveillance system to prgtect the offces $15,000 and laundry roomsfrom theft and vandalism. See memofor additional details. TBD Truscott would like [o use these monies fo pay for weatheriza[ion and materials $8,000 [o to make a greener property. We would also like to purchase more energy efficient bulbs and repair existing solar panels as well as investigate our options on adding more solar arrays to the property. See memo for additional details. Subtotal, Truscott Housing Fund $195,490 $53,000 Att B. New Requests Page 2 City of Aspen Attachment B 20095upplemental Budget ~ New Funding Requests All Requests are one-time unless otherwise noted. Department /Fund New Reouest Description Amount Subtotal by Dept. EmployeeHOUSing Fund ~. .. 505.94.81022.86000 Staff recommends a 505 fund budget supplemental in the amount of $75,000 to $75,000 complete roof repairs and improvements to the Water Place Housing units, improvements that were initiated in 2008. The funds will pay for heat tape, snow fencing/clips and other capital improvements plus contingencies. See memo for additional details. Subtotal, Employee Housing Fund $75,000 Asset Management Plan:FUnd - 000.41.83005.86000 Streets Department request to use CDOT Grant for purchase of an additiional $160,280. flush truck for the City of Aspen's Fleet was approved by Council in November of 2007. This isa request for the formal appropriations of the funding. The total cost of the flush truck is $160,280. $116,035 will be paid for by a CDOT grant and $44,245 will be paid forfrom the Street Department's departmental savings. See attached memo for details 000.91.81022.86000 Staff is requesting funding to complete city hall roof repairs and improvements $50,000 that were initiated in 2008. See memo for additional details 000.61.82137.• Council approved a contract pn July 28th, 2008 for the GIS to acquire a new aerial $35,000 photography and related GIS base layer for the Aspen Area. This is formal _ appropriations pt the additional funding needed to fund the approved contract in full. See memofpr additional details 000.26.TBD Staff is requesting appropriation of GORE grant funding to purchase a portable $10,000 renewable energy system to be used 6y for special events in [he City. See memo for additional details 000.07.83095.86000 Council Chambers Remodel -See memo for additional details $600 000.11.81199.86000 CIP Software package approved by council in March of 2009. The total cost of the 5149,800 software and hardware is $149,800. SOY of the total will be paid for bythe Finance Departmental Savings and SOY of the total will be paid for by capital projects budgeted in 2009. Subtotal, Asset Management Plan Fund $405,680 Total New Requests All Funds: $1,638,720 $1,638,720 Total New Requests After Offsetting Funding Source: $870,672 * Italics Indicates offsetting funding source Att B. New Requests Page 3 City of Aspen ATTACHMENT C 2009 Supplemental Budget Request 10% and SO% Carryforward Requests Central Savines "10%" Ogeratine Budeet SO% Department Carrvforward Savings Carryforward Savings Council $0 $0 City Manager $149,560 $48,120 Human Resources/Risk $0 $17,940 City Clerk $0 $77,670 City Attorney $0 $2,560 Finance $0 $142,410 Planning ~ $0 $13,920 Engineering $0 $26,850 Environmental Health $0 $15,050 Police $0 $272,880 Records $0 $7,040 Streets $0 $144,950 Information Technology $0 $64,490 Aspen Recreation Center $0 $1,320 General Fund Subtotal Departmental Savings $149,560 $835,200 Parks and Open Space Fund $0 $87,340 Wheeler Opera House Fund $0 $191,160 Transportation Fund $0 $87,410 Kids First Fund $0 $58,330 Water Utility Fund $0 $211,260 Electric Utility Fund $0 $100,130 Parking Fund $0 $174,810 All Other Funds Subtotal Departmental Savings $0 $910,440 Total Departmental Savings $149,560 $1,745,640 Att.C - 10% & 50% Savings Clty of Aspen tAll Requests are one-time 2009 Supplemental Budget 100% Carry Forward Appropriation Request ATTACHMENT D Subtotal by Department /Fund Description Amount Department GeneralFund . , ~ e. .. .. City Manager 001.05.05000.83625 Workstation Replacement $5,150 001.05.05000.83655 PC Replacement $13,260 Subtotal, City Manager $18,410 HR /Risk Management 001.06.06000.83625 Workstation Replacement $9,940 001.06.06000.83655 PC Replacement $8,230 Subtotal, Human Resources $18,170 City Clerk 001.07.07000.83625 Workstation Replacement $2,030 001.07.07000.83655 PC Replacement 513,990 Subtotal, City Clerk $16,020 City Attorney 001.09.09000.83625 Workstation Replacement 5880 001.09.09000.83655 PC Replacement $2,510 Subtotal, Ciry Attorney $3,390 Finance 001.11.11000.83625 Workstation Replacement $16,560 001.11.11000.83655 PC Replacement $2,900 Subtotal, Finance Department - 519,460 Planning 001.13.13200.83625 Workstation Replacement $21,880 001.13.13200.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $21,440 001.13.13200.83655 PC Replacement 51,610 001.13.13318.82999 Zupancis to Mill Conceptual Plan-See memo $6,370 001.13.13400.82900 Historic Preservation Task Budget-See memo - $33,360 001.13.13410.82999 Aspen Grove Cemetery-See memo $13,630 001.13.47501.82900 Aspen. Area Community Plan-See memo $46,320 - Subtotal, Planning $144,610 Engineering - 001.15.15000.83625 Workstation Replacement Carry forward $4,210 001.15.15000.83655 PC Replacement Carry forward: $3,110 Subtotal, Engineering $7,320 Building 001.21.21000.83625 Workstation Replacement $2,610 001.21.21000.83655 PC Replacement $6,720 001.21.21000.82900 Harvard Grant awarded in 2008-see memo $10,000 . Subtotal, Building $19,330 Environmental Health 001.25.25500.83625 Workstation Replacement 55,930 001.25.25500.83655 PC Replacement $6,760 Subtotal, Environmental Health $12,690 Police 001.31.31000.83625 Workstation Replacement $22,830 001.31.31000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $76,590 001.31.31000.83655 PC Replacement $22,340 Suhtotal, Police $121,760 Records 001.33.33000.83625 Workstation Replacement $990 001.33.33000.83655 PC Replacement 51,860 Subtotal, Records $2,850 streets 001.41.41000.83625 Workstation Replacement $7,980 001.41.41000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $38,030 001.41.41000.83655 PC Replacement ~ ~ ~ $1,890 001.41.41100.83036 EPA Retro Fit Clean Diesel Grant $880 Subtotal, Streetr ~ ~ 548,780 Atf D 100% Cfwd City of Aspen All Requests are one-time 2009 Supplemental Budget 300%Carry Forward Appropriation Request Department /Fund Geographic Info System 001.60.60000.83625 Information Technology 001.61.61000.83625 001.61.61000.83655 Special Events 001.70.71000.83625 001.70.71000.83655 Description Workstation Replacement Subtotal, Geographic Information System Workstation Replacement PC Replacement Subtotal, Information Technology Workstation Replacement PC Replacement Subtotal, Special Events Recreation 001.71.71000.83625 001.71.71000.83655 Aspen Recreation Center 001.72.72000.83625 001.72.72700.83625 001.72.72700.83655 Ice Garden 001.74.74000.83625 001.74.74000.83655 Asset Management Workstation Replacement PC Replacement Subtotal, Recreation Workstation Replacement Workstation Replacement PC Replacement Subtotal, Aspen Recreation Center Workstation Replacement PC Replacement Subtotal, Aspen Ice Garden ATTACHMENT D Subtotal by Amount Department $2,880 $2,880 $8,920 $7,250 $16,170 $1,440 $740 $2,180 $4,770 $130 $4,900 $9,130 $1,840 $2,250 $13,220 $6,180 $5,450 $11,630 001.91.05000.83625 Workstation Replacement $5,450 001.91.05000.83655 PC Replacement $10,460 Subtotal, Asset Management $15,910 Subtotal, General Fund $499,680 -0arks and Dpen Space Fund 100.55.55000.83625 Workstation Replacement $4,280 100.55.55000.83655 PC Replacement $250 Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Fund $4,530 Wheeler Opera House Fund 120.93.93000.83625 Workstation Replacement $3,820 120.93.93000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $47,270 120.93.93000.83655 PC Replacement $26,200 120.93.93200.82140 Advertising Fees for General and Venue Advertising $162,430 120.93.93150.82900 Phase I of the 21st Century Master Plan $260,000 120.94.81023.86000 Stage Lighting Improvement - ~ $31,000 120.94.81100.86000 Keyless Entry and Security System $17,680 Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House Fund $Sgg~go0 Transportation Fund _.~ °` 141.34.34100.83625 ~ Workstation Replacement $13,090 141.34.34100.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $34,090 141.34.34100.83655 PC Replacement $12,020 141.34.34000.82180 ETA Alternatives and Transit Development Plan - $106,000 141.34.34000.83900 ETA Alternatives and Transit Development Plan $24,000 141.94.83055.86000 Ruby Park Facility Improvements $38,000 Subtotal; Transportation Fund $227,200 Att D 100Y Cfwd City Of AspeD All Requests are one-time ATTACHMENT D 2009 Supplemental Budget 100% Carry Forward Appropriation Request - Subtotal by Department /Fund Description Amount - Department Housing Development fund 150.23.23140.86000 Housing Development Misc. -See Memo for Details $177,700 - 150.23.23112.86000 802 West Main St. Maintenance-See Memo for Details $10,000 150.23.23128.86000 Deer Hill Trail -See Memo for Details $48,030 150.23.23120.86000 Annie Mitchell -See Memo for Details $83,610 Subtotal, Housing Development Fund $319,340 Early Childhood Education Fund ;, y ~ - 151.26.26200.82999 Grant Funds Will be Distributed in 2009 $7 500 Subtotal, Kids First Fund $7,500 Kids First Fund ~ 152.24.24000.83625 Workstation Replacement $3,110 152.24.24100.82911 Grant Funds Will be Distributed in 2009 $11,000 Subtotal, Kids First Fund $14,110 Stormwater Fund 160.94.82051.86000 Mill Street Pipe Extension-Jenny Adair $15,630 160.94.81115.86000 Rio Grande Park Redesign $34,190 160.94.81116.86000 Drainage Criteria Manual $110,000 - Subtotal, Stormwater Fund $159,820 Parksand Open Space Capital Fund 340.94.81014.86000 Cozy Point Ranch $258,170 340.94.81096.86000 Triangle Park $27,620 340.94.81108.86000 Castle Creek Underpass /Cemetery Lane Improvement $506,470 340.94.81111.86000 Buttermilk Intercept Lot Trail Connection $20,000 340.94.82047.86000 Entrance to Aspen $15,890 340.94.82086.86000 Yellow Brick Picnic Shelter $23,530 340.94.82098.86000 Smuggler Mountain Open Space Management Plan ~. $19,870 340.94.82099.86000 Smuggler Mountain Reclaim and Restoration $197,250 Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Capital Fund $1,068,800 Water Utility _, 421.43.43000.83625 Workstation Replacement $340 421.43.43000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $12,580 421.43.43000.83655 PC Replacement $3,430 421.94.43501.86000 Global Warming Remodel/Move $7,54p 421.94.44103.86000 East Treatment Plant $1,940 421.94.44104.86000 West Treatment Plant $335,990 421.94.44105.86000 Administrative Building ~ $215,990 421.94.44106.86000 Disinfection Replacement $14,870 421.94.44107.86000 Distribution/Electric Building $10,220 421.94.44108.86000 Backwash Pond Improvements $10,000 421.94.44109.86000 Cleanvell $20,000 421.94.44110.86000 Storage Shed $15,000 421.94.44114.86000 Leonard Thomas Reservoir $2,000 421.94.44202.86000 Hunter Creek Plant $20,210 421.94.44401.86000 Water Rights Activities $7,650 421.94.44402.86000 Castle Creek Dam & Headgale $13,840 421.94.44405.86000 Castle Creek Pipeline $6,240 421.94.44407.86000 Gauging Stations $5,000 421.94.44408.86000 Reclamation Project $25,510 421.94.44409.86000 Whitewater Course Improvements $18,970 421.94.44501.86000 Raw Water Distdbution $6,340 421.94.44601.86000 ~ Mainline Replacement Program ~ $114,930 421.94.44603.86000 Meter Replacement Program $30,000 Att D t00% Cfwd City of Aspen All Requests are one-time 2009 Supplemental Budget 100%Carry Forward Appropriation Request De0artment /Fund 421.94.44605.86000 421.94.44614.86000 421.94.44615.86000 421.94.44701.86000 421.94.44702.86000 421.94.44802.86000 421.94.44907.86000 421.94.45001.86101 421.94.45001.86103 421.94.82057.86000 421.94.82088.86000 Electric Utility 431.45.45000.83625 431.45.45000.83635 431.45.45000.83655 431.94.46101.86000 431.94.46103.86000 431.94.46203.86000 431.94.46206.86000 431.94.46207.86000 431.94.46401.86000 431.94.46402.86000 431.94.46404.86000 431.94.46405.86000 431.94.46407.86000 431.94.46408.86000 431.94.46410.86000 431.94.46411.86000 431.94.46601.86000 431.94.82057.86000 431.94.82088.86000 Renewable Edergy Fund 444.94.43604.86000 444.94.43505.86000 444.94.43500.86000 444.94.43570.86000 444.94.43571.86000 444.94.43572.86000 444.94.43573.86000 Parking FUnd ,. Descri0tion Iselin?iehack Waterline Across Maroon Burlingame/Aabc Tie-In Maroon Creek Bddge Highway Crossing Pump Station Pressure Reducing Valves Storege Tanks "B" General Groundwater Facilities I.S. Plan - Scada/System Telemetry I.S. Plan -Utility Billing Network Systems Core Network Subtotal, Water Utility Workstation Replacement Equipment Maintenance and Repair PC Replacement Electric Administration Building Distribution/EiecMc Building Golf Course East Distribution System Acsd Distribution System Arc Distribution System Meter Replacement Maroon Creek Bdtlge Conduit Project Energy Conservation System Telemetry Conservatiop Progrem Carbon Offset Program- Canary Tags Insulate And Seal Project Energy Star Homes Project Streets Conduit Program Network Systems Core Network Subtotal, Electric Utility Ruedi Maintenance Ruedi Site Improvements Maroon Creek Hydroelectdc Facility Castle Creek Hydro Electdc Distrbution Castle Creek Hydro Penstock Castle Creek Hydro Engineering Castle Creek Hydro Constmction Subtotal, Renewable Energy Fund $2,838,000 451.32. 32000.83625 Workstation Replacement $13,090 451. 32. 32000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $34,090 451. 32. 32000.83655 PC Replacement $12,020 451. 32. 54000.83625 Workstation Replacement $1,240 451. 32. 54000.83635 Equipment Maintenance and Repair $54,700 461. 32. 64000.83666 PC Replacement $2,310 451. 94. 81023.86000 Parking Garage Lights $98,500 451. 94. 81076.82770 Parking Garage Planning for Garage Repair $97,740 Subtotal, Parking Fund ~ $313,690 Amount $400,000 $195,000 $342,680 $29,620 $12,820 54,340 $17,500 $19,050 $12,950 $87,030 $15,250 $1,080 $4,320 $2,200 $4,000 $19,950 $442,410 $120,000 $139,900 $42,990 $161,000 $30,000 $42,000 $150,000 $15,000 $12,000 $6,270 $8,770 $1,500 $4,250 ATTACHMENT D Subtotal by Department $2,034,830 $1,207,640 $333,020 $41,460 $70,610 $194,230 $481,890 $56,180 $1,660,610 Att D 1011% Cfwd City of Aspen All Requests are one-time ATTACHMENT D 2009 Supplemental Budget 100% Carry Forward Appropriation Request - Subtotal by Department /Fund Description Amount Department Golf Course Fund ~~ - ~ ~ 471.73.73000.83625 Workstation Replacement $540 - Subtotal, Golf Course Fund .___ $540 ___. Truscott Housing Fund 491.01.45044.83625 Workstation Replacement $1,880 491.01.45044.83655 PC Replacement $4,850 491.94.81022.86000 Truscott Roof Repairs $109,000 491.94.82085.86000 Truscott Metal Stairs Repaint $52,000 491.94.82113.86000 Truscott Trash Compactor $14,000 491.94.82114.86000 Heat Tape and Cutters-Replacement $6,000 491.94.82117.86000 100 Building Door Replacement $7,000 - subtotal, Truscott Housing Fund $194,730 Marolt Housing Fund 492.01.45043.83625 Workstation Replacement $1,450 492.01.45043.83655 PC Replacement $2,600 - Subtotal, Marolt Housing Fund _. _. __. $4,050 Employee Housing Fund _ 505.94.81022.86000 Water Place Housing Roofing Project $3,190 Subtotal, Employee Housing Fund $3,190 Housing Administration Fund ' 620.23.45002.83625 Workstation Replacement $6,000 Subtotal, Housing Administration Fund $6,000 Asset Management Plan Fund 000.61.82057.86000 City - IT Network Systems Plan $221,000 000.61.82057.86000 City - IT Core Systems Plan $73,200 000.61.83060.86000 City - IT Phone Systems Plan $4,500 000.61.81169.86000 County- IT Network Systems Plan -100% Reimbursed $34,500 000.61.81171.86000 County-Web Development-100%Reimbursed $51,200 000.61.81170.86000 County-IT Core Systems Plan-100%Reimbursed $73,200 000.61.81174.86000 County-IT Phone Systems Plan-100%Reimbursed $4,500 000.61.82137.86000 GIS areal photography needed to complete update $60,000 000.07.83095.86000 Council Chambers Remodel - $9,750 000.91.81107.86000 City Hall Remodel $780 000.72.72106.86000 Building Controls $39,000 000.72.72613.86000 Pool Lighting $11,720 000.74.81112.86000 Aspen Ice Garden Renovations $8,810 000.72.82062.86000 ARC Mechanical Retro-Fit $78,580 000.91.81022.86000 City Hall Roof Repairs $7,700 000.91.82153.86000 Isis Notch ~ $1fi,690 000.41.81097.86000 Effciency Measures $100,000 000.41.82003.86000 Site Improvements $81,200 000.41.82003.86000 Street Improvements $367,980 000.15.83075.86000 Bridge Maintenance and Repair $123,000 000.90.82076.86000 TABOR Projects $711,000 000.15.82002.86000 Curb and Gutter Projects $44,400 000.15.81197.86000 Main Street Median Project $96,890 , 000.15.82022.86000 Survey Monuments $50,000 Subtotal, Asset Management Plan Fund $2,269,600 Tota1100 %Carry forward supplemental Requests $11,721,650 Att D 100% Cfwd THE CITY OF L'1~L ~Lv Detail Descriptions For 100% Carry Forward Requests Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 DEPT Name: Originator: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Zupancis to Mill Conceptual Plan Justification: The Zupancis-Galena Conceptual Plan budget item rolled-overto the neM budget year. A few invoices are still outstanding on the project from 2008. - Estimated Cost: Amount $6,370 Total Estimated Costs $6,370 Ord JJ30 Services Justification: Staff has met with City Council on several occasions to provide an update on progress of the Historic Preservation Task Force. Council allocated $77,000 to support the work of this citizens' group. Approximately $50,000 has been spent on facilitation, expert speakers, public outreach and tours, and logistics needed for 100 small and large group meetings that have taken place over the last year. The Task Force hopes to deliver recommendations to City Council in May. The remaining budget available for this project needs to be rolled forward into the 2009 budget and is expected to be adequate to complete the project Estimated Cost: Amount $33,360 Total Estimated Casts $33,360 Aspen Grove Cemetery Justification: Aspen Grove Cemetery Preservation Plan budget item rolled overto the next budget year. This funding amount will be used to continue the scope of work in 2009, Estimated Cost: Amount $13,630 Total Estimated Costs $13,630 Aspen Area Community Plan Justification: Aspen Area Community Plan budget item rolled-overto the neM budget year. This money is being used to fund the existing contract with Design Workshop. Estimated Cost: 1/16/2009 Amount $46,320 Total Estimated Costs $46,320 001.41 Streets Department /EPA Retro Fit Grant -Clean Diesel Justification: Streets was awarded a $20,000 EPA reimbursement grant in 2007 to retrofit both on road and off road Street Department vehicles. Due to the required outputs for this grant the project has been extended an additional year (into 2009). Therefore, revenue and expenditure budget authority will be re-appropriated from 2008 to 2009. Revenue line is 001.41.00000.62000 Estimated Cost: Total Estimated Costs Amount 880 $880 Attachment D Details Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Date: 3/3/2009 Supplemental Request: Advertising Fees _ Justification: The remaining $162,430 appropriated in 2008 should be 100% carried forward due to City Manager's directive'to do more in the way of marketing the city, attracting more visitors, and promoting Aspen as an unique resort destination. Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Amount Estimated Cost: 82•" Professional Fees -general advertising $40,230 Estimated Cost: 82"• Professional Fees -venue advertising 122 200 Total Estimated Costs $162,430 21st Century Master Plan Justification: The remaining $260,000 appropriated in 2008 should be 100Y carried forward due to City Council's decision to move forward on Phase 1 of the 21st Century Master Plan and completing some of the related issues, documentation, and testing. Amount Estimated Cost: 260 000 Total Estimated Costs $260,000 'iransportatioh & Parking-450 Fund John D. Krueger': 2/20/2009 Consultant Services-ETA Alternatives and Transit Dev Plan Justification: This request is to carry forward funding previously approved in the 2008 budget to 2009 for services to provide continuing feasibility studies of Entrance to Aspen alternatives ($75,000) and to complete the Transit Development Plan ($31,000), Amount Estimated Cost: 106 000 Total Estimated Costs $106,000 Public Process -ETA Alternatives and Transit Dev Plan Justification: This request is to carry forward funding from the 2008 budget to 2009 for completing the Entrance to Aspen /Transit Development Plan public process and open houses including renderings and other materials. Estimated Cost: Rubey Park Facility Improvements Amount 24 000 Total Estimated Costs $24,000 Justification: This request is to carry forward funding previously approved as part of the 2008 budget to 2009 for continued improvements to the Rubey Park transit facility including restroom improvements and curb/gutter repair. Amount Estimated Cost: 38 000 Total Estimated Costs $38,000 Early Childhdod Education Fund ,. .. Shirley Ritter ~ . , , , 3/6/2009 ' Attachment D Details 2 Departmental Details far 100% Carrv Forward Proieds from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Grant funds Justification: Kids First is the fiscal agent forthe Rural Resort Region Early Childhood Council, a four county council. We have received an additional grant from the Colorado Trust for $7,500 and need to add this so that those funds may be expended for the purpose of the grant. This is a planning grant to be used this year; we may receive additional funds later this year for the implementation portion of this funding. Amount Estimated Cost: Colorado Trust planning, facilitation of community planning meetings 7 500 across Lake, Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Total Estimated Costs $7,500 ___ DEPT Name: Kids Eirst Fund ~' ~~ Originator: Shirley Ritter - Date: 3/4/2009 Supplemental Request: Carry forward grant funds Justification: Kids First receives a grant each year from the Aspen Valley Medical Foundation. It is paid in October and December for the period of time until the following October. In order to spend this revenue for the intended purpose we would like to carry forward this amount Amount Estimated Cost: Early Childhood Mental Health Consultations $11,000 Total Estimated Casts $11,000 DEPT Name: Engineering Department (Stormwaterj`, ~+ Originator: ... _ April Barker „ Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: 3/12/2009 Mill Street Pipe Extensiod Justification: Consulting services for design of the Mill Street Pipe EMension to Jenny Adair Wetlands. Request to carry forward remaining project budget from 2008. Estimated Cost: Rio Grande Park Redesign Amount 15 630 Total Estimated Costs $15,630 Justification: Services for a redesign of Rio Grande Park. Request to carry forward remaining project budget from 2008. Estimated Cost: Drainage Criteria Manual Project Amount 34 190 Total Estimated Costs $34,190 Justification: Contract approval was not received until December 2008. Therefore project was not begun until January 2009. Request to carry forward entire 2008 project budget of $110,000 and to appropriate $35,000 of unrestricted fund balance to this project in 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: 110 000 Total Estimated Costs $110,000 Parks and Open Space Eund Stephen Epsperman Attachment D Details Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Proieds from 2008 to 2009 Date: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/4/2009 Cory Point Justification: In 2007, City Council appropriated $600,000 over two years in capital improvement funding for Cozy Point Ranch. This allocated funding was to include $300,000 in 2008 and $300,000 in 2009 and was to include critical improvements to the facility. Building permits for the facility are still in process and a bid process has been completed for these improvements, which include upgrades forthe restroom facility, public spate and utilities, as well as historic cabin renovations. A contrac[or has been selected and the project will move forward in Spring, 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: ~ 258 170 Total Estimated Costs $258,170 Parks and Open.Spade Fund Steptien Ellsperman Triangle Park Justification: This project is for the replacement of playground equipment that has aged and has some components that no longer meet current national playground safety guidelines. The project was placed on hold through January 2009 due to other project priorities. Estimated Cost: Castle Creek Underpass/Cem Ln Imp Amount 27 620 Total Estimated Costs $27,620 Justification: The Castle Creek Underpass and Cemetery Lane Improvements projects was initiated in 2008 to remedy hazards in this area for passing cyclists and pedestrians. Staff worked with a consulting engineer in 2008 on design. The Open Space and Trails Board reviewed the development drawings and directed Staff to continue with design documentation. Construction is targeted to begin in Spring Estimated Cost: Buttermilk Intercept Lot Trail ConneQion Amount 506 460 Total Estimated Costs $506,460 Justification: In 2008, the City Council directed staff to complete a trail connection that would extend from the Buttermilk Parking Lot down valley to the AABC Trail in order to provide a safe and secure pedestrian connection in these locations. Due to project load, this project is now,scheduled for planning and implementation in 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount 20 000 Total Estimated Costs $20,000 Entrance to Aspen Justification: The Entrance to Aspen Improvements include specific native landscaping that was reviewed by City Council and aesthetic improvements to the travel corridor adjacent to Highway 82 in many locations. The remaining funds in this project will be used for landscape and irrigation installation that was not completed in 2008. Landscape restoration on the south highway/Maroon Creek Club large landform is scheduled in the last two weeks of April 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: ~ 15 890 Total Estimated Costs $15,890 Yellow brick Shade Picnic Shelter Attachment D Details 4 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 DEPT Name: Originator: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Justification: The Yellow brick Neighborhood Park was intended to have a shade structure located at the picnic table near the basketball court when the park was developed in 2001. The construction budget did not allow for a structure to be built at that time. A budget has been developed to complete design in 2008 and construction in Spring 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount Estimated Cost: 23 530 Total Estimated Costs $23,530 Parks and Open Space fund ~, Stephen Ellsperm5n , ., ... , Smuggler Mtn OS Mgmt Plan Justification: The Smuggler Mountain Master Plan was completed and approved by the Ciry of Aspen and Pitkin County in 2008. This plan provided a comprehensive guiding document for the management of this important Open Space resource co-owned by both local agencies. As a portion of the plan, both agencies are required To complete further study on botanical, wildlife, and recreational resources of the property and this account provides the funding stream to complete this important data collection. Estimated Cost: Smuggler Mtn Reclaim and Restoration Amount 19 870 Total Estimated Costs $19,870 Justification: The Smuggler Mountain Restoration Project was approved as a portion of the original purchase of Smuggler Mountain and includes the restoration of significantly disturbed portions of the property. The project was originally scheduled for 2008, however, the City and County Open Space and Trails Boards felt it was important to wait until the completion of the Smuggler Mountain Management Plan before implementing restoration activities. The project includes active restoration of many areas within the property and also coordination with RFOV as a scheduled 2009 project. Amount Estimated Cost: 197 250 Total Estimated Costs $197,250 DEPT Name: Water Fund ". Originator: Phil Overeynder, Utilities & Environmemal Initiatives Direttor Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/9/2009 Global Warming Remodel/Move Justification: Expansion of water administrative building to be completed in 2009. Expense budgeted for move-in costs to occupy new space. Estimated Cost: East Water Treatment Plant Amount 7 540 Total Estimated Costs $7,540 Justification: Eunds required to install new backwash pumps in East Treatment Plant. Amount Estimated Cost: - 1 940 Total Estimated Costs $1,940 West Water Treatment Plant Justification: Expenses budgeted to replace filter media in West Treatment Plant. - Attachment D Details Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Estimated Cost: Water Administrative Building Amount 335 990 Total Estimated Costs $335,990 Justification: Expenses budgeted to expand water administration building to house Global Warming staff to eliminate rental expenditures. Amount Estimated Cost: 215 990 Total Estimated Costs $215,990 Water Fund Phil Dvereyhder,Utilities&Environmental lnitiativesDirector 3/10/2009 Disinfection Replacement Justification: Expenses budgeted to complete conversion to liquid chlorine disinfection resulting in eliminating current federal and state requirements for storage and use of chlorine gas. Estimated Cost: Distribution/Electric Building Amount 14 870 Total Estimated Costs $14,870 Justification: Expense budgeted to insulate building and improve energy efficiency. Estimated Cost: Backwash Pond Improvements Amount 10 220 Total Estimated Costs $10,220 Justification: Expense budgeted to improve system used to dredge and clean backwash ponds. Amount Estimated Cost: 10 000 Total Estimated Costs $10,000 Supplemental Request: 2 Mg Clearwell Justification: Expense budgeted to replace flow meters. Amount Estimated Cost: 20 D00 Total Estimated Costs $20,000 DEPT Name: Water Fund Orginator: Phil Overeynder, UNIIUes$Environmen[al Initiatives Director Date: 3/10/2009 - Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Storage Shed Justification: Expense budgeted to extend utilities and electric power to storage shed. Estimated Cost: Justification: Leonard Thomas Reservoir Amount LS 000 Total Estimated Costr $15,000 Attachment D Details 6 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Protects from 2008 to 2009 Expense budgeted to replace valves at reservoir outlet structures. Amount Estimated Cost: 2 000 Total Estimated Costs $2,000 Supplemental Request: Hunter Creek Plant Justification: Expense budgeted to remove existing treatment facilities and convert building to other uses, including a pump station. Amount Estimated Cost: 20 210 -Total Estimated Costs $20,210 Supplemental Request: Water Rights Activities Justification: Expense budgeted for water rights including completion of filing for rights for reclaimed water project. Amount Estimated Cost: 7 650 Total Estimated Costs $7,650 DEPT Name: Water Fund ~:' Originator: Phil Overeynder,Utilities8.rvEnvoonmen[5l lnitiatlves DireROr Date: 3/10/2009 Supplemental Request: Castle Creek Dam & Headgate Justification: Estimated cost of dredging and removal of spoil material from behind dam. Estimated Cost: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Castle Creek Pipeline Amount 13 840 Total Estimated Costs $13,840 Justification: Project completion, surface restoration, re-vegetation, and cleanup for pipeline project constructed in zoos. - Estimated Cost: Amount 6 240 Total Estimated Costs $6,240 Gauging Statioris Justification: Installation of measurement equipment for minimum stream flow by-pass. Estimated Cost: Reclamation Project Amount 5 000 Total Estimated Costs $5,000 Justification: Remaining unconstructed sections of project design and construction delayed to allow coordination with right-of-way through Burlingame Village Phase 2. Amount Estimated Cost: 25 510 Total Estimated Costs $25,510 4 Attachment D Details 7 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2005 to 2009 Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/10/2009 Whitewater Course Improvements Justification: Project construction delayed to 2009 because of high water conditions encountered during spring 2008. Estimated Cost: Raw Water Distribution Amount 18 970 Total Estimated Costs $18,970 Justification: Budgeted cost to provide City's portion of new pressurized raw water connection to the Aspen Valley Hospital. Estimated Cost: Mainline Replacement Program Amount fi 340 Total Estimated Costs $6,340 Justification: Combined cost for Iselin-Tiehack Project may exceed budgeted funds for that project. Mainline replacement program funds will be used for reconfiguring existing connection to Tiehack Tank and provide a redundant source of water for the service area west of Maroon Creek. Estimated Cost: Meter Replacement Program Amount 114 930 Total Estimated Costs $114,930 Justification: Beginning of smart grid program started at end of 2008. Meter replacement funds will be used to implement fixed area network and electronic meter reading on selected sections of the water distribution system in 2009 as foundation of smart grid program. Amount Estimated Cost: 30 000 Total Estimated Costs $30,000 Water Fund - Phil Overeynder, Utllhfes & Environmental Initiatives Director 3/10/2009 lselin/Tiehack Waterline Across Maroon Justification: Project needed to provide a redundant source of water supply in the event the single source of water supply to the area west of Maroon Creek is disrupted. Estimated Cost: Burlingame/Aabc Tie-In Amount 400 000 Total Estimated Costs $400,000 Justification: Project delayed to 2009 because of need to coordinate design and construction through the right-of- way at Burlingame Village Phase 2. Amount Estimated Cost: 195 000 Total Estimated Costs $195;000 Attachment D Details 8 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Proietts from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Maroon Creek Bridge Highway Crossing Justification: Project completed by CDOT in 2008 but no invoice has been received for project. Funds must be reserved to pay CDOT the agreed contract price once an invoice is received. Estimated Cost: Amount 342 680 Total Estimated Costs $342,680 Pump Stations Justification: Completion of multi-year program to upgrade pump stations using energy efficient models to reduce energy usage and reduce operating budget for electric energy purchases. Amount Estimated Cost: 29 620 Total Estimated Costs $29,620 DEPT Name: Water Fund :- OflginatoC Phil Overeynder,Utilities &EnvnonmenWllnitiativa Dllet[Or Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/10/2009 Pressure Reducing Valves Justification: Carryforward funds to be utilized to remove a hazardous PRV vault installation. Estimated Cost: Storage Tanks "B" Justification: Funds required for work scheduled at Aspen Grove tank in 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount 12 820 Total Estimated Costs $12,820 Amount 4 340 Total Estimated Costs $4,340 Justification: All three wells have significant capital needs to address water quality limitations that currently preclude use of this source of water. These funds will be added to the 2009 appropriations to complete improvements for water blending (two wells) and to address sanding issues in the third well. Estimated Cost: I.S. Plant - Scada/ System Telemetry Amount 17 500 Total Estimated Costs $17,500 Justification: Complete 2008 radio telemetry projects in east water treatment plant and three pump stations. Amount Estimated Cost: 19 050 Total Estimated Costs $19,050 DEPT Name: OrlglOdtOr: .PHIL( Date: 3/10/2009 Supplemental Request: Justification: I.S. Plan -Utility Billing Attachment D Details 9 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Funding is to complete new electric rate implementation with Utilitech billing outsourcer and the Munis billing software upgrade required to stay with a supported version. Estimated Cost: Amount 12 950 Total Estimated Costs $12,950 Network System Justification: This program funding is to complete implementation of Aclara fixed area network, including Hexagram server and integration with Munis billing software, as part of smart grid project. Also included is the contract completion with Prometheus Group for the utility Technical Vulnerability Assessment and the state required Identity Theft Program. Estimated Cost: Amount 87 030 Total Estimated Costs $87,030 Core Network Justification: This program funding represents utility's portion of city hall network room ucgrades as it relates to cooling features and redundancy for Utility server, SANS server, and other related services affecting utility data base, backups, and operational components. Amount Estimated Cost: 15 250 Total Estimated Costs $15,250 Electric Fund - PhilOvereyndey Utilities & Environmental Initiatives bireRm 3/10/2009 Electric Administration Building Justification: Deferred improvements to Electric administration/switch station building to 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: 4 000 Total Estimated Costs $4,000 Distribution/Electric Building Justification: Design, permitting, and construction of building expansion to store crane truck scheduled for 2009. Estimated Cost: Golf Course East Distribution System Amount 19 950 Total Estimated Costs $19,950 Justification: Project bidding and construction delayed to 2009 in order to coordinate construction of bike trail realignment (Parks) and Castle Creek Hydro plant penstock (Renewable Fund). Amount Estimated Cost: 442 410 Total Estimated Costs $442,410 ' Electric Fund' "' Phil Ovcreynder, Utilities & Environmental initiatives DlreROr 3/10/2009 Acsd Distribution System Attachment D Details 10 Departmental Details for 100°/ Carry Forward Praiects from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Justification: Project timing will be dependant on ACSD's schedule for replacement of sewer line as well as reclaimed water line in order to share common trench and reduce construction and rehabilitation Estimated Cost: Amount 120 000 Total Estimated Costs $120,000 Arc Distribution System Justification: Project bidding and construction scheduled for 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount 139 900 Total Estimated Costs $139,900 Meter Replacement Justification: Beginning of smart grid program started at end of 2008. Meter replacement funds will be used to implement fixed area network and electronic meter reading on selected sections of the electric distribution system in 2009 as foundation of smart grid program. Estimated Cost: Amount 42 990 Total Estimated Costs $42,990 Maroon Creek Bridge Conduit Project Justification: Installation of conduits and vaults completed by CDOT under an existing cost reimbursement agreement in approximately 2005. No invoice has been received from CDOT to date. Funds must be reserved to pay when CDOT invoices for completion. Amount Estimated Cost: 161 000 Total Estimated Costs $161,000 DEPT Name: 'Electric Fvnd °`" ~. ' Originator Phil Overeynder,Utilities& Environmental Initiatives Director Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/10/2009 Energy Conservation Justification: Funds necessary to reimburse CORE for completion of energy conservation projects. Amount Estimated Cost: 30 000 Total Estimated Costs $30,OOD System Telemetry ° Justification: Funds budgeted to initiate SCADA system to improve automation and data collection on electric distribution system. Project deferred to 2009. Estimated Cast: Amount 42 000 Total Estimated Costs $42,000 Efficieny/Conservation Program Justification: Funds reserved for expansion of customer energy efficiency, demand side management, energy audits and related activities in order to leverage receipt of grants through-the federal economic stimulus program in 2009. Attachment D Details 11 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Amount Estimated Cost: 150 000 Total Estimated Costs $150,000 Supplemental Request: Carbon Offset Program -Canary Tags Justification: Funds necessary to pay for carbon offsets. Amount matches the funds received as a result of sale of Canary Tags. Amount Estimated Cost: 15 000 Total Estimated Costs $15,000 DEPT Name: .Electric Fund Originator; Phil Overeynder, Utilities & Environmental Initiatives Director Date: 3/10/2009 Supplemental Request: Insulate And Seal Project Justification: Remaining balance in pass-through grant funds received from State of Colorado. New funds for 2009 program to be administered by CORE. Amount Estimated Cost: 12 000 Total Estimated Cgsts $12,000 Supplemental Request: Energy Star Homes Projec[ Justification: Remaining balance of pass through grant funds received from State of Colorado. New funds for 2009 program to be administered by CORE. Amount Estimated.Cost: 6 280 Total Estimated Costs $6,280 Supplemental Request: Streets Conduit Program Justification: Funds to be used in connection with installing conduits underground when other utilities open a trench and make space available. Amount Estimated Cost: g 77p Total Estimated Costs $8,770 Supplemental Request: Network Systems Justification: Project funding will be used to improve network reliability and business continuity that was not completed in 2008. Amount Estimated Cost: 1 500 Total Estimated Costs $1,500 DEPT Name: -Electric Fund '_ OrlglnatoC Ph5l Overeynder,Utlities&Environmental lnitiatives Director Date: 3/10/2009 Supplemental Request: Core Network Justification: - Project funding will be used to improve network reliability and business continuity that was not completed in 2008. Amount Attachment D Details 12 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2D08 to 2009 Estimated Cost: 4 250 Total Estimated Costs $4,250 DEPT Name: - Renewable Energy Fund r ~ _ OriginatoC _ Phil Overeynder,Utilities&Environmentallnhlatives DGector` Date: 3/9/2009 Supplemental Request: Ruedi Maintenance Justification: Existing contract to G.E. for purchase of new turbine runner will be completed at end of 2009. Carryforward amount will provide final payment for cost of turbine runner. Amount Estimated Cost: 333 020 Total Estimated Costs $333,020 Supplemental Request: Ruedi Site Improvements Justification: City contracts with G.E. for operation of Ruedi facility. G.E. chose to delay certain site improvements required by OSHA until 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: 41 460 Total Estimated Costs $41,460 Supplemental Request: Maroon Creek Hydroelectric Facility Justification: Work to be completed in 2009 includes: Site clearing for built-up vegetation; on-site electrical generation for power backup; and reconstruction of supply valve. Amount Estimated Cost: 70 610 Total Estimated Costs $70,610 Supplemental Request: Castle Creek Hydro Electric Distribution Justification: Multi-year project. Engineering work initiated in 2008. Electric distribution improvements to be bid for 2009 construction. Amount Estimated Cost: - 194 230 Total Estimated Costs $194,230 DEPT Name: ,Renewable Energy Fund Originator Phil Overeynder,Utilities;& Environmental Inma[nres Director . Date: 3/9/2009 Supplemental Request: Castle Creek Hydro Penstock Justification: Multi-year project. Survey and Engineering design of penstock initiated in 2008. Construction to be bid in 2009. Estimated Cost: Supplemental Request: Castle Creek Hydro Engineering Amount 481 890 Total Estimated Costs $481,890 Justification: Multi-year project. Engineering design and construction observation fees will continue to be charged as project moves to final permitting and construction phases. Estimated Cost: Amount 56 180 Attachment D Details 13 Deaartmental Details for 100% Carrv forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Castle Creek Hydro Construction Total Estimated Costs $56,180 DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Justification: Multi-year project. Equipment manufacturer has been selected and equipment manufacturing has been initiated. Construction will be bid in 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: 1 660 610 Total Estimated Costr $1,660,610 'Parking Department Blake Fitch '' 3/20/2009 Lights Justification: Carry forward from 2008 to the 2009 budget. Replace internal light fixtures at the parking facility. Lighting Replacement Project. Waiting for the final facility evaluation from McKinstry, in order to make the proper lighting seleRion and estimate the cost savings for the lighting retrofit. Estimated Cost: Amount 98 500 Total Estimated Costs $98,500 Capital Planning Justification: Carry forward from 2008 to the 2009 budget. Parking Garage Plaza repair. Replace the topping layers and waterproofing materials that are on the plaza level of the Rio Grande Parking Garage. This is being done in order to stop water penetration and correct drainage issues that are leading to deterioration of the underlying structural precast concrete of the facility. Amount Estimated Cost: $97,740 Total Estimated Costs $97,740 Hoaxing Kai Ramsey 3/11/2009 Truscott Repaint metal stairs/rails Justification: Funding was approved for this project in 2007. It is our intention to complete this project in 2009. Estimated Cost: Truscott trash compactor Amount 52 000 Total Estimated Costs $52,000 Justification: Funding was approved in 2008. the project will be completed in 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: 14 000 Total Estimated Costs $14,000 Replace heat tape and gutters Justification: Funding was approved in 2008. The project will be completed in 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: ~ 6 000 Attachment D Details 14 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Total Estimated Costs $6,000 Supplemental Request: 100 building door replacement Justification: funding was approved in 2008. The project will be completed in 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: _ 7 000 Total Estimated Costs $7,000 DEPT Name: T-~ ':Housing Originator. _ Kai Ramse `` Y ,~ Date: 3/11/2009 Supplemental Request: Truscott 100 Roof Repairs Justification: Project was starte d at the end of 2008. Project is complete and. balance will be paid in 2009 . Amount Estimated Cost: 109 00 Total Estimated Costs $109,000 DEPT Name: - .,. ', Employee Housing Fund Originator: .._ Jeff Pendarvis :,~ . _ Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/12/2009 Water Place Housing Roofing Project Justification: Need to carry forward balance of funds appropriated in 2008 to complete the project in 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount 3 190 Total Estimated Costs $3,190 Employee Housing Maintenance Justification: Need to carryforward balance of funds appropriated in 2008 to complete the projects in 2009 Amount Estimated Cost: 4 600 Total Estimated Costs $4,600 DEPT Name: Street's Department, Originator. „ ~ ~' .., .Linda Chi.'.. - , , Date: Supplemental Request: Efficienry measures Justification: We have been waiting on the results of the efficiency measure projec[ with McKintry to move forward with energy and money saving improvement at the Street Department. Estimated Cost: Amount 100.000 Total Estimated Costs $100,00D Supplemental Request: Concrete -improvements Attachment D Details 15 Deoartmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 Justification: We have been trying to add our project on to the Engineering Departments project. Estimated Cost: Amount 81000 Total Estimated Costs $81,000 Supplemental Request: Street improvement project Justification: We were unable to get asphalt for the street improvement project last year. Elams, who won the bid has agreed to complete the project at the price agreed upon with the 2008 bid process. Estimated Cost: Amount 367.980 Total Estimated Costs $367,980 DEPT Name: Information Technology - Originator. lim Considine Date: 3/2/2009 Supplemental Request: IT Plan -Network Systems Carryforward Justification: Carryforward for Network Systems projects still underway or critical replacements deferred to 2009. These projects are on budget and require no additional funding. Estimated Cost: - Amount Critical Systems Replacement- deferred to 2009 " Help Desk Server/Software Upgrade $11,000 ' Corporate Firewall $11,000 ' Core Domain Servers $10,000 GIS Large scale printer $2,500 Public Safety -New World Systems (under contract) $131,400 Web Redevelopment (under contract) $51,200 Recreation Conversion to Active Net (under contract) 3 900 Supplemental Request: IT Plan -Core Systems Carryforward Total Estimated Costs $221,000 Justification: This funding represents the funding needed to replace core data and phone switches. We have been replacing switches as'needed to expand capacity, capability, or failure. The Ca rryforward funding is earmarked for our core switch in City Hall that is approaching end of useful life and end of support from Cisco. Amount - Estimated Cost: Core Switching 73 200 Total Estimated Costs $73,200 Supplemental Request: IT Plan -Phone Systems Carryforward Justification: The batteries used for system ride-through during power fail were scheduled for replacement in 2008. Our tests indicated they have some more useful life but are not anticipated to make it through 2009. Amount Estimated Cost: Phone System Batteries 4 500 Total Estimated Costs $4,500 DEPT Name: Recreation Department Originator: Tim Anderson,.,, .. Date: 2/5/2009 Attachment D Details 16 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Proieds from 20d8 to 2009 Supplemental Request: Building Controls Justification: These are funds that will be utilized to supplement the building controls to the mechanical retro-fit being completed by LONG building technologies which the ARC has had so many problems. Work by LONG is anticipated to be completed in March of 2009 so staff may move forwarded with building control improvements to enhance energy savings and ease of operations. Amount Estimated Cost: 39 000 Total Estimated Costs $39,000 DEPT Name: Retteation Department Originator: ,. Tim Anderson _ Supplemental Request: Pool Lighting Justification: This project also is part of the mechanical retro-fit and energy improvement audit which needs to be completed. Staff is still waiting on the completion of work by LONG. Estimated Cost: Amount Estimated Cost: 11 720 Total Estimated Costs $11,720 Supplemental Request: Aspen Ice Garden Renovations Justification: Staff has funding in 2009 to continue renovations to the Aspen Ice Garden locker rooms which are in need of upgrades. Staff would like to carry forward these funds to supplement the 2009 funding such that adequate improvements may be achieved. Amount Estimated Cost: 8 810 Total Estimated Costs $8,510 Supplemental Request: ARC mechanical retro-fit Justification: These are remaining fund due to LONG building technologies once the complete and deliver the job that is months behind schedule. Amount Estimated Cost: 78 580 Total Estimated Costs $78,580 DEPT Name: Asset Management Department ~' Originator: . , Jeff Pendarvis` Date: 3/12/2009 Supplemental Request: City Nall Roof Repairs Justifcation: Need to carry forward balance of funds appropriated in 2008 to complete the project in 2009. Estimated Cost: Amount 7 700 Total Estimated Costs $7,700 Supplemental Request Isis Notch Justification: Need to carry forward the savings from funds appropriated in 2008(000.91.82163.86000) to finalize design and construct the project in 2009 Estimated Cost: Amount 16 690 Attachment D Details 17 Departmental Details for 100% Carrv Forward Projects from 2008 to 2009 DEPT Name: Originator: Date: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: DEPT Name: Originator: Supplemental Request: Supplemental Request: 3/13/2009 Bridge Replacement Carry Forward Total Estimated Costs $16,690 Justification: Bridge maintenance associated with this project did not occur during the 2008 calendar year. CDOT off-system bridge inspection of the City's bridges were conducted during 2008. Deficiencies in various aspects of the bridges character were identified in this report. In concurrence with the City asset management plan staff will seek to address infrastructure deficiencies on these three structures. Estimated Cost: TABOR Pedestrian ProjeCS Carry Forward Amount 123 000 Total Estimated Costs $123,000 Justification: Construction of the Lone Pine Road Sidewalk connection, various ADA ramp improvements are all scheduled TABOR pedestrian improvement projects for 2009. These projects were identified from the original 2005 TABOR project list. Estimated Cost: Curb and Gutter Carry Forward Amount 317 420 Total Estimated Costs $317,420 Justification: Close out of the 2008 Concrete Replacement Projects includes the completion of punch-list items and the release of reiainage. Ezpenditu res for this project will continue in 2009. Therefore the remaining 2008 fund balance will need to a used in 2009 Amount Estimated Cost: 44 400 Total Estimated Costs $44,400 Engineering Department Trish Aragon/Tyler Christoff Main Street Median Carry Forward Justification: City Council directed staff to complete a master planning process for the Main Street corridor so the data, designs, and input already collected could be utilized at a later date. Funding available for this project in 2008 will need to be carry forward to 2009 to complete this.process Estimated Cost: Amount 96 890 Total Estimated Costs $96,890 Survey Monuments Justification: Maintenance of City's survey.monuments. Maintenance work will include replacing the sleeve and cap protecting each monument with new hardware that will prevent sediment, water, and ice from building up around the monument, and resetting the monument if necessary. All new monuments will be plated in locations consistent with surveying needs and practices. Amount Estimated Cost: SO 000 Total Estimated Costs $50,000 Attachment D Details 18 Attachment E " 1U04.INTERFUNDTRANSFERS TransferFmm Transfer TO Transfer Amount Pumose of interfund Transfer 000 Asset Management Plan Fund ~~ ~ ' ~ ~' , , .. . ., ". ' ~ ti ~ ~' - Wheeler Opera House Fund ~ $186,470 1998 Street Improvements 10 Yr IF Loan Wheeler Opera House Fund $85,000 Red Brick Wes[ End Project 10 Vr IF Loan Kids First Fund $181,690 19985treet Improvements lO Vr IF Lf1a0 Debt Service Fund 93180 Series 2005-STRR-AMP'S Portion Suhtotal, Transfers $546,340 001- General Fund Parks and Open Space Fund $86,090 Annual Partial Subsidy of Food Tax Refund Employee Housing Fund $200,000 Employee Affordable Housing Water Utility Fund $74,600 1/3 of the Global Warming Program Housing Development Fund $580,000 Zupancis Property fte-purchase AMP Fund $74,900 Finance Savings to Fund CIP Software Package Transportation Fund 37 620 Employee Commuter Cash and Bus Passes Subtotal, Transfers $1,053,210 100 -. Parks and Open Space Fund Parks and Open Space Capital Fund $1,378,040 Capital Projects Debt Service Fund $844,400 Parks 2005 Open Space Bonds Debt Service Fund $858,110 20015ales Taz Revenue Bonds Golf Course Fund $135,000 Series 2005 -STRR-Golfs Partian Debt Service Fund $950,700 Series 2006 -STRR-Park's Partian General Fund $15,000 Additional ACRA Marketing General Fund $730,970 Overhead Paymen[ General Fund $3,610 Central Savings Employee Housing Fund 221190 Employee Affordable Housing Subtotal, Transfers $5,137,020 120 Wheeler Open House Fund - - Employee Housing Fund $77,830 Employee Affordable Housing General Fund $15,000 Additional ACRA Marketing General Fund $12,770 Central Savings General Fund ~ 259530 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $365,130 141-Tnnt_portation Fund- Employee Mousing Fund $9,150 Employee Affordable Housing Parks and Open Space Fund $366,730 Rubey Park Mall Maintenance General Fund $157,500 Use Taz Positions General Fund $15,000 Power Plan[ Road Study General Fund 149 300 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $697,680 150 Housing Development Fund Truzcatt Housing Fund $743,820 Truscott I, 2001 Housing Bands Subsidy Housing Administration Fund $198,880 Operations SUhsidy (SO%of total) General Fund $541,030 Overhead Payment - Wheeler Opera HOUSe Fund 2915680 BMC WesT-If Loan Subtotal, Transfers $4,399,410 151-Early Childhood Education fund _ ,. Kids First Fund 21270 Administration Services Subtotal, Transfers $21,270 152-Kid{First Fund Employee Housing Fund $31,130 Employee Affordahle Housing General Fund 69 010 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $100,140 160-Stormvaater Fund General Fund 63 060 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $63,060 340 Parks amf Open Space Capibl Fund Water Fund $613,170 Water Reclamation Projec[ General Fund 33 870 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $647,040 .. Attachment E _, _ `.,; ,,;;`.,,,, 2009JNTERFUND TRANSFERS ~, _ ~ Transfer From Transfer To Transfer Amount Puroose of interfund Transfer 421-Water Utility Fund ,'! ~ .~ ~_ 'I' General Fund $1,000,000 Operations Fadlities Land Renewable Energy Fund $975,D00 Capital Projects Moved Employee Housing Fund $43,440 Employee Affordable Housing Parks and Open Space Fund 5150,000 Water Usage Conservation Programs General Fund 672 300 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $2,840,740 431 -Electric Utility Fund ~_ - GeneralFUnd $425,350 Franchise Fee General Fund $341,920 Overhead Payment General Fund $1,980 CenVal Savings Employee Housing Fund $18,830 Employee Affordable Housing Renewable Energy Fund $144,000 Capital Projects Moved Renewable Energy Fund $312,OD0 Carhon Emission ReduRion Tagz Renewable Energy Fund 5418,240 Purchase of Hydroelectric Power Renewable Energy Fund $132,000 Purchase of Hydroelectric Power Water Utility Fund $74,600 1/3 of Global Warming Program water Utility Fund 289800 Elettric Utility portion of Utility Billing Services Subtotal, Transfers $2,158,720 444-Renewable Energy Fund - --- GeneralFund 12 410 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $12,410 451-Parking Fund ' Employee Housing Fund $58,910 Transfer-Employee Housing Fund General Fund 53,600 Central Savings General Fund 511 210 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $573,720 471-Golf Course Fund Employee Housing Fund $18,830 Transfer- Employee Housing Fund General Fund 115 720 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $134,550 491-Truzbott Housing Fund - - General Fund $24,360 Overhead Payment Employee Housing Fund $31,130 Employee Affordable Housing Housing Administration Fund 49750 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $105,240 492-Mamlt Housing Wnd General Fund $19,280 Overhead Payment Employee Housing Fund $24,610 Employee Affordable Housing Housing Development Fund $417,050 Loan Repayment Housing Administration Fund 58370 Overhead Payment Suhtotal, Transfers $519,310 620-Housing Administration Fund ;_ i General Fund 104210 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $104,210 622 Smuggler Housing Fund - '' General Fund $8,290 Overhead Payment Housing Administration Fund 1 900 Overhead Payment Subtotal, Transfers $10,190 All GtyFUnds with Health Insurance Expenses Employee Health Insurance Fund 3 015100 Employee Health Insurance Premiums Subtotal, Transfers $3,015,100 2009 TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS $22,504,490 Gty Of Aspen Attachment F 2009 Technical Adjustments Department/Fund Technical Adiustment Description Amount Subtotal General Fundl ~: ~ _. 001.95.xxxxx.96000 SOY of the funding of the CIP software package is from the $74,900 Finance Department's carry forward departmental savings This transfer of funds to [he AMP Fund accomplishes this. 001.03.0300D.88903 Reduced Council contingency to fund a portion pf the ($10,000) $200,000 of additipnal marketing thru ACRA far the City of Aspen 001.02.04322.84060 84200 Matching the 2009 contribution budget to the 2009 ($49,560) contributions 001.02.04321.84011 Grassroots Nfranchise fee distribution-2008 franchise fee $16,110 collections were higher than projected during budget development in 2009. 001.02.04321.84039 K1A%franchise fee distribution-2008 franchise fee $16,110 collections were higher than projected during budget development in 2009. Subtotal, General Fund $47,560 Parks and Open Space Fund- ..., ~ ~ c: _ ~ ., -- 700.95.00000.95340 Reduce Transfer due to reduction in capital projects in 20D9 ($1,565,840) 100.55.55000.88901 Transfer to Central Savings $3,610 Subtotal, Parks Fund ($1,562,230) Wheeler Opera HOUSeFund _ ,.,, 120.93.93000.88901 ~ Y Transfer to Central Savings ~ ~ ~ ~ $12,770 Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House Fund $12,770 .City 7ouASmlPromodon Fund ;. 130.00.19010.82000/19020.82025 Reduction in budget authority to match the lodge tax ($214,000) fprecasted revenue with the disbursements for in town transportation and ACRA Subtotal, City Tourism Promotion Fund ($214,000( Transportation Fund „ s ... .. TBD Reduction in budget authority to match the 2009 ($111,650( forecasted expenditures in the Transportation Fund Subtotal, Transportation Fund ($111,650) Housing Development Fund ~ . - 150.23.23150.' eurlingamelot subsidies-adjust budget to match 2009 ($133,500) forecasted expenses Subtotal, Housing Development Fund ($133,500) Parks and Opeh Space'C_ap~'Nal fund ~~ ~ ... _ 340.95.82067.95421 The Water Fund transferred funding to the Parks and Open $613,170 Space Capital Fund far the water reclamation project. This project crosses the Burlingame Ranch subdivision and shares rights-of-way with Burlingame infrastructure. Completion of project engineering and construRion is dependant upon foal design for Phase II of Burlingame. Therefore, the timeline for completion of this project has been expanded. The unspent funding for this project is transferred back to the Water Fund from the Parks and Open Space Capital Fund and the project will be appropriated according [o the new timeline in [he Water Fund. Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Capital Fund -$613,170 Gty Of Aspen 2009 Technical Adjustments 421.94.82067.86000 ~ A percentage of [he water reclamation project was funded by the Water Fund. The unspentfunds, $613,170, are being transferred back from the Parks and Open Space Fund in 2009 due [o the eMended timeline of this project. The approved budget authority will be re-appropriated in the water Fund aver the next three years, starting in 2009. Amount Attachment F Subtotal, Water Fund $61,000 Electric Fund , 431.45.45200.82370 This updates the City of Aspen's fnancial system wkh the ($575,000) changes to wind purchase power as presented to Council on March 17, 2009 431.95.00000.95444 This updates [he City of Aspen's financial system with the ($100,000) changes to wind purchase power as presented to Council on March 17, 2009 431.45.45000.88901 Transfer to Central Savings $1,980 Subtotal, Electric Fund ($673,020) .Parking Fund ~ .. ~ '= :; 'i ~` ,..?,. .u TBD Reduced the in car meter refunds to match the liahility for ($398,930) deposits . 451.32.32000.88901 Transfer to Central Savings $3,600 Subtotal, Parking Fund ($395,330) Asset Management Fund _ , ,~a rr ' , , 000.95.83065.95120 Updating the budget for interfuhd loan payments to match $6,980 the amortization schedule Subtotal, Asset Management Fund $fi,980 Total Technical Adjustment All Funds: ($2,348,250) ($2,348,250) c~ c a u T v 3 N N d 0 Q C C d E a a a M H a w m o v Z, !~ R m E c E v ~ E " d c c a Q j ¢ `o m `o « ~ r V N V v N i .a+ „ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -o o 0 0 0 0 a~ m o ,n o O o O m o m o m o o a o .. o m m o 0 O .. v m J m rv m N ~ O m, rv m ~ m ~ m o ~ ~n ti o N ,~- m ~ m o N ^' o~ a "~ vi ~ ,-i ,-i ,-i ^y °O rti ~ N pQj tO l0 om a m N n b ti ~ opi ~ `V ~- fL o VQl m O rv rv d' /f O n O b O a l0 O rv m b N N n ~ o l0 m b n a m < .~ < m vi ~n m M, ti rv IO ~ e`I N N M V! 1/Y '-I 'i » '-I N Q VY V} N H ~ V} N N N N O to N N V? N H V! N Vf VY ~ H ¢ u ¢ w ~ m m oQ ° v° o° m °n m rv O o, 0 0 om ° o°b o 0 0~ °o lD C e0 N T b b N 'y n 01 r vni .+ v0 tn0 O y~ l0 O y J I~ ~ t0 N N 1~ b O ri N O` M Q 1°M1 ~ '-1 N '-I ~ N M N b m O p O V '~ ~ v1 = V} ~ N ~ eQi N m ~ N r1 V N ~ a V1 N N .~.. `. F ~ 1/1 VY K .W.. ~ V? J N u W O O ~ O Q O b m o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ h L" n O 1/f N VF N Vf Vf N V4 N V1 1n VY N ~A H M h 1/Y N N V1 V 1~ .y N n Q d' ~ ~ ~ H r °a ~ ~ ~ O O 00 O ~ pip Om ~ M ~ °O ~ b t°p O C O ~ ~ O W a1 J o o '" "' "' g '^ m °i o o °' 4 ~+ m n m m m o m ~ a N, ~ ti N n N lO Q ei ~ Q ~ y V1 N M N O W N rl O b Vt M11 n N N m Of M N fy ~ b rl b m O1 ti N rl V M 9 j N ~/} V1 V N {ry N (/~ ~~ M1A V1 1A V N V1 1A K h N y H N m ~ O J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 8 O O C U O~ m m n m O O O H O ti b m n O' m N M N J O b R vt O m O m O O O O T m b n V b Qi N O O N K a ~ O ~ N fl `~ n W l0 N N O YF N Q ey lA m n O O) N N~° N m a 3 N o 0 0 0~° o ,9i m o o m o 0 o g o O o ~ p °J O O O rl O m O b M m b n ~ O n ~ eni ~ M N b O~t p O~ b ~« ~ N +A a0 a0 ~ vm'' .Ti ~ N N .Ni N N N V N ~ M yQj, N ti .Ni V1 V11 P ~. .n +n +n ,,, .n +n ,~, +n .n .n .n +n „~ u - c w E °m °a ° o ° ° ° ,°~ °m o ~ °m o ~ E¢ 0 0 `o m b N v m m o o N o o O1 o Q o O m o 0 0~^ VF V! n 1~ n N Mf b 4f Vf N ~ V1 y N H N N Vf V~ O ~° C N N N '~ H N M M ti~ uF ~ N H 0 > n N u g o 0 0 0 o O ~± m o o u± » O m ~ O g o o N O o o~ m y~ V1 1/1 N VY h N n N V1 y~ t/? rl Vf Vl V1 V1 N N 3 ~ ~~ N N ti b p N N ih V1 ~ a Z V on a o m o o ~ ~ m o a ~ ~ ~ ~ m v p° vmi m v ro ° °a ° ~ m ¢ p~ ~ ~n trD ,n+ N N t0 .i .i of ° .+ v' W is a0 rn °' m ~y n o g ~ p m v ~+i ~+i o ai m o n n r+ ~n c ~e m ~+ b ~+ m m ~ ~ ,~ N ^ A J N O .~+ m n b ~n vi o m n m < b m m m < m m o ~ n o a+ c m a m b b o a .+ a m ~n b N .+ rv N 1A N N N 1/1 ~ '1 N N m V~ N `"~ N "'~ V1 `~ N N N IC Vf N N h to V1 V! N N Vf N 0 a E E A Z N ~ Y C T C d ~ ~ C u m z ~ ° > a ~p G w c \ v E t m c c a e a ~ x ~ p u 'u o a E 3~ E - p a a v a q ~ d Jo > 1°. u H ~° v rv m v a c c v u o -c' c ~ c o a a~ c ~ ~ ~ o m ~~ E 'c ~~ o o a ~ m d ~ u o a o m n a~ ~ c w ~ c a a E~ E _a ~~ ~ ~~ y w~ u ~ u ¢ ~ c c a u `o m m a a N ~ p o L' ~ Z Z o m w 'g c a `a o~ ao~ ~ w w n n n o u u u x u u - d m w a m u v~ V' C 2 ~ Q Q Q u F F- n m T E E o H ~ 0 3 3 ~ d o a m m £ v p v+ ~c x ~ n ~ u d o d d o n 'd ~ c c a a G F o ~ ~ ~ , z ~ ° ° o m .. ~ N 3 n N N o ° W ~ < ,~ o w a ~ d v, - ~ a o - v O v ~ °0 ~ m 2 c c O m £ T w o c ~ ~ ° o ° o m '^ - ^ ~ c ~ d a ~ x x N o O s . . O O r c ~ o u 3 ~ ~ W > W > n d c ~ o ° n o ~ ° ~ u w ~ ~ ~ a n a . ' n 3 ? 3 o n e . . . T d C N n O C d '~ > V C > j C n 3 W fi O d j N . r O N T C ~ ^ o o c' c o ~ ~ d " 0 o c o ~ Z o n ~ n ° n n d . c > ° 3 > n ~ n '° n N p Y V1 N {h Vs W ih Uf N l/~ U W Uf 1A N N N N lR V! pp O W IA f+ -Vl W F+ F+ ~+ O~ N V V A W F+ N N V W !+ W lp ~ A Y I+ Y O~ A N N F+ W V1 V O W N F+ 01 N N W l0 m N N t0 O N V V W W Oi A O V A O V W ~p A N to O N W N p A A V V N N UI 1+ W Y N W l0 VI UI F+ p1 lp a ~ A t0 V O W 01 w A Y N O to O W A O wj A N O A to n `+ A O V O b W V V In O In In N W V tD p p W V O tp W ~ O c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a m n N Z ~' j N tI~ N N V1 W N N N £ T O V U~ W N W A F+ W V~ l/~ N to y~ N W 1M1 Uf Vf y~ O1 V~ H U~ V1 V~ O 1/~ N IA IA A W W O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 1D V pp O O ~ O O ~ O O c o 0 0 0 0 o p o o C ° y~ _ O `~ N lM1 N y1, ~ N F+ 1+ N Y V 1O N Vl i/~ N Vf V4 1/~ N p N p F .r V1 N {/~ W (/~ W N F+ V ~' .~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W O r+ N O O O W O O A O _Y W D 3 C O O O O O O 0 0 ~ c .. ~ w N ~ C 3 3 ~, t, N N N N N ~ N Y ~ {M1 U~ + N F+ N F+ N V N 01 W H A F tO N W F+ W N O O F+ VI f' l/~ V W F+ N N l!~ A 1/~ A d `Z N W O O Y+ V~ O A U1 W W O W Ol tIf ~- `A t b V U W C O U !" t p O t0 O W V A ~° V A W O ~' o O . IA A `< W W O O O W O P ~p O O~ W W W N ~' O O W A N O A O W O p N .00 O O S Q ~ ~ O O O O O vii ~ O i a H Y .e N V4 H N N V1 l/1 Us (/1 lh {/1 'N 'V1 {/1 tM1 {h {h Uf 1A N N lM1 N O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O ~ C Q C d O H V P j W lA {A ~ 1A N in N i/~ in N N C O. W ~ W U N F+ N lA N A ~ ~ ~ O `O W 1D p j U F+ W Vf W M N O A O Y A A W A A v lD l0 N O ~ W N m V O V C p S O O A O S O ~ N O O O O O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O O O C O- O O N O N th lh Ui N N trv V1 Vf F+ •' ~ W N 01 W 01 T m ' '+ 1+ N F+ N n A U U N N N {/~ N W N V F+ ~ N N N N ~ O1 S p p W O O O O O O O ~ O W O w 0 O O O W I+ A ' W ° w o o " ~ o~ o v " 3 ° O $ ° ~ u o ° ° ° ° Wo Y1 UI 1M1 F+ V N F+ A N W W W N N Y lA Us W Y N V Y I^° ° w O W W ~ ~ N Ol N tD W N Ot W b p lA .O W lY0 A p W W G N W Y ~ A O I~lt b O V lNlf ~+ OWO O\ A O O N O Oi Dd m ~. ~ O ~ ~ O O 0 0 0 wo O D O O O O O p O W O D O u - A N (~ O ~ b ~ H ~ c N ~ N m v A 3 H N C ~ 3 ;, d 07 p_ ~. m In ^ C v v m 3 N d N a m N N N 3 a N N N Vf lM1 O1 N F+ N U W V~ F+ N F+ N F+ N 01 W W H W N lO t/~ A N W N I+ UY N Vl lM1 W Uf W V! N V1 A yf W D p D d ~ ~ Ol O ~~ V O V ~ O~ V N A V W L+ N IA N W V O W A lO U~ N l0 W A W W N N yAj F+ ~p pt W V O W Vl W W ~p O ]J ry ~ ~ Y V m U+ A W W ~p b N W O V Of O N ~W ~O V A W b V O O _ 3 d (P b N O W S O p N O W O N O O1 O UI O W O O O O O O O W O W O W O ~ p t O ~ O O O VI O lA O "°. • d ~^ w O N ~ G1 T~ CrrY of Asr~rr Back Up Documentation For: First Reading Memos Detail Descriptions for. New Requests TO: Aspen City Council c/o Randy Ready FROM: Debbie Braun, President Julia Theisen, Vice President Sales and Mazketing, Destination Mazketing Aspen Chamber Resort Association DATE: April 15, 2009 RE: 200K Supplemental Mazketing Funds Deaz Members of the Aspen City Council: Please find attached the marketing budget for approval by the City Council in regazds to the $200k in supplemental funds requested by ACRA. This mazketing effort has been acommunity-wide collaboration. The plan has been discussed with many lodging partners and non profit organizations in the community as well as reviewed and approved by ACRA's mazketing advisory committee (MAC). The additional funds will allow Destination Mazketing efforts to reach a broader audience, tazget new visitors as well as extend the stay of our core guests. Some of the new initiatives the plan includes aze as follows: • Create acity-wide promotion including "50% off Wednesday" lodging (with a two- night stay) or a "Buy three/ get four" lodging promotion -both representing a discount of 25%. We have had significant support from the lodging community. We have asked the rest of the community to get involved with 50% offers on Wednesday: Create the Aspen Summer Pass, acity-wide promotion which is designed to offer a value proposition to prospective guests. The Aspen Summer Pass will make available significant discounts to events, arts, restaurants and shops. The cazd will be free to any visitor booking a minimum two- night stay and will offer considerable value on top of lodging offers. (25% discounts; two for one or buy one adulbget one child free). Educate the managers and employees of the 10 Colorado Welcome Centers throughout the state and invite them for a familiarization trip in early June in order to create Aspen ambassadors to the 1 million"summer visitors to the Welcome Centers. • Increase our marketing reach including specific messaging to new targeted media outlets (arts, family, adventure, golf) that we have not been able to reach in the past due to limited budget. Utilize our partners, TOSV and Aspen Skiing Company, to send dedicated email blasts of new promotions to past summer and winter guests with minimal cost implications. Implement additional public relations initiatives: the fsst is an invitation to morning television programs from key feeder markets (Chicago, NY, LA, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Florida and Denver) to broadcast Aspen stories this summer. The second is attending two additional media events and media appointments in Dallas and Chicago in cooperation with Colorado Tourism Office. • Mazketing plans include ongoing and increased efforts in social media including blog, facebook, twitter and new initiative on Twisitor Center (http://twisitorcenter.comn which is similar to a guidebook that lives on the web and new content is created constantly. • Additional exposure to existing City of Aspen events including Cycling Criterium, Triathalon, golf packages, Wheeler Opera House events. • As directed, ACRA will utilize the new ACRA website (paid for out of Destination Marketing Funds) and unique toll-free phone numbers to provide tracking mechanisms which will enable us to provide a comprehensive metrics report at the end of the season Please note that this budget is subject to slight changes due to media rates that aze currently negotiable; leaving us flexible to take advantage of any other last minute opportunities that aze in line with the plan. Thank you for your consideration of the attached marketing budget. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions. Sincerely, Debbie Braun Julia Theisen m J ? m i t °r m _ 5t 0_ t O_1 p 6 OI G a E L 5 E = 9 ° ~+E m n ~ ° m na' D` m m E ;~ dte ° .m e ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° m m o m o o m m m m o o o m m o ° o o m o o m ° o m ° ° ° ° ° o ° ~ ~ m rv a ma o 0 0 o ~ e ° o ° o ° c °o ° N m w o o o n : n o . m m m m n m n m m a n ° °o °o °o ° m o o m m o n m N m A Q A ~ t+l N N V A m V n N m M m Q N N O O O O O O m O O O O O m m i°a n °o `ri N N e' N O O O O O O O O, VOI N Y°l_ Y°] aOl < O N (V N m O O O O O O O 0 O O O ° O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O N m m P O O O O O O O .a m N N .n O .m m n Q rn m m m ~ N m O o N N O m O a O o O ~n ~ N ~ (7 N O _ A N N l7 O O ° O O O O O O C O N N N E E E E E E a Y _ V N 0 U ~ ~ m 0 ~ m m 0 C a ~ ~ ~ _ L Q M tli M H M !9 j .. Y Y Y Y L Y Y - m a ~ ~ m m N E c 5 c c x x m "q N O .q C_ C C C C A V D C C D 9 ~ c ° ° ° = E ~ a m ~ ° m m m a m F ~ ~ n m n m m m - _ m m ~ - D ~ m m m a ~ a e c d - ` ° e c ~ c ~ a ; e ~ LL E _ e ~ e e e m _ o c s o o a m c a a ° E a ` O N N Z m 0 O N Q Q L O Z U m Z 9 O ~ a ~i Y O Nm ~ O a ~ m ~ r Q ~ ~ `° m ea a ;, ~~ m ° o `a `m `u L° S m a u ° a m n 'o `'`'' °u m o e m o m d m m d U ^ ^ ^ U' U ^ Q LL L 1 r ^ r 2 j N J C'1 ^ F' J LL ^~ ^ ^ ^ U~ ~ G + 9 ; : U c u1 ° m a n c ` N ~ v ^ C ~ e ' H > ' y N t~ ` W Z ~ D m LL m v ^ c E m m m . W m ^ ' O m m @ c g „ ~ s o i m i N `w m E Y n ' '> m U ' 1° m ° E q E E o E ; > i0 u n > m ? y m C ~ v > E a Z L m m S a w m ,~ w c n '° ` n E m A E m m ~ . c ~ E K m e N w G E ` m :m ~ ; o o -. ~` 3 m .W 3 D o m , m r e a m E im' 3 n ` h ° . a W ~ m d p ~a E ~ m m m Q < m A d q ~ > y a g g m m ^ ^ Y O U Z ^ U ^ F J H 'm ;: N r l - ~ Q ~ 2 ~U I - : c 0 a m z m' ~ v m o 0. o m m m' d R m w . m' 3 3 3 3 _ o ~ m g m m ~ _ 3 T S N fi ~ p.. _ m ° 3 3 $ m a ~ i° b a p J J ~ ~ m ° ~ m ~ a _ S o ~ m ~ o d 3 s d n Y - m m u ~ o m° ^ O o a x o m ^ u 7 E ~ tF. n g n D m p 'S . 2 t ? :LI s Y . O -1 ,: 3 p a y „ '. { _ ~ D ; i: Y a = : ? Z o' 3 a N ~ ~C N V O V N N O O O O O J O 0 0 0 O 0 m ~ a ~ m H a m u ~ O D O O ~ O D O ; ... o n ° o 0 o 0 ' o n n m m _ o x 'm" n m y 3 „ - o m ~ y- s. f << W H O ~ F N ~ 7 ' : a v m 0 ~ ~ a s m ' ,< e ~ 3 m H 1 ~ ~ ~ i m . ~ q. ~ m 'm m' m ~ m m a ' m 3 O O m O a o n ' ' p m ° ~ ~ m a aO m y .1_ ~ J fl k ~ ~ e: A G C. p w m m m m m m _ _ ~ ' ' € ~ ° a -~ _ ; a d m , m ~ a ~ _ 0 m A ~ ro o J o m' m v ~ o 0 o D p > n' 'm m' 'm m 'm om m 3 m 3 a n °' u m 3 a c N N O ~ uO C ~ O O ° S O O V Q O V + U O O S O S S ° ° S ° ° o O S V ~ (p~ O J O O C O O S O T A V N N O A O V fJ W O O O O W O O O O Ip O 41 O O O O S S O O S O O O O O a ~ i c 3 o~°m K= Ai S a m J n m v ~ na ~O-~~ o _c F -. ~ `c' - m °° J ' ' x o m m `c' 0 Z MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner RE: Supplemental Request: Aspen Area Community Plan Update DATE: April 20, 2009 SUMMARY: The City and County have been jointly working on an update to the Aspen Area Community Plan. On March 3, 2009, City Council and the Board of County Commissioners gave their approval to take additional time for adoption of the updated AACP. City and County staff anticipates a revised timeline will take adoption into October or November of 2009, and will require additional work beyond the original scope of work. Staff is requesting a total of $83,651.72 in this supplemental request. This is divided as follows: 1. Staff is requesting that the remaining amount in the 2008 AACP budget of $46,318.72 be rolled-over to the 2009 budget. This money will be used to pay the remainder of the original contract with Design Workshop. Design Workshop is a professional planning firm working with City and County staff to update the AACP. o The remainder of the contract that this money will be used for includes: • Meeting food and incidentals associated with 15-20 P&Z joint meetings and 5-10 CC/BOCC meetings. • Technical writing of document drafts and editing for 'public consumption' following Planning and Zoning Commission review of each topic. • Technical work during the adoption process, including assistance in additional community meeting organization and facilitation. • Formatting the final document in professional design software (the document will be formatted similarly to the State of the Aspen Area Report). Note: The additional time added to the drafting and adoption schedule (roughly 15- 20 meetings through -October for P&Z and another 5-10 through -February for Council and BOCC) combined with the decrease in staff resources for current planning minimizes ComDev's ability to reduce the existing contract. 2. Staff is requesting a supplemental of $37,333 in new monies divided as follows: o $33,333 of this money is Pitkin County's portion of the remaining AACP tasks (identical to the City's list above). Because the project is being managed through City Finance, this money needs to be allocated by the City and the City will be reimbursed by the County according to the cost-sharing agreement. o $3,000 for reimbursement of monies used in the Census update. o Staff is requesting a supplemental of $1,000 to continue the website (www.aspencommunityvision.com) through the end of 2009. This money will be spent to continue hosting services through ProjectWest, and will enable staff to use the website as a tool to update the public on the adoption phase. ALTERNATIVES: Staff has outlined a number of alternatives if City Council chooses not to fund the remaining work for the AACP: 1. Due to recent staffing changes in the Community Development Department the staff members who had been solely dedicated to the AACP have been splitting their time between the project and current planning and/or zoning reviews. City Council could direct the department to have these staff members return working solely on this project. However, this would negatively impact the timeframes for review of current planning cases, zoning reviews, and response times to citizen complaints. 2. The P&Zs have requested staff to do additional existing conditions work regarding residential buildout and lodging statistics beyond what is included in the State of the Aspen Area. This additional work is taking a majority of staff time dedicated to the project. Council could direct the P&Zs that staff should not work on this additional information, leaving more time for staff to work on the adoption and document review process. 3. City Council could ask staff to complete the work entirely in-house. This would likely lengthen the time frame, beyond the current estimate of February for BOCC and Council Review. Additionally, this would eliminate important portions of the original contract, including ensuring the document is reader friendly by having outside, expert reviewers; that the document includes appropriate graphics that illustrate the key planning concepts in the plan; and that the document is formatted for easy access on- line as well as on paper. 4. City Council could reduce the scope of services and/or schedule for the Historic Preservation Task Force and move monies from that project to the AACP. 5. City Council could shorten the review time for the document. On March 3~d, both the BOCC and City Council directed the P8~Zs to take as much time as they felt was necessary to review the document. Currently the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions are scheduled to review the document and make changes through October. This expanded timeline was requested by the Planning and Zoning Commissions. City Council could ask the P&Zs to finish their work sooner. This may not reduce costs. z MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Adam J. Trzcinski, Project Manager, Engineering. THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: March 12, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: BMC West Property Annexation SUMMARY: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $5,975.00 for the completion of surveying work associated with annexing the BMC West property into the City. BACKGROUND: Staff has been directed to initiate the annexation process for the recently purchased BMC West parcels. The initial steps in this process are procuring an annexation plat map and an improvement survey map. Staff has contracted with JR Engineering for this scope of work. FINANCIAL IlVIPLICATIONS: Funding Budgeted BMC West Property Annexation Carry Forward Request $5,975.00 $5,975.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends carrying forward the amount of $5,975.00 for the completion of the BMC West Property Annexation survey work. ' CITY MANAGER COMMENTS MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Adam I. Trzcinski,. Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: March 12, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: N. Spring St. Road Right-of--Way Legal Description Project SUMMARY: Staff recommends a budget supplemental in the amount of $4,000.00 for the completion of surveying work associated with the legal description of a' portion of 445 N. Spring. St. along the road right-of--way. BACKGROUND: Staff is in the process of rectifying vehicular and pedestrian traffic hazazds in the proximity of 445 N. Spring St. At this locale the road follows a 90 degree curve which results in a blind comer hazazdous to vehicles and pedestrians. The north and east sides of the road aze abutted by a steep embankment and the west and south sides of the road aze abutted by a berm and various landscaping elements belonging to 445 N Spring St. DISCUSSION: Staff advises that the road be widened in the area azound 445 N.'Spring St. to mitigate the hazazds associated with the 90 degree curve. This solution will require the condemnation of a portion of land owned by 445 N. Spring St. In order to proceed with the condemnation process the City must first obtain, from a surveyor, the legal description of the portion of land to be condemned. This supplemental request is for the surveying work associated with the required legal description. FINANCIAL IlVIPLICATIONS: Supplemental Request N. Spring St. Road Right-of--Way Legal Description Project $4,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a budget supplemental in the amount of $4,000.00 for the completion of the N. Spring St. Road Right-of--Way Legal Description Project. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Bill Linn Steve Barwick March 18, 2009 April 14, 2009 Police Supplemental Budget Requests. REQUEST OF COUNCIL: We ask city council to pass two supplemental budget requests. BACKGROUND: 1. Supplemental budget request to enable use of a 2009 DUI enforcement grant, funded by state funds. 2. Supplemental budget request to enable use of a 2009 Federal Justice Department JAG iaw enforcement grant.. DISCUSSION: Supplemental budget request to enable use of a regiona12009 DUI enforcement grant, procured and managed by the Pitkin County Sheriffs Office: The amount designated for use by the Aspen Police Department is $10,243. It is only available for use paying overtime for DUI enforcement shifts, under the terms of the grant. The police department has previously participated in this grant, and council has approved. Supplemental request to allow use of a Federal Justice Assistance Grant (The Edward Byrne JAG), which is funded through the FY 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The .grant is to be used to pay for law enforcement programs, including technology improvement programs. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Item #1, DUI enforcement grant; grant revenues will match expenses. Item #2, Justice Assistance Grant; grant revenues will match expenses: Page I of 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The only environmental impact anticipated is through the DUI enforcement grant, officers will spend more time in patrol vehicles for DUI enforcement. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Passage of the supplemental budget requests. ALTERNATIVES: Item #l; Reallocate the grant funds tiack to the Pitkin County Sheriffs Office and Snowmass Village Police Department for their use. , Item #2; To not accept the grant. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Mary Lackner, GIS Manager Don Taylor, Finance Director April 15, 2009 Apri127, 2009 Request for Increased GIS Budget Authority for an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) with ESRI REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The GIS depamnent is requesting an ongoing increase in budget authority of $11,800. This request will be 100% offset by the City and County Departments. 50% will be offset by the County reimbursement and 50% by subscription fees paid.by the City of Aspen internal Departments. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: • None. BACKGROUND: In February 2008 the City of Aspen purchased the ELA system allowing the City and County to acquire core licenses from ESRI reducing the overall yearly licensing costs to individual departments. This is a three year contract at a $11,800 annual maintenance cost increase. Under this new agreement City department's will no longer have to pay ESRI annually for their licenses. This allows the City of Aspen Departments to use the GIS system in their daily work activity with the latest version of the interface software. This change in operations by the GIS department has created an overall efficiency in each depamnent's yearly operations expenses. DISCUSSION: Each internal GIS user pays a subscription fee for access to the GIS database, however no longer has to pay the software licensing fee to ESRI. This has encouraged Departments to incorporate the GIS information in their analysis of their projects and has increased the overall usage of the GIS system. For this reason, the amount of subscription fees paid to GIS has increase from 2007 to 2008. This increase in subscription fees paid by the user will offset the $5,900 (50% of $11,800) increase in the annual maintenance expense to the City of Aspen. Page 1 of 2 .~ In addition to the reduced sofwaze licensing costs, departments no longer administer the procurement of new licenses; keep track of the software and license files. This decreases the administration time and cost for all departments that use GIS as this is now managed centrally in the GIS Department. Software is also deployed much faster as all versions of the software and keycodes aze on site. All users in the organization aze on the same version of the software so there is consistency in data access, compatibility, support and workflow throughout the organization. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Since the implementation of the ELA in 2008, the City has saved $29,976 in GIS license costs. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I am recommending that Council approve the ongoing increase in the GIS operations budget of $11,800 to pay for the increase in the annual maintenance for the ELA program. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution /~ of 2009." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ATTACIiNIEENTS• none Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Nancy Lesley, Director of Special Events and Markering THRU: - Jeff Woods, Manager, Parks and Recreation DATE OF MEMO: February 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: February 17, 2009 RE: Ride the Rockies REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting that Council approve a supplemental for Ride the Rockies visit to Aspen on June 18ih 2009. In addition, staff is requesting approval to put entertainment and beer gazden for Ride the Rockies on Hopkins, between Mill Street and Monazch Street, closing that portion of the street for just one day, Thursday, June 18m. Staff will be looking for a decision at your work session on Tuesday, February 17`s. If Mayor or Council needs any additional information in which to make a decision, please don't hesitate to ask. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: When Ride the Rockies came through Aspen in June of 2007 Council agreed to a supplemental. - BACKGROUND: Ride the Rockies, anationally-recognized bike ride that varies the route every yeaz throughout Colorado, generates extensive media coverage; daily features in the Denver Post and in the past NBC's Today Show. Per the Ride the Rockies information given to each host town, they feel that at a minimum, this year's tour will bring in over $200,000 in taxable revenue to Aspen alone on Thursday, June 18th. Aspen will receive aquarter-tabloid page advertisement in The Denver Post at no chazge, as well as access to the mailing list of the 3,000 + riders for promotional correspondence. While embracing our "body, mind and spirit" culture and making this azero-waste event, Staff intends to create a lasting and positive impression on these cyclists and guests. DISCUSSION: Ride the Rockies is returning this summer to Aspen on Thursday, June 18th We aze the last overnight of this 7 day tour, and the cyclists aze riding to Glenwood on their final day (Friday). This event will bring not only over 3,000 bicyclists, their families and support staff, but regional and national media attention as well. Many first-time and returning visitors will have an opportunity to experience the best of Aspen in just a few short hours while staying in our local-hotels, experiencing the cuisine, and wandering the streets of Aspen. Staff is acting as liaison with hotels, restaurants, and shops during this one-day event. To ease logistics, base camp for the cyclists will be located at the school campus, and staff is looking to bring the entertainment and beer gazden into town to encourage the cyclists to dine and enjoy all that the core of Aspen has to offer. This yeaz, with Jazz and Food and Wine, downtown Aspen will be showcased at its best. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Although Ride the Rockies brings in a significant number of people and taxable revenue within a short timefi-ame, Staff will need to expend some funds to make this event successful. While the Roaring Fork Valley is a very generous and community-minded place, Ride the Rockies is during two (2) of the valley's favorite and most volunteer-intensive events: Food and Wine and Jazz Aspen. While Staff will ask for volunteers, the most viable option will be to work with local non-profits and contribute to their cause in exchange for assistance from their stable of volunteers. Staff is also purchasing small, but memorable, Aspen-specific giveaways for the riders as a reminder of their experiences here. Staff is responsible for maintaining security for all the bikes; setting up, maintaining, and securing the campsite; meals, sanitation and clean up; and hospitality and promotion. Given Aspen's community-minded spirit and energy, Staff is conftdent this event will be a great success. ENVIRONMElV"I'AL IMPACTS: Staff is working to make this azero-waste event. To that effort, staff wiil pursue all options in partnerships, but will need to pay for some portion of the effort. RECOMMENDED ACTION:. Staff recommends providing $15,000 in funding for this event and allowing the beer gazden and entertainment to be on Hopkins between Mill and Monazch. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Nancy Lesley, Director of Special Events and Marketing 1~v THRU: Jeff Woods, Manager, Parks and Recreation DATE OF MEMO: Friday, February, 27, 2009 MEETING DATE: Tuesday, March 3, 2009 RE: Additional Events and Marketing REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff has been working on ways in which to increase visitors to Aspen. Through current eveirts and new events, staff would like to promote Aspen to the Denver and Front Mange. Staff is asking for an additional $50,000. BACKGROUND: Staff produces three (3) events in which they feel that the growing trend that has been seen over the last couple of years could oontinue, and potentially.on a greater scale with additional marketing money. A specific example of this marketing approach is the Owl Creek Chase. By increasing our advertising/marketing budget, we saw immediate and significant growth.. This is the formula we are asking to take into the future. By choosing events with name recognition, we feel our growth has abetter chance of immediate success. The specific events are the Aspen Downtown Criterium held in May (see attachmem page 5, for more specifics on this event), the Aspen Triathlon, held in August (see attachment page 6, for more specifics on this event) and the Golden Leaf, held in September (see attachment page 7, for more specifics on this event). Staff would Like to do targeted advertising of these everrts on the Front Mange and in Denver. This is a market that previously was traveling further for their athletic events, and is more open to traveling closer to home in this economic climate. Staff has been working with the hotel community to provide more affordable rates than at any time in the past. - Staff is also looking at doing three (3) new events. These events are not athletic based, but more rooted in building community and a sense of season. Staff would like to give not only the guest, but our local, memories that bring them back to these events that hopefully will become tradition with many families. These events are also rooted in bringing vitality to the downtown core that will potentially result in more traffic through the retail stores and restaurants. The events that staff is proposing are: A Downtown Festival (late July), Halloween Festival (late October) and Christmas/Holiday Festival (December). Psge 1 of 2 DLSCUSSION: Staff would like to add the three new events mentioned above. Staff feels events that promote community, bring people together and create memories can be building blocks for the future. The Community Picnic is an example of this theory. By creating something that was fun, vital and encompassed a wide variety of interests and activities, staff saw a signifi~arJt increase in attendance. Staff would tike to extend the range of advertising and marketing,bf these new events and advertise in the Roaring Fotk Valley, Front Range and Denver area. By creating something that "feels good" and instills a sense of community while bringing people to town, staff feels like the new events can help take us into the future. Other mountain communities are aggressive]y pursuing the Denver area consumer and seeing a good return. on our dollar. While we are asking for significantly less dollars than the other communities spew, we feel we can still make an impact is Aspen. Therefore we'd like additional funds to increase our advertising on three (3) existing events. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Staff is requesting an additional $50,000 to be coming from the General Fund. Staff is projecting an increase of taxable revenue of $281,326. This is based completely on the three athletic evems; as we azen't sure how to measure the other 3 events and their impact on our community. While we feel it will be significant, we. can't put numbers to it. Please see attachments for details and specifics on each event, their projected impact to taxable revenue as well as past impacts. ENVIRONIIH;NTAL 1MPACTS: Atl events that the City produces are all ZGreen events, and staff works closely with the Environmental Health Department to ensure we are in complete compliance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve an additional $50,000 to fund more marketing for 3 current events and 3 new events to bring more people to town. ALTERNATIVES: Staff will proceed with events and current budget. This will result in event number potentially being flat, if not down. ATTACHMENTS: Event Outlines and Growth History and Potential (page 3 -9) Economic Impact (page 10) Page 2 of 2 Owl Creek Chase Saturday, January 16, 2010 How do you stack up against the best in Nordic skiing? The Owl Creek Chase is a 2IK freestyle cross-country ski race from the Snowmass XC Center to Aspen XC Center. This unique event combines an elite level pro Nordic race with the casual feel of one of the Roaring Fork Valley's favorite citizen events. Participatrts can"choose to compete in either the Elite Division or Citizen Division The Owl Creek Chase is a USSA sanctioned race and part of the Super To>.ff NorAm series and the North American Cup Marathon Series. Please join us for this one of a kind event in Aspen and experience Olympic Ievel skiing first hand. _ Potential Growth Ideas Increase out oftown participants by advertising on the Front Range, bring more college teams, etc here for the weekend. Additional Costs $ 6680 $1500for additional Rocky Mountain Sports ads $I 80 for increased distnbution on Front Range $2000 (2) ads in each Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1,000 for local radio and Newspaper ads $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs Uwl Creek Chase itao ~aoo 600 400 200 a azooi ^zooa v zoos ~ 2006 ^ 2007 8 2008 2009 ^zoio 2009 Economic Impact $250,000 Taxable Revenue Projected 2010 Economic Impact, $275,000 Taxable Revenue, (10% increase) , 4, 1` ~ zoos zooa zoos zoos zoa7 zoos zoos zoro America's Uphill Saturday, Msrch 13, ZO10 Aspen's spring ritual-a 3000 foot climb pp Aspen Mountain using snowshoes, track skis, telemark skis or alpine touring gear. Racers will begin their journey up Aspen Mountain in pursuit of the win. The course starts at the Base of Little Nell and ascends 7,945 feet to finish at the Sundeck Restaurant at an elevation of 11,212 feet. Inspection of the race course prior to race day is recommended. Information concerning the racecourse or the timing of your inspection maybe obtained from the Aspen Mountain Ski Patrol on the Aspen Mountain Ski Area. Potential Growth Advertiseffocus on affordable lodging options fur this weekend, Market Great Aspen Getaway, first tracks on Aspen mountain etc. Additional Casts $5040 53000 for additional ads, Rocky Mountain Sports, $2000 for (2} ads in each Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News America's Uphill 400 350 300 z50 zoo 150 100 50 a M12003, ~ 2004 ~ 2005 O 2006 la zoo? tlt 2008 2009 ^zolo 2008 Economic Impact S26,400 Taxable Revenue 2004 Projected Economic Impact 528,600 Taxable Revenue (10% Increase) 2010 Projected Economic Impact 531,460 {10% increase) .~ yi , 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 z610 Cycling Criterium Sunday, May 17, 2009 - Heart pounding, adrenaline pumping, high speed FUN1 'The Aspen Cycling Criteriutn is the single most exciting biking event in Aspen each summer. This exclusive course on the closed city streets of Aspen, Colorado will challenge even the toughest and most skilled bike Pacers in the US. With sharp curves, high-speeds, and rapid comers bi7cers must be facused, alert, and ready to take on whatever obstacles they may encounter. Feeling a bit intimidated? Don't worry, the .9 mile loop is the perfect place for beginner and intermediate racers to increase their technical skills, gain experience in riding with, large packs, and learn the ropes in a Criterium bike race. The Aspen Cycling Criterium offers heats for every skill level from beginner to intermediate with age ranges from 10 years okl to 60 and over. Don't miss out on this remarkable event! Potential Growth Ideas This event continues to grow, and is a great opportunity to reach our Denver Market Front Range Poster Distribution Cycling Club contacts, invitations Increased Front range advertising Advertise Great partnerships with hotels on discounted rooms Partnership with Ride for the Pass for Cycling weekend Rocky Mountain Sports ads Colorado Runner ads (online as well} USA Cycling Sanctioning Offer Group Discounts to Cycling Clubs Add a Hoolagan Race, to increase participation for family members, and the not so competitive participants Email Ride the Rockies Contact list, invite them to pa'eview the azea, Put ad in college newsletters Reach Utah Mazket Advertising Costs $ 6700 " $ISOOfor additional Rocky Mountain Sports ads ' $180 for increased distribution on Front Range $2000 (2) ads in each Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1,000 for Utah Ads $1000 far ads in Daily Camera (Boulder} $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs Criterium 160 Ia0 120 100 60 60 40 20 ^ x°oa ^ 2D05 ~I12006 12007 A 2008 882009 w2030 2008 Economic Impact S7,128 Taxable Revenge ' 2009 Projected Economic Impact $7,840 Taxable Revenue (10 % increase) 2010 Projected Economic Impact $8,624 Taxable Revenue (10 % increase) ~GZ/tP,~ ~ •~ ~:' ,tom •~ 200a 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Aspen High Country Triathlon Satnrday, August O8, 2009 Do you swim? B>7ce? A~ Run? Then Aspen, Colorado has the perfect event for yon, the Aspen High Country Triatlilon. This multi-sport event consists of an 800-yazd indoor pool swim, 17- Milebike {gaining 1,500 feet in elevation) to the spectaculaz Maroon Bells, and a 4-mile run in the Elk Mountain range and the scenic Maroon Creek Valley. This is the perfect triathlon for beginner triathletes looking for a unique challenge and seasoned racers wanting to compete an a short, but challenging course. The triathlon is a USTA sanctioned event. Prizes will be awarded to the overall male and female competitors as well as prizes will be given for each age group. Aid stations with high energy snacks are strategically placed along the entire course for participants. The state-0f--the-art Aspen Recreation Center will act as the start, finish, and transition azea for the race. Please join us for this exceptional event! Potential Growth Ideas Increased advertising on the Front Range Increase National Advertising, through USA triathon, Rocky Mountain Sports Advertise as a sprint Triathlon, uniqueness of the area, really market the Bike Course up to Mazoon Bells, Advertise as great beginner triathlon, send invitations to past participants, Triathlon clubs, cycling clubs, etc. Add more swim heats to allow for more participants, Additional Costs Advertising 55200 $1,000 for local radio and Newspaper ads $200 for poster distribution in Denver $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $2000 for ads in Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs aoo 350 300 zso zoo tso loo 50 @ 200s @ 2006 m zoo? ~ zoos ^ 2009 ^zot0 2008 Economic Impact $52,272 Taxable Revenue 2009 Projected Economic Impact $57499 Taxable Revenue (10% increase) 2010 Projected Economic Impact $63,248 Taxable Revenue (10% increase) Triathlon ~~ ,i' ~. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2004 2010 Golden Leaf Half Marathon Saturday, September Z6, 2009 "Golden Leaf Half Marathon Maintains Raak as one of America's Most Scenic Races" Runners from across the US will descend upon Aspen, Colorado to participate in the much anticipated 31st Annual Golden Leaf Half Marathon. Chosen by Trail Runner Magazine as one of "America's 14 most scenic races," the Golden Leaf is one of the most beautiful foot races in the Rockies. In the height of the picturesque fall colors of Colorado, reds, greens, and the famous gold's of the Aspen Trees will guide runners on this challenging course from Snowmass to Aspen. The course traverses the mountains of Snowmass and Aspen at breathtaking heights with fabulous mountain views. The trail can be narrow and steep at times with elevation gains of 970 feet peaking at 9,400 feet in elevation. Unlike the many fast and flat marathons on city streets, the Golden Leaf will challenge even the toughest of marathon competitors with its rocky mountain trails. Potential Growth Ideas Increase maximum number ofparticipants Wave start not to overcrowd trail Partner with hotels for discounts Mazket what other things Aspen has to offer for activities to keep the garticipants in town { diswunt ride to Maroon Bells, discount golf some type of activity to go with the Golden Leaf to keep them in town for the entire weekend) Group discount for running clubs etc Additional Costs Advertising $7300 $1,000 for Utah Market $200.for poster distribution in Denver $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $2000 for ads in Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs $2100 for Running Times (national Magazine) Golden Leaf soo zoo soo soo aoo aoo zoo zoo ~zooo a zooz iszooz rzooa ^zooe ^zoos zooz a zoos ^zoos ^zozo 2008 Economic Impact $196,352 Taxable Revenue 2009 Projected Economic Impact $215,987 Taxable Revenue 2010 projected Economic Impact $237,585 Taxable Revenue y~ ~ •. ~-~ ~ a zooo zooz zooz zoos zoos zoos zooz zoos zooz zozo Hockey Mountain High Adult Ice Hockey Tournament Friday -Sunday, October 2-4, 2008 Al] the participating tearris regard the Hockey Mountain High Tournament as a great pre-season challenge jam packed high energy hockey and entertainment. The Aspen atmosphere is the quintessential backdrop for this up-in-coming hockey event. Since it's inception in 2005 the event has tripled its size and reputation. Each yeaz our defending champs return to safeguard their title. Men's division, women's division, open division, recreational divisions, and novice divisions. Event is at Capacity with 3 day format. Potential Growth Ideas Increase Tournament Dates, add a 4'~ day to increase tournament capacity Allow more teams in the tournament (increase amount ofout oftown teams, no turning teams away Add another weekend (mirror fill face off1) Advertise cheap groups rates in town, advertise other activities for family members, etc. to participate in. Add Another day New Eco Impact 123,300 Additional Costs Advertising $5200 $1,000 for local radio and Newspaper ads $200 for poster distribution in Denver $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $2000 fnr ads in Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs Hockey Mountain High 40 .... 24. 26 , 28 - ~200fi 20 -° ~ 8 H 2007 0 612008 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 6[2009 2008 Economic Impact $ 82,200 Taxable Revenue 2009 Projected Economic Impact $90420 Taxable Revenue 2010 Projected Economic Impact $99462 Taxable Revenue Christmas/Holiday Event December~leigb Rides-bon fire-parade of lights-CaroIers- Santa(sleigh rides with Santa) Poteatiai to bring more families to town during the holiday's Benefit for City of Aspen. Increase visitors to Aspen during the Holiday's Increase Families to visit Aspen During the Holiday's Costs $10,700 . Operating Costs $5500 Advertising $5200 $1,000 for local radio and Newspaper ads $200 for poster distribution in Denver $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $2000 for ads in Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs Halloween Weekend Events October3l°~ 2009 Costume race/contest (foot race,l OK or SK ifweather is hazardous use track at Football field, lights etc. Pumpkin Race (families) Pumpkin Patch (on fields at reFCenter} Hay rides (on fields) Haunted hay rides (use parks machines to cut down on costs) Benefit for City of Aspen Increase visitors td town during Halloween Weekend "Additional Revenue" for Special events, Aspen Recreation Center Costs SI0,700 Operating Costs $5,500 Sleigh, trailer, equipment, hay bails, Advertising $5200 $1,000 for local radio and Newspaper ads $200 for poster distribution in Denver $1000 for ads in Daily Camera (Boulder) $2000 for ads in Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News $1000 for ads in Colorado Springs Downtown Festival, Summer Dance party, stage, band, Beer Garden. Location will be the same as Saturday market. Make the whole day fnD of downtown activities, follow Saturday Market. Benefit for City of Aspen Bring visitors to Aspen, Bring Visitor; from the Front Range and Utah Costs: Operating and Advertising $15,000 ~~_/ o° °o o°O °o o° o° °o °o °o °o N N yy ~~ O ` M ? N N ~ ~ l0 O R1 ~ ~ ^!NO lOO ~ r ~ rN .fD N r (O N r i O NN NN NN 69 NN fA ~.~~' 00 oo 00 oo 00 o0 0 0 m 00 00 0 0 ~ p,.~~; *.jFb~ 41 e} O O NCO N(O Of C7 e~ OSr N 67 O ti O ya . V d' 70p7 7 GO 0 ~ al: f7 O N ~ N ~ r O r '~•O1' r r ^ C r t~Z, ~. a, y~ +:_ ~:~. ys ~ en en en rn N csa N N N as ~„ ~~,, aE ~ . ~ ~y ~ ~M~ m~ mrmi ° Nm u°~ ~: ~~ e' r ~ ~ N Z ; ~`% ~ ~*~fF! ~;V~ ~ ~~s_~~ iL7 . r ~ C' ~~~-'0#D49. OD tf W~ N N~ O N~ u1 ~ h N ~ V n p ~ " ' . ~ u~G }S . ~ „ 1O~ c' ~aO s m m ip m!'P Tt ~ ~,F z N f0 M c0 °°N O ~ m O ~,~' ~rn ~ E O ~ I c i a i m x ~ :.,~ g a-a ':ti a ar ."; ~~~y0,~ •: lno N N o~ O N °opp N Of p0 7 0 od~ N r ao 0 9 E ~p z,. N fD r r ~, r N .- Y ~(~ .. lFf~z ~ " ~ mrm e~ a ,~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ .' `; r '^'~ y ~ ~~ N 4~~ ns`"~ m M N O a V NM M ~ a O m. Q't-` *"a:.,~b' }m~ N N N~ 69 6R N N N N W ~ : ~ .-,:x~~,c.:La. m m k^ h ` ~rix}.fKh~ ~ ¢ n IO a z. h ~"~~* c m e E .~, ~p N # ` N : v', p o0 R w ' . m m E ~ ~ m i.1 o W qY m E O m E C ~ L r d E L o F ° ~ w - U Q~ O M ~ C G7 m - b ». q N ~ C e.~ WF- ~ C ~ C ~ m S QL 1 ~ m R ~ c m ' Y Z NF OF yy - ~U mY ~ , L m ' ~ c-~ U $ c~v T U m ,~ c m m ~ a` Q m O ~ L CN C= l Y ~ C =a U' C E ~ m ~ ~ [ m_ m '=o l y C Y 0 ~~ L~ d 3 m E ~rC ~ O 7 lC x O r -C7 ¢¢LL .eu ~C7 =O Q F ~rbl - x '~~ ~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: Apri12, 2009 MEETING DATE: April 13, 2009 RE: 150 Housing Fund Supplemental Requests for 2009 SiJNIlVIARY: Staff recommends a 150 Fund budget supplemental in the amount of $525,859. BACKGROUND: Due to ongoing pre-planning, planning and design efforts in progress as well as potential unforeseen efforts that may arise in 2009, staff is making the following recommendations for 2009 _ supplemental budgeting for the 150 Housing Development Fund. DISCUSSION: Burlingame Phase 2: 150.67.23700.* Although there is no supplemental request at this time for the design development of Burlingame Phase 2, staff is currently in the process of working with potential housing partners to get commitments on 2009 housing partner funding for design development. Once housing partner funding for Burlingame Phase 2 design development has been confirmed, staff intends to propose an additional supplemental request, if necessary, for the 2009 Burlingame Phase 2 design development effort. If necessary, this is expected to occur in May or June 2009. Burlingame Lot Subsidies: 150.23Z3150.* Subsidies for Burlingame Phase 1 single family lots are expected to total $650,000 for 2009. This is $133,500 less than originally anticipated. Annie Mitchell: 150.23.23120 In 2008, the City engaged a forensic azchitect to explore, evaluate, and design a mitigation program for the physical deficiencies left at Annie Mitchell by the origirial developer and contractor. The City engaged Fenton Construction to begin repairs, and Fenton completed a roof deck reconstruction proj ect as well as repairing a water-damaged interior of one unit. That contract was approved as a three phase agreement to allow for major roof repairs and major foundation waterproofing repairs in 2009. However, it was recently decided to bid the additional work and an RFP is in process. The amounts below aze internal budget numbers based on some recent estimates as well as from recent staff discussions with the azchitect: Descrip6on• Total Roof Repairs: $261,000 Design and Field Observation: $9,900 Staff Management Costs: $62,400 Foundation Wateroroofine: $195 220 Total 2009 Budget Request: $528,520 Staff has provided previous notice of the potential cost impacts due to the risks of delaying these corrections. Staff recommends that these measures be taken caze of in 2009 to avoid additional cost escalations due to continued damage as a result of these deficiencies. Deer Hill Trail: 150.23.23128.* The requested carry forwazd amount of $48,029 is intended to fund the creation of a trail from Burlingame Ranch up to the top of Deer Hill in order to mitigate residents cutting various azbitrary bandit trails to the top of Deer Hill which may threaten native species in the delicate open space azea on and around Deer Hill. 802 W Main St MAINTENANCE: 150.23.23131.* This account needs to be renamed as noted above. The requested carry forwazd amount of $10,000 is needed in 2009 to maintain the rental unit and fo keep it rentable (plumbing repairs, HVAC service, ect.) as well as the holding costs (utilities) associated with owning the property and for capital improvements (roof, heat tape, and other safety improvements) that would be required of any landlord. 312 W Hyman Ave MAINTENANCE Anew account needs to be set up as noted above. The additional (new) supplemental request of $10,000 is needed to maintain the rental unit and to keep it rentable (plumbing repairs, HVAC service, etc.) as well as the holding costs (utilities) associated with owning the property and for capital improvements (roof, heat tape, and other safety improvements) that would be required of any landlord. Property Maintenance: 150.23.55110.* The additional (new) supplemental request of $5,000 is needed to maintain all other 150 Fund properties including holding costs (utilities) and other miscellaneous costs associated with owning the 488 Castle Creek, 517 Pazk Circle and BMC West properties. Housing Dev. Misc: 150.23.23140.* The requested carry forwazd amount of $177,700 is intended to fund additional housing development planning efforts for properties, owned by the City including 488 Castle Creek Rd, 802 West Main St, 517 Park Circle, BMC West as well as properties not owned by the City including the Forest Service Pazcel. Total requested supplemental: $525,859 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the described supplemental fending. Staff also recommends that the Capital Asset department and the Finance department work closely in 2009 to track 150 Fund revenues. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: FINANCIAL IlVIPLICATIONS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Barker, Stormwater Manager, Engineering THRU: Scott Miller, Capital Asset Drrector Trish Aragon, P.E., City.Engineer DATE OF MEMO: March 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: April 14, 2009 RE: Drainage Criteria Manual Supplemental REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the entire 2008 project budget of $110,000 and to appropriate $35,000 from unrestricted fund balance for the Drainage Criteria Manual project. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council approved the professional services contract for AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. in the amount of $143,788.00 at the December 8, 2008 Council Meeting. BACKGROUND: In order to establish a more comprehensive stormwater management program, we aze rewriting the drainage design criteria to address both water quantity and quality impacts ofpost-construction stormwater runoff. Standazds will be established and described in a new Drainage Criteria Manual. These standazds will be supported by a set of design and management tools and an integrated design approach for implementing bath structural and nonstructural stormwater controls. DISCUSSION: Because approval of the contract wasn't received until mid-December, work on the contract did not begin until January, 2009. Therefore the amount budgeted in 2008 was not used. This project is now a 2009 project and will be completed this summer. The amount budgeted in 2008 was $110,000. As explained at the time of contract approval, staff intends to fund the remainder of the contract from the stormwater budget's unrestricted fund balance. Page 1 of 2 FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Funding Budgeted 2008 Drainage Criteria Manual Project (160.94.81116.86000) 2008 Total Expenditures 2008 Drainage Criteria Manual Project (160.94.81116.86000) Carry Forward Request 2008 Drainage Criteria Manual Project (160.94.81116.86000) Supplemental Request 2009 Total Budget $ 110,000.00 $0 $ 110,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $145,000.00 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends to carry forward the entire 2008 project budget of $110,000 and to appropriate $35,000 from unrestricted fund balance for the Drainage Criteria Manual project. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: Environmental DATE OF MEMO: RE: Mayor and City Council Kim Peterson, Global Warming Project Manager Phil Overeynder, Director of Public Works and Initiatives March 11, 2009 Spring Supplemental Budget Request - 2009 Budget Authority to spend 2008 REMP Funding REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to approve a supplemental budget request in the amount of $221,494 to spend 2008 REMP funds awarded to the City by CORE. BACKGROUND: In the fall of 2008, the City of Aspen submitted a grant proposal to CORE to compete for a portion of the REMP funds. The CORE board subsequently approved the funding request at a lower level than what we asked for. On December 8, 2008 City Council approved the recommendations of the CORE board to award the City of Aspen a REMP grant in the amount of $$07,000. On January 14, 2009 the Pitkin Board of County Commissioners passed the same. DISCUSSION: Two items contained within the grant were budgeted for in the usua12009 budgeting process. Those items include: $85,506 in salary and benefits for the global warming project coordinator and $200,000 for engineering studies on the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. Council is asked to approve expenditure of the following amounts from the remaining revenue awarded by the 2009 REMP grant. These were not included in the norma12009 budget process because they did not receive approval from the County until January 2009. $26,000 for Z Green Business Outreach. This funding will go towards increasing our global warming data analyst from 20 to 30 hours per week and adding benefits. With the added capacity we will expand upon our ZGreen business program. $170,494 for energy efficiency improvements in Aspen's affo;dable housing stock. The City will improve the energy efficiency of rental housing.units at either Hunter Creek or Centennial or within city owned affordable housing units by working with the Page 1 of 3 property owners, managers and tenants. REMP funds will be used to insulate, seal and improve overall energy efficiency in the maximum number of units possible by leveraging other resources including utility rebates, funds from the governor's energy of£ce, federal stimulus bill and owner/tenant contributions. The City will identify a suitable contractor and coordinate the work. $10,000 for technical assistance in implementing the 2030 Challenge. In September 2008 Council authorized staff to proceed on the 2030 Challenge. This rigorous protocol, if adopted, will dramatically reduce the amount of fossil fuel energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. from all new and majorly renovated buildings. The City of Aspen will use these REMP funds to do energy modeling on buildings and to create and implement the necessary codes and tracking systems to verify fossil fuel reductions. $1,000 for energy audit equipment. The Utilities Efficiency manager will purchase the following equipment to be used for residential energy audits: -Blower door testing kit includes DG-700 diagnostic gauge and all accessories (software compatible) - FLIR b50 IR camera w/digital overlay, memory card, battery pack and charger (software compatible) - Duct blaster testing kit includes DG-700 diagnostic gauge and all accessories - Pressure Pan (individual duct register testing tool to diagnose where duct leaks are, size of leak, etc) - Low E /solar gain diagnostic tool - Systems C02 diagnostic tool "This equipment will be made available to qualified energy auditors to help them get started in an energy audit business. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The approval of this budget request will allow the City to spend $221,494 in 2009 from monies that has already been awarded as a grant. This will bring revenue to the city. Expenses for this work will match the revenue. If there is any case where the revenues exceed the expenses, the excess funds will be returned to CORE for return to the REMP fund. All of these funds are expected to be expensed by the end of 2009. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Expenditure of these funds will favorably decrease the amount of energy used in residential buildings. Staff does not have an estimate at this time but as the affordable housing project develops, will calculate and report to Council the amount of energy and greenhouse gas savings achieved by the energy efficiency improvements. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve this budget request to allow for the expenditure of REMP funds. ALTERNATIVES: Council can du•ect staff not to proceed with the 2030 Challenge project and with improving energy efficiency in affordable housing. Under that scenario, the City Page 2 of 3 would either return the corresponding portion of the REMP funds to CORE or we could ask for an amendment to the grant to use the funds for another purpose. PROPOSED MOTION: ".I move to approve a Canary supplemental budget request in the amount of $221,494 to provide for implementation of the projects proposed herein." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 3 of 3 a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kai Ramsey THRU: Tom McCabe DATE OF MEMO: February 9, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: Truscott Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the supplemental request for $20,000 to cover the cost of unexpected repairs to heat tapes and at Truscott. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: There have been no previous requests in regazds to this issue. BACKGROUND: New heat tape was installed during the roof replacement and it was brought to our attention that other buildings had sections of faulty tape which needed to be replaced. DISCUSSION: Heat tape had failed on multiple buildings causing a major safety concern. Faulty heat tape created cornices and ice dams that hung over the roof in some place SOft above walkways. One section had a lazge chuck of ice break off and fell onto an awning ant the entrance if an apartment and completely destroyed the tin roof. New heat tape was installed and gutters were repaired to allow for proper drainage. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Truscott is requesting $20,000 to cover the costs of the upgrades and repairs. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve; with an additional $y~{QK in unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2009 allows for normal operations through December 31, 2009. Even with these additional projects in 2009the Truscott fund is projected to be financially stable over the next ten years. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has been consulted and we have no negative environmental impacts. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Truscott property management staff recommends that council approves the supplemental request for $20k to cover the repairs to the heat tape at Truscott. Page 1 of 2 ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative, the work has been completed. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ..." CTTY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Coyncil FROM: Kai Ramsey THRU: Tom McCabe DATE OF MEMO: February 28, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: Truscott Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the supplemental request for $20,000 to cover the cost of unexpected electrical repairs at Truscott. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: There have been no previous requests in regazds to this issue. BACKGROUND: New. heat tape was installed during the roof replacement and the existing electrical panel could not handle the load. A new upgraded panel and components to maximi~.e efficiency were needed to complete the job. Repairs to other malfunctioning heat tapes were also performed at the same time. DISCUSSION: A licensed electrician was needed to finish the installation of the heat tape. When installation was complete and power was returned to the system, we found that the old panel of more than 20 yeazs could not handle the electrical load. An upgraded panel that has a higher threshold was needed and the cost'was $7,175. Included in the panel upgrade were timers and delays to control when the system is on or off. This will reduce energy consumption by only running at night when there is no solar assistance. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Truscott is requesting $20,000 to cover the costs of the up des and repairs. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve; with an additional $K in unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2009 allows for normal operations through December 31, 2009. Even with these additional projects in 2009the Truscott fund is projected to be financially stable over the next ten yeazs. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has been consulted and we have no negative environmental impacts. Page 1 of 2 .RECOMMENDED ACTION: 'The Truscott properly management staff recommends that council approves the supplemental request for $20k to covet the electrical upgrade and repair costs at Truscott. ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative, the work has been completed. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ..." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ' ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Kai Ramsey Tom McCabe February 9, 2009 Truscott Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the supplemental request for $15,000 to cover the cost of installing security cameras at Truscott. PREVIOUS COUNCIL. ACTION: There have been no previous requests in regazds to this issue. - BACKGROUND:. There has been an increase in criminal activity at Truscott and management would like to install cameras to protect the office and common azeas. DISCUSSION: There aze no existing security measures at Truscott and management feazs that it is only a matter of time before we experience a major incident. Management would like to install cameras in the office, laundry rooms, and possibly the dumpsters. Rent is now collected at the property meaning monies taken at the end of the day could sit overnight in the safe. We have been experiencing vandalism in the laundry rooms causing thousands of dollazs in repairs. Illegal dumping is also costing us thousands of dollars a yeaz. We would like to catch the violators on camera and prosecute to recoup some costs. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Truscott is requesting $15,000 to cover the costs of the materials and installation. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve; with an additional $~K in unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2009 allows for normal operations through December 31, 2009. Even with these additional projects in 2009 the Truscott fund is projected to be financially stable over the next ten yeazs. . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has been consulted and we have no negative environmental impacts. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Truscott property management staff recommends that council approves the supplemental request for $15k to cover the installation of security cameras at Truscott. ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative, the work has been completed. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ..." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: . RE: Mayor and City Council Kai Ramsey Tom McCabe February 9, 2009 Truscott Supplemental Request REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the supplemental request for $8,000 to cover the cost of "Gieening" up Truscott. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: There have been no previous requests in regazds to this issue. BACKGROUND: Truscott would like to repair a broken solaz array as well as get an energy audit and weatherize the property to become greener. - DISCUSSION: Following the city's efforts on becoming greener, management has come up with a few projects we would like to perform in~2009. The solaz array above the 600 building has been off line and broken for a number of years. We would like to repair these panels to reduce our energy needs to produce hot water. Management would also like to have an energy audit performed to see where else we can be more efficient and use less energy. Consultation on weatherizing the 100 building to maximize efficiency and educating the tenants would be other projects needing these funds. FINANCIALBUDGE'I' IMPACTS: Truscott is requesting $8,000 to cover the cos of this project. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve; with an additional $ Kin unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2009 allows for normal operations through December 31, 2009. Even with these additional projects in 2009 the Truscott fund is projected to be financially stable over the next ten years. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has not .been consulted and we believe they would stand behind our request. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Truscott property management staff recommends that council approves the supplemental request for $.8k to cover a greener Truscott. ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative, the work has been completed. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ..." CITY MANAGER CONIIVIENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: Mayor and Council Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director Steve Barwick, City Manager Apri13, 2009 MEETING DATE: April 13, 2009 RE: 505 Housing Fund Supplemental Requests for 2009 SUMIVIARY: Staff recommends a 505 Fund budget supplemental in the amount of $75,000 to complete roof repairs and improvements to the Water Place Housing units, improvements that were initiated in 2008. The funds will pay for heat tape, snow fencing/clips and other capital improvements plus contingencies. BACKGROUND: Roof leaks in the homes at Water Place have been an ongoing problem with the development. The repairs that were performed in 20081ook to be successful however further steps need to be taken to manage ice dams and snow loading on the roofs to reduce the possibility of ice and snow falling on pedestrians and damaging gutters. DISCUSSION: Roof Tec Consultants, D&D Roofing and-Staff evaluated the roofs this winter to determine additional improvements and prescribe remedies to finish the project. The work needed will include installing heat tape in all gutters and down spouts and. on some steep roofs, having electricians install new circuits to the homes electrical systems, and snow fencing and clips, to retain snow and ice above pedestrian walkways.. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This expense is not included in the 2009 budget and is requested to be paid from the 505 Housing Fund. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the budget increase of $75,000 to complete improvements to Water Place. ALTERNATIVE: If the roof repair is not approved the snow and ice problem will continued to be managed by the Capital Asset Depaztment and the Water Place HOA, but the inherent problems will remain. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2009". CITY MANAGER COMMENTS MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jerry Nye, Superintendent of Streets THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: November 9, 2007 RE: Approval of CDOT Grant and flush truck purchase contract SUMMARY This memo requests that Council approve the attached resolution accepting Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant AQC M045-007 from the State of Colorado in the amount of $116,035.00 for the purchase of a flush truck. Staff also requests authorization to approve the use of De~aztmental savings to fund the required matching portion of this grant, $24,120.00 as well as additional funds needed to complete the equipment purchase (see Financiallmplicationsbelnw). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION In September of 2007, Council approved a diesel retrofit project that uses a portion of 2007 funding. In previous years, Council has approved CMAQ funds for the purchase of a street sweeper as well as for Truscott pedestrian improvements and the construction of the Cemetery Lane trail. DISCUSSION Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grants have been awazded to the City of Aspen every other yeaz since 2000 for the purpose of implementing projects or procuring equipment that mitigates PM10 pollution in the upper valley. Because PM10.generated.from airborne particles of disintegrated street sanding material is one of the main sources of particulate matter in Aspen, use of CMAQ funds for a new flush truck has been approved by the Colorado Department of Transportation. This procurement would increase the City's flush truck fleet from one to two vehicles. City Council approval of this item will authorize acceptance of this CMAQ grant; allow the Streets Department to access its departmental savings for the matching portion of this grant; and permit the Streets Department to begin the bid process for the new flush truck. Use of the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality grant funds to purchase a new flush truck will increase the Street Department's ability to reduce PM-10 by flushing the sanding materials and fine particulates that aze in bedded in the pores of the asphalt from the middle and driving lanes of the streets to the side where a sweeper will then pick them up. This will allow the Department to flush and sweep more street azea each day and reduce the length of time that PM-10 particles aze airborne. The flush trucks will also help the City to meet its storm.water mission by increasing the Department's efficiency when cleaning storm water vaults and catch basins. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The CMAQ funded portion of this project totals $116,035.00. Matching funds of at least $24,120.00 must be committed by the City. Staff plans to cover the required match of $24,120.00 as well as any additional equipment cost via Departrnental savings. Because CDOT will not allow the City of Aspen to proceed with its bidding process until signed contracts aze in place, staffis unable to provide Council with the exact cost of a new flush truck. However, reseazch indicates that approximately $45,000 in Departmental savings will need to be tapped for this project (including the required match). No additional capital appropriation is being requested at this time. However, approval of this contract will add an addifional piece of equipment to the City's fleet replacement schedule every 10 years (beginning in 2017 or 2018). The net replacement cost after trade-in is estimated to be $175,000. The additional annual operating expenses for the new sweeper, including preventative maintenance and additional fuel costs aze estimated at $4,328.00 per yeaz. If City Council approves the procurement of this additional piece of equipment, an ongoing supplemental budget request for that amount will be submitted beginning in 2008 in order to support the improved level of street sweeping service. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS. As discussed above, the addition of a flush truck to the fleet will allow for more efficient removal of particulate matter and sanding materials from City streets. At the same time, this increase in street cleaning will require the use of additional fuel and water. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of contract AQC M045-007 accepting CMAQ grant funding in the amount of $116,035.00. In addition, staff requests authorization to proceed with a flush truck bid and to expend an estimated $45,000.00 in departmental savings to fund the required grant match and the remaining flush truck cost. ALTERNATIVES .Council could approve the acceptance of CMAQ funds and authorize staff to proceed with a bid process only. Staff could then return to Council at a later date to further discuss the selected flush truck and associated costs. PROPOSED MOTION "I move to approve Resolutions # and # - of 2007 on the consent calendaz of Monday, August 22, 2007. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City.Council FROM: ..Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager. DATE: Apri13, 2009 MEETII`TG DATE: April 13, 2009 RE: City Hall Roof Repai; Contract REQUEST OF COUIv'CIL: Staff recommends a budget supplemental in the amount of $50,000 to complete roof repairs and improvements to the City Hall Roof, improvements that were initiated in 2008. These funds will pay for heat tape, snow fencing/clips and other capital improvements plus contingencies. BACKGROUND: Repairs to the roof performed in 2008 have fixed the problems with the leaks into the second floor manager and attorney offices damage the walls, ceiling, however a problem remains with ice dams and snow loads. The snow and ice buildup on the roof and pose a hazazd to pedestrians using the alley entrance to City Hall. This past January the snow and ice slid and damaged some HVAC equipment causing the IT network to be down for an extended period. While the equipment has been relocated to move it out of harm's way, the buildup of ice and snow is still a danger to people walking on that side of the building. DISCUSSION: Roof Tec Consultants, D&D Roofing and Staff evaluated the roofs this winter to determine additional improvements and prescribe remedies to finish the project. The work. needed will include installing additional heat tape, having electricians install new circuits, and snow fencing and clips to melt and retain snow and ice on the roof to prevent uncontrolled unloading above pedestrian walkways. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This expense is not included in the 2009 budget and is requested to be paid from the General Fund. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the budget of $50,000 to complete repairs to the north side roof of City Hall. ALTERNATIVE: If the roof repair budget is not approved, the snow and ice problem will continued to be managed by the Capital Asset Department, but the inherent problems will remain. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2009". CTI'Y MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO:. Mayor and City Council FROM: Mary Lackner, GIS Manager THRU: Don Taylor, Finance Director DATE OF MEMO: March 2, 2009 v1EETING DATE: April 13, 2009 RE: Appropriations for 2008 Aspen Area Flyover REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting approval for formal appropriations of $35,000 for this project to acquire new aerial photography and related GIS base layer date for the Aspen Area. The budget authority for this project also increases from $131,333 to $135,000 to cover the contract and all miscellaneous expenses related to the flyover. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved the contract for $131,333 on July 28, 2008. This passed 4-0, Skadron was absent. • 2008 Asset Management Plan approved the Flyover Project for $100,000. DISCUSSION: The original Staff memo included discussion of the additional funding sources but did not clearly identify the need for the funding to be appropriated. The formal appropriations of $35,000 for this project come from two funding sources: 1. The first source is ($27,123) is funded by the digital submission fee which the City has been collecting from all building permits that add square footage. This fee was established in the late 1990's to help offset the costs of future aerial flyover projects. 2. The second source and the remaining balance of $7,877 will be funded from a reduction in budget authority in the Community Development and Engineering Departments. Both Departments requested enhancements to the base data and had agreed . to fund the enhancements prior to contract approval. The increase in budget authority of $3,667 covers all the miscellaneous expenses related to the flyover project, including additional hard drives for storage of the new data, postage, and advertising. Page 1 of 2 FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: This request increases the budget authority by $3,667 covers miscellaneous expenses related to the flyover which are above the cost of the contract and formally appropriates $35,000 from existing funding sources to this project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this appropriation and increase of budget authority. ALTERNATIVES: If not approved other revenue sources of $35,000 will need to be identified to cover the project expenses. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution N _ of 2009. CITY MANAGER COMME'_VTS: ATTACIL'~NTS: none Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: RE: Mayor and City Council Ashley Cantrell, Environmental Health Specialist Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Department March 3, 2009 2009 Supplemental Budget Request - Renewable Energy CORE Reimbursement Grant REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Environmental Health is seeking appropriation of $10,000 to allow us to spend the money CORE has awazded us in that amount. DISCUSSION: The Environmental Health department was awazded a Green Key grant from CORE of up to $10,000 to design and purchase a portable renewable energy system to be used for special events in the City. This request is coming to Council now, as opposed to the 2009 budget development period because the grant was awarded on January 20, 2009. This is a reimbursement grant. As Council is awaze, all special events im the City now aze required to meet ZGreen Event standazds as a condition of permit approval. In order to help events meet the standazds, the portable PV system will be available for use by all special events that aze required to meet ZGreen standazds. Other events wishing to use the system will be evaluated on a case by case basis, depending on availability. The system will provide power to select aspects of each event, including the sound system, race timing system and spot lights. In addition to providing power to events, it will also be an educational tool, offering event attendees ahands-on experience with renewable energy. A copy of the grant proposal and printed RFP is available upon request. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The cost for a renewable energy system and other materials necessary for transportation and education is estimated at $10,000 which is fully reimbursable by the CORE grant. EH is requesting the initial $10,000 as a supplemental. Future maintenance costs aze estimated at $200-$400/year. This amount has been factored into the ZGreen program budget, shazed by EH and the Canary Initiative. Staff does not anticipate the system will generate revenue, as we want to encourage event planners to use the system whenever possible and not be dissuaded by cost. Page 1 of 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Energy and carbon savings: The PV system will supply approximately 18 kWh of power from the batteries. This number represents 80 percent of total power, which is the recommended usage to prolong battery life. It is estimated that this amount of power will be enough to run a sound system for 6-8 hours or a timing system for a race. Events that would otherwise draw power from the Aspen Electric grid will displace 10.71 pounds of cazbon during one chazge of the batteries, assuming a cazbon factor of .595 pounds of cazbon dioxide equivalent per 1 kWh. For those events that use the Holy Cross grid, the cazbon factor is 1.795, allowing those events to displace 32.31 pounds of cazbon with one battery chazge. Assuming half of all events use Holy Cross energy and the other half use Aspen Electric, the 40 events that will potentially use this system can save a total of 860.4 pounds of cazbon a yeaz from entering the atmosphere. That is the equivalent of 12 days of output from an average US home. Education: The most important benefit of this project may not be the cazbon savings at the event, but the potential cazbon savings that can come from educating an estimated 40,000 people about the benefits of using renewable energy in their homes or at work. Green events are the single lazgest tool to inspire action in citizens and visitors. For this reason, we want to maximize the educational opportunity at each event by providing educational tools to assist an event in better educating their attendees. Winter and summer events combined, over 40,000 people will be exposed to the solaz structure and it's messaging each yeaz. The PV system will become a regulaz fixture at all possible events in the City of Aspen. We plan to give the structure a name and a personality to make it recognizable and easily approachable. Throughout the yeaz, there aze an estimated 40 events where the solaz structure would be a welcome addition. The summer months will be the busiest time of year, as the solaz array will be present at such events as the Food and Wine Classic, Jazz Aspen June Concert Series, Aspen Rotary Club Ducky Derby, athletic events, running races, and community picnics. In addition to summer events, the solaz house will also be visible at winter events such as Aspen Skiing Company's Winter Concert Series or ACRA's Winterskol Carnival. Other Uses: When not in use at an event, the structure will be stored outside a city building, possibly behind city hall, where it can recharge. The system can be used for other purposes such as emergency lighting, a radio chazger, or a broadcast system and can continue to serve its educational role. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve aone-time supplemental increase of $10,000 for the purchase of a portable renewable energy system. Page 2 of 3 ALTERNATIVES: If Council chooses not to approve this request, the EH department can request that CORE distribute the money in advance of the project. CORE prefers to administer their funding as reimbursement grants. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 3 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Scott Miller, Capital Asset Duector THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: Apri12, 2009 MEETING DATE: April 13, 2009 RE; - 07 City Clerk Fund Supplemental Requests for 2009 SU1ViMARY: Staff recommends a 07 Fund budget supplemental in the amount of $600. BACKGROUND: Due to ongoing design considerations for an emergency exit lighting solution for the exterior stairs, staff is making the following recommendations for 2009 supplemental budgeting for the 07 City Clerk Fund. DISCUSSION: Council Chamber Remodel: 000.07.83095.* The 2009 budget is $10,350 with the dollars comprised by a-carry forwazd request for $ 9750 and additional $600 supplemental requests. These funds should meet the Contractor proposed cost for the light fixtures, wiring and labor necessary to complete the code required emergency lighting for council chamber egress. Total requested supplemental: $600 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the described supplemental funding. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: yFINA.'VCIAL IlVIPLICATIONS: - MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: ASHLEY ERNEMANN, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU: DON TAYLOR, FINANCE DIRECTOR STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 13, 2009 RE: CONTRACT FOR CAPITAL PROJECT PLANNING SOFTWARE Request of Council: Staff is requesting the authorization from Council to purchase and implement Capital Project Planriing Software and. approval from Council for. the Purchase Agreement with Keenology Corporation d/b/a CIPPlanner Corporation. Refer to attachment "C" for agreement. Previous Council Action: Council has not previously reviewed the Capital Project Planning Software. However, it was a recommendation of the audit of Burlingame that .the City have a better mechanism for tracking complex, multi-year capital projects. An independent investigation focusing on management aspects of Burlingame commissioned by Aspen City Council at the request of the Citizen Budget Task Force found that several factors contributed to the, city's miscommunications with the public with regard to overall cost of the project. Several improvements were recommended 6y McMahan and Associates, including adopting a more formalized process for preparing voter information and utilizing an integrated project management software program. The City Manager has worked with staff to examine and implement recommendations stemming from the two investigations. Background: As part of the Cites on-going effort to improve services and reduce operating costs, staff has been examining the possible implementation of a Capital Project Planning Software to manage capital projects. The work product for this professional services contract will be an installed software package that will allow users in various departments to track and manage capital projects and perform analysis. This system will help manage the City's capital projects and ensure the efficient use of public funds. ' Capital projects have been averaging $20 million a year and the City completes a ten year asset management plan every budget process. In the current ten year capital plan, there is over $125 million of capital projects. Capital projects for the City can be large in scale and scope and take multiple years to complete. Currently these projects are being managed with a variety of tools, without consistency across Department or Fund. The City would like to have a single source for managing capital projects that allows for centralized data collection and consistency in the quality of financial control. An institutionalized and systematic process would also allow for data and knowledge retention and transfer beyond a project cycle or a particular individual. The objective of the software is to develop an interface for multiple users in various Departments and Funds to track and manage complex, multi-year capital projects and create a centralized database of project information and financial data. In January 2009, Finance issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to provide fora capital project management software system. The City received proposals from twelve software vendors. Finance reviewed the proposals and selected the three most responsive veridors. A review committee comprised of employees from Finance, IT, Engineering, Housing, Asset Management, Parks and Utilities evaluated the three software packages. The review process included demonstrations from the three vendors and interviews with references. A number of software features were evaluated, including but not limited to, general system configuration, financial system interface capabilities, reporting functions and project management. The evaluation established CIPPlanner as the recommended software provider, as they presented the most comprehensive capital project management software package. CIPPlanner is a member of the APWA National and Local Chapters and based on APWA Management Practices, CIPAce'" complies with over 903'0 of criteria set forth in those practices. Additionally CIPAceTM" is 1003'o in compliance with the Capital Project Monitoring and Maintenance Best Practices defined by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). CIPPlanners products and practices follow those of the two most influential associations for Cities, Counties and Local Government Agencies. CIPPlanner Corporation is the marketing arm for the CIPAce'" product line. DigiCentury, the development arm of CIPPlanner'" Corporation, was founded in 1998 as an IT consultanty with its software being deployed in various organizations such as the Wall Street Journal, Coca Cola, 1J.5. News and World Report and NextStudent. CIPPlanner'" Corporation is headquartered in Santa Clara, California (Silicon Valley) with presence in Sacramento, California, Phoenix, Arizona, Wake Forest, North Carolina and Guangzhou, China (Software Development Center). CIPPIannerTM' Corporation is an Enterprise Application Software company whose products and technologies evolved from development programs originating from DigiCentun/s consulting engagements. The products offered by CIPPlanner'" Corporation are Governmental-off-the-Shelf (GOYS) solutions designed specifically for Capital Program Management (CPM) for the Government Sector. CIPPlanner's involvement with capital budgeting and CPM began in 2001 with the development of a customized solution for the City of Fremorit, California which was then delivered in 2002. This product has now evolved into the flagship product currently known as CIPAce'"'. This comprehensive GOYS Enterprise Software was designed embedding best practices identified from research of more than two hundred Capital Improvement and Maintenance Programs of a variety of local government agencies. CIPPlanner Corpqration will be the sole provider of product. and services for this project. Currently, CIPAceTM' has been deployed in over 20 cities/agencies serving populations as small as 16,500 to cities and counties as large and complex as San Francisco, CA and Pima County, AZ. Discussion: The City, is seeking to implement a Capital Improvement Project management system that enables the City to develop a long range capital improvement plan and to provide management information to project managers through completion of the project. CIPPlanners software system is a web-based enterprise class software application called CIPAce that enables agencies to manage their entire capital program and capital projects from planning and implementation to completion and report writing managed by a single database. The software will support the organization of the information by City defined hierarchal levels. It will have flexible templates to assist users in project cost development. The system for developing the Capital Improvement Plan will include the ability for all users to submit capital project requests and shall collect all data and information required to rank and evaluate projects and to create a Capital Improvement Plan document. The system will allow for systematic evaluation of all potential projects at the same time. It will maintain multi-year cost information for projects that span more than one fiscal year and maintain data on projects that are not approved in the capital budget. The system will have definable work flow capabilities to automate the approval process of the projects included in the plan. The system will interface with the Cit~/s financial system, downloading cost information for the projects.. The system will provide tools, or support third party tools such as "Microsoft Project", for managers to administer their project budgets. The system will provide document management and retention for all documents related to a specific project: The software will serve as a public relations and economic development tool with easy access to information and financial data. Implementation is scheduled to be concluded by the end of June 2009 assuming a Notice to Proceed is received by CIPPlanner'" no later than March 25, 2009 and that there are no unforeseen events that would. adversely impact the schedule provided. The License Agreement and Purchase Agreement have been approved as to form by the City Attorney. The decision that needs to be discussed is which installation option council prefers and how to fund the acquisition of this software. If Council chooses to move forward with the Capital .Project Planning Software, the options available to do so are: 1. Option I: Purchase the Software (recommended) a. Installation: pay with Finance Department Savings and charge out to capital projects b. Annual Fees: pay by charging out to capital projects 2: Option II: Utilize the Software as a Service a. Installation: pay with Firiance Department Savings b. Annual Fees: pay by charging out to capital projects Financial/Budget Impacts: For procurement of equipment and software, staff is recommending appropriating approximately $143,700 for installation and $17,200 for hardware. In addition, $25,000 will be needed annually for maintenance and support. The installation costs will be incurred in 2009. The detail cf costs: Option l: Purchase the Software (recommended) • Five Concurrent Licenses $ 97,100 • Tyler EDEN Integration $ 10,000 • Platform Fee $ 15,000 • Configuration Analysis $ 3,500 • Travel $ 8,000 • Maintenance $ 10,089 • Hardware 17 211 TOTAL FIRST YEAR: $ 160,900 • Maintenance $ 20,178 • Server (includes replacement cost every 5 years) 4 500 ALL OTHER YEARS: $ 24,678 FIVE YEAR COST: $260, 000 Option !!: Utilize the Software as a Service • Tyler EDEN Integration $ 10,000 • Travel $ 8,000 • Annual Fee and Maintenance (Five Concurrent) 56 574 TOTAL FIRST YEAR: $ 74,574 • ALL OTHER YEARS: $ 56,574 FIVE YEAR COST: $300, 000 Travel expenses will be capped and include the costs for two individuals to travel to Aspen for four visits for installation and training. The purchase of a perpetual license is the recommended course of action because of the cost benefit. Environmental Impacts: There are no environmental impacts associated with this software. Recommended Action: Staff is recommending the purchase of the Capital Project Planning Software. Funds needed to install the software would come from Finance and by being billed out to capital projects and the annual maintenance and support would be billed out to capital projects. Alternatives: The alternative would be to continue to manage projects with a variety of tools, without consistency across Department or Fund. Manager's Comments: Attachments: Attachment "A" CIPPlanner Proposal Attachment "B" License Agreement Attachment "C" Purchase Agreement TxE Crrx of Asr~r Back Up Documentation For: First Reading Memos Detail Descriptions for All Other Requests ~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Supplemental Request: Historic Preservation Task Force DATE: April 20, 2009 SUMMARY: Since March 2008, Community Development has been working with a 22 member Historic Preservation Task Force that was created following the approval of Ordinances 30 and 48, Series 2007. Staff has met with City Council on several occasions to provide an update on progress of the Historic Preservation Task Force (HPTF). Council allocated $90,000 to support the work of this citizens' group. To date, just less than $57,000 has been spent on professional facilitation, expert speakers, public outreach, public tours, and logistics for the 20 Task Force meetings, and 90 focus committee meetings that have taken place over the last year. A summary of Task Force expenditures is attached to this memo. Please note that this is the most up-to-date accounting, and reflects bills that have been submitted to Community Development in the last month, but which are not yet entered in the City's Eden accounting system. At this time, three focus committees have concluded their initial presentations, and three are pending. The Task Force is on hiatus for off season and will gather again as a group beginning in June. Staff anticipates that it will take at least 6 weeks for the committees to finish reporting, and for recommendations to be woven together. The group has discussed options for public outreach with their First Draft, which might be released in early August. Council hearings would follow. $43,362 remained in the HPTF budget at the end of 2008. Staff believes that the project can be completed for $10,000 less than the original allocation, therefore we are requesting that $33,362 of the 2008 HPTF budget be rolled-over to the 2009 budget. The funds will be used as follows: 1. $11,000 for money spent to date as the project has extended into 2009. 2. $22,362 for remaining Task Force work, including: • Professional facilitation of the Task Force to ensure the group remains on task and that all voices are heard, Advertising and distribution of the Task Force work to the public, and Meals for the Task Force while they continue their work through the fall. ALTERNATIVES: Staff has outlined a number of alternatives if City Council chooses not to fund the remaining work for the HPTF: 1. City Council could shorten the time frame for the Task Force and ask for the Task Force's recommendations to be delivered sooner. This may not reduce all costs. 2. Due to recent staffing changes in the Community Development Department the staff members who have been dedicated solely to Historic Preservation work, including the Task Force, are splitting their time between the project and current planning. City Council could direct the department to have these staff members work solely on the Task Force. However, this would negatively impact the timeframes for review of current planning cases, zoning reviews, and response times to citizen complaints. 3. The Task Force has requested staff to do additional background research on various historic preservation case studies and "best practices" beyond what was originally anticipated. This additional work takes up a majority of staff- time dedicated to the project. Council could direct the Task Force to utilize the resources they have already received from staff, leaving more time for staff to work on the facilitating the process and assisting the sub-committees with their recommendations. 4. City Council could ask staff to complete the work entirely in-house, eliminating outside experts and the professional facilitator. This would likely lengthen the time frame beyond the current estimate of the fall, and could negatively impact other projects staff is working on, including current planning, complaint responses, and zoning review. 5. City Council could reduce the scope of services and/or schedule for the AACP and move monies from that project to the Historic Preservation Task Force. Aspen Historic Preservation Task Force Budget Summary $90,000 Allocated by City Council Projected Exoenditures throush April 20. Bu ¢et 2009 General support Food 16,000.00 10,330.00 Creation of website and logo 7,100.00 6,150.00 Newspaper ads 8,000.00 5,280.00 Taping and broadcasting by Grassroots 7,000.00 3,940.00 Misc. meeting venue rentals 500.00 350.00 Learnin¢ oaoortunities and exaert input Leslie Lamont- Facilitation 20,000.00 12,970.00 Aspen Institute presentation by 3 national preservation experts 6,650.00 6,650.00 (Venue, food, speaker hotels, fees, and airfare) Preservation ordinance consultant 4,570.00 4,570.00 (Fees, hotel, airfare) Givenlnstitute presentation by National Trust Directors 1750.00 1,750.00 ( Venue, food, speaker hotels, etc.) Economics Committee- case studies (in-house) and consultant 3,000.00 500.00 Misc. historical photos 3,000.00 2,625.00 Bus tour 1,524.00 1,524.00 (Bus, lunch, printed guide) Print final draft recommendations, host open house 2,000.00 0 Aspen Grove Cemetery Consultant-to be transferred to correct acct. -1094.00 1,094.00 TOTAL 80,000.00 57,733.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council COPY: Finance Department FROM: Johannah Richards, Community Development Administrative Manager RE: 2009 Supplemental Requests ~ 1 ~'•`~ DATE: April 17, 2009 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting the following budget items be rolled over to the 2009 budget yeaz: Planning Department: • $6,372 /The Zupancis-Mill Conceptual Plan budget item carried forwazd to the 2009 budget yeaz. The Zupancis-Mill Conceptual Plan budget item rolled-over to the next budget year. A few invoices are still outstanding on the project from 2008. • $13,625 /Aspen Grove Cemetery Preservation Plan budget item carried forward to the 2009 budget yeaz. Work has been ongoing for a yeaz, which includes condition assessments of the wood and stone work, grave marker documentation, and extensive azchival research. Staff is in the process of requesting a portion of the allotted grant money from the SHF. Field work will continue in the spring after the site is clear of snow. Building Department: • $10,000 /Harvard Grant budget item carried forwazd to the 2009 budget yeaz. This money was awarded from Harvazd with the intent that it be spent to develop materials explaining our REMP program and encouraging other jurisdictions to adopt similaz codes. The production of a DVD and brochures is planned for later in the yeaz. Page 1 of I MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: Aspen Grove Cemetery Preservation Plan Supplemental Funding Request DATE: March 13, 2009 SUMMARY: Community Development Staff received a State Historical Fund _ (SHF) grant to survey, document, grid ultimately put together a comprehensive preservation plan for the Aspen Grove Cemetery (similar to what was completed at the Ute Cemetery). The cemetery is owned and maintained by the Aspen Grove Association. The project will be completed in .two phases: the first phase includes -~ documentation, planning, surveying; and the second phase will require Parks Department involvement, volunteers, another grant application to the State and future funding for implementation of the preservation plan created in phase one. Phase one of the project is estimated to cost $71,602. A scope of work and projected budget is attached as Exhibit A. In April 2007, Aspen City Council agreed to pay a 50% cash match for the SHF grant program or $35,801. Work has been ongoing for a year, which includes condition assessments of the wood and stone work, gravemarker documentation, and extensive archival research. Staff is in the process of requesting a portion of the allotted grant money from the SHF. Field work will continue in the spring after the site is clear of snow. Staff requests to roll-over the .Aspen Grove Cemetery supplemental funding of $13,625.32. This is not a "new" funding request. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Council , FROM : Gram Slaton, Wheeler Executive Director THRU: ACM Randy Ready DATE OF MEMO: 3 Mazch 2009 RE: 2008 Carryforwazds Request SUMMARY: Approval is requested for four budgetary. line items from the 2008 operating budget to be carried forward for use in the 2009 operating year. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: None. BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: The Wheeler Opera House requests that four lines be carried forwazd from last yeaz's operating budget in order to better allow Wheeler staff to navigate through the challenges we aze likely. to encounter in 2009. Specifically, these four line items aze: Advertisine Fees -The Wheeler is the City of Aspen's primary entertainment attraction in the downtown core for guests and residents, and in order to better use the Wheeler as a tourism attraction it would be beneficial to carry forwazd $40,226 for general venue and entertainment-awazeness advertising, as well as $122,200 in individual event advertising. Increased strategic advertising during times of recession or other economic challenge is an important part of ensuring Aspen's place as Colorado's premiere resort and vacation destination. Some of the events currently on the Wheeler schedule that would benefit from broader advertising and help bring new visitors from out of the azea include the second Rooftop Comedy Festival in June, the first mountainfilm in aspen festival in August, and stepped-up programming activity for the last two weeks of December. General advertising initiatives include celebration of the Wheeler's 25t° anniversary since the 1984 reopening, and other venue-related advertising that will promote the Wheeler as a cultural adjunct to the sports and outdoors attractions for Aspen. 21" Century Master Plan -The full $260,000 amount left on this line is being requested for consideration for carryforwazd, as an additional amount for use during the early-development phase of the possible expansion of the Wheeler. The architectural design team is aggressively moving forwazd with articulating a program, spatial relationships, etc., that may allow the Wheeler to move forwazd more rapidly than originally foreseen, in which case having additional funds available for use would be extremely advantageous. The present, contract with Fazewell Mills Gatsch, the selected azchitectural design firm for the first stage of development, is presently engaged only through August 2009. Staee Liehtine Improvements -Wheeler staff identified new stage lighting technology during the first half of 2008 that appreciably advanced the Wheeler's and City's initiative to reduce energy consumption; however, the anticipated release date for this new lighting was set back from eazly fall to mid-December which left Wheeler staff without sufficient response. time to execute purchase in 2008. The $31,000 requested for carrying forward is the amount needed for this purchase. Keyless Entry And Security System -Wheeler staff has found that having security cameras installed as part of a comprehensive entry and security system has been an effective solution towards creating and maintaining a safe environment around the Wheeler property 24 hours a day. Recently the Wheeler has worked with both Aspen Police and the FBI in identifying criminal activity, including that related to the New Year's Eve threat, thanks to these new surveillance cameras. Allowing the remaining monies of $17,676 to be carried forwazd will allow the Wheeler Opera House to purchase and install two last cameras and complete remote surveillance over all security points for the historic st-ucture. RECONL'~IENDATION: Wheeler staff and Board recommend approval of these increases. ALTERNATIVES: Should any or all of the carryforwazd amounts not be approved, the Wheeler will be able to continue at its current levels; however, advancing certain of its pro~Ta**+ming, energy, development, and security goals will be limited to existing budgetary dollazs. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John D. Krueger, Director of Transportation THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE: March 5, 2007 RE: 2008 Carry Forward Requests REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Transportation Department is requesting $168,000 in 2009 supplemental budget requests in the form of carry forwazds from the 2008 Transportation Fund budget. DISCUSSION: The following 2008 carry forwards are being requested by the Transportation Department. Supplemental Request # 1: $106,000 Planning Services Entrance to Aspen Alternatives and Short Range Transit Plan This request is to carry forwazd funding previously approved in the 2008 budget to 2009 for services to provide continuing feasibility studies of Entrance to Aspen alternatives ($75,000) including the split shot and reversible lanes and to complete the City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan ($31,000). Supplemental RequesY# 2: $24,000 " Public Process Entrance to Aspen and Short Range Transit Plan Materials This request is to cazry forward funding from the 2008 budget to 2009 for completing the Entrance to Aspen /Short Range Transit Plan public process including renderings and other materials for Apri12 open houses. ,' Supplemental Request # 3: $38,000 Rubey Park Facility Improvements This request is to carry forwazd to 2009 funding previously approved as part of the 2008 budget for continued improvements to the Rubey Pazk transit facility including restroom improvements and curb/gutter repair. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The carry forwazd requests listed above totai $168,000. These funds were approved but unspent in 2008. Carrying these funds forwazd to 2009 will not negatively impact the Transportation Fund. Choosing not to carry these funds forward would require that the Fund pay for these services out of savings. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The completion of the Short-Range Transit Plan could lead to transit improvements that decrease single-occupant vehicle trips therefore reducing air pollution. Improvements to the Rubey Park facility may also increase transit trips. Further study of Entrance to Aspen alternatives could lead to a solution that reduces traffic levels. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that City Council approve the above carry forward requests. ALTERNATIVES: Council could choose to approve only selected requests. Council could choose to deny all of the requests. Without the above carry forwards, the Transportation Fund will need to either spend savings on these projects or stop work on the projects. " MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Barker, Stormwater Manager, Engineering THRU: Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: March 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: Apri114, 2009 RE: Mill Street Pipe Extension Project Supplemental REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the remaining 2008 project budget of $15,632 for the Mill Street Pipe Extension project design. BACKGROUND: Jennie Adair wetlands need consistent flow to maintain the proper operation and appeazance of the wetlands. Currently the water department occasionally sends flow from a well behind Clazk's mazket. The purpose of this project is to design a pipe system that would direct the base flow received from the Durant and Wheeler minewater in the Mill Street stormwater pipe to the wetlands, providing a more consistent flow to the Jennie Adair wetlands. This project is also exploring the possibility of diverting some of the stormwater flow as well, therefore providing water quality treatment to a portion of the Mill Street drainage. DISCUSSION: This project is currently in the design phase. A contract for 30% design should be completed in the spring and then construction design will need to be completed in eazly summer. Expenditures to complete the design will continue in 2009 and therefore the remaining 2008 fund balance will need to be used in 2009. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Funding Budgeted - 2008 Mill Street Pipe Extension Project (160.94.82051.86000) $20,000.00 2008 Total Expenditures 2008 Mill Street Pipe Extension Project (160.94.82051.86000) $ 4,638.37 Carry Forward Request 2009 Mill Street Pipe Extension Project (160.94.82051.86000) $ 15,361.63 Page 1 of 2 RECONIDZENDED ACTION: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the remaining 2008 project budget of $15,632 for the Mill Street Pipe Extension project design. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council April Barker, Stormwater Manager, Engineering Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer March 13, 2009 Apri114, 2009 Rio Grande Park Redesign Project Supplemental REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends to carry forward the remaining 2008 project budget of $34,187 for the Rio Grande Pazk Redesign project. BACKGROUND: Rio Grande Pazk is one of the high priority sites for capital improvements to the Stormwater infrastructure identified in Aspen's Stormwater Program. An initial conceptual design was developed and presented to Council for the Rio Grande Regional Stormwater Quality facility in 2007. Council disapproved of the inundation of the activities and special events field, therefore the purpose ofthis project is to analyze potential alternatives to detaining stonnwater`at the field in Rio Grande Park. Analysis includes feasibility of "EPIC" system for the field, underground detention beneath the field, and diversion of portion of Mill Street drainage to. Jenny Adair. Final deliverable will be a conceptual design of the alternative selected by the City. DISCUSSION: Expenditures to complete the redesign, including consulting services, staff time, public meetings, etc., will continue in 2009 and therefore the remaining ?008 fund balance will need to be used in 2009. FINANCIALlBUDGET IMPACTS: Funding Budgeted 2008 Rio Grande Pazk Redesign Project (160.94.81115.86000) $ 70,000.00 2008 Total Expenditures. 2008 Rio Grande Park Redesign Project (160.94.81115.86000) $ 35,813.03 Carry Forward Request 2008 Rio Grande Park Redesign Project (160.94.81115.86000) $ 34,186.97 Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the remaining 2008 project budget of $34,187 for the Rio Cnande Park Redesign prof ect. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: - MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: , TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR THRU: STEVE BARWICK, CITY MANAGER DON TAYLOR, FINANCE DEPARTMENT JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: FEBRUARY 6, 2009 RE: .2008 BUDGET CARRY FORWARD REQUEST The Recreation Division is requesting to carry forward $138,114 to the 2009 budget for completion of. ongoing projects. In addition staff is requesting another $6,500 in appropriated expenditures as , identified below. 1. Building Controls ($39,000): This $39,000 was budgeted to upgrade building controls to the ARC one the mechanical retro-fitwas completed. As you are aware there have been many problems associated with this project and staff anticipates completion in March of 2009 so that the upgrade to the building controls may be completed to ensure the most efficient operation of the new systems. 2. Supplemental Pool Lighting ($11,720): These funds are a part of the Canary Upgrades to the ARC in that more luminescent lighting will be installed for the competitive pool while keeping energy efficiency in mind. This too is awaiting the completion of the mechanical retro-fits and the introduction of upgrades to the building controls. 3. Aspen Ice Garden Renovations ($8,812): Staff began improvements to locker rooms at the Ice Garden last fall. These funds will be used along with 2009 funds to provide cosmetic upgrades to the locker rooms at the Aspen Ice Garden. Staff has installed more energy efficient water heaters, and would next look to more efficient lighting, upgrades to plumbing, painting, and showers. The Garden is in much need of these repairs. 4. ARC mechanical retro-fit ($78,582): These are the remaining funds needed to pay off the work provided 6y LONG building technologies for the completion of the ARC mechanical retro-fit which should be done in March. Council will also see a regLest for $6,500 to be appropriated to the ARC for the purchase and installation of a new diving board. A private donor has provided this $6,500 to the City so that the current board may be replaced. There is no cost to the general fund and the $6,500 has been received. Council need to appropriate the expenditure under the City Charter. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: March 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: 2009 Bridge Maintenance and Replacement Supplemental SUNIl~fARY: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $123,000.00 for the continued maintenance of the City's three bridges. BACKGROUND: The City's three bridges include: the Mill Street Bridge, No Problem Joe Bridge, and the Power Plant Road Bridge. Currently two of the three bridges are functionally obsolete (No Problem Joe and Power Plant) which means they are structurally safe but too narrow for current traffic volumes. This rating along with the increasing growth in and around Aspen points to the need for replacement or renovations to these structures. At the minimum preventative maintenance needs to occur to keep these bridges usable and safe for the public. Maintenance and Replacement of these 3 City bridges is an important feature in our City's infrastructure. Safety of public is paramount; therefore preventative maintenance and eventually replacement of these bridges is necessary. DISCUSSION: Bridge maintenance associated with this project did not occur during the 2008 calendaz yeaz. Colorado Department of Transportation Off-System bridge inspections of the City's bridges were conducted during 2008. Deficiencies in various aspects of the bridges chazacter were identified in this report. In concurrence with the City asset management plan staff will seek to address infrastructure deficiencies on these three structures. FINANCIAL IlVIPLICATIONS: Funding 2009 Bridge Maintenance (Account # 000.15.83075) $175,000.00 And Replacement Supplemental Request $123 000 00 TOTAL $298,000.00 Expenditures 2009 Bridge Maintenance $200,000.00 Staff Time $ 30.000.00 TOTAL $230,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $123,000.00 for the continued maintenance of the City's three bridges. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering TFiRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: March 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: 2009 TABOR Pedestrian Projects Supplemental SUMMARY: Staff recommends to carry forward the amount of $317,417.00 for the construction of various pedestrian safety projects in locations throughout the City. BACKGROUND: The Pedestriap Capital improvements program is an ongoing safety enhancement plan with the goal to develop and maintain safer pedestrian corridors in Aspen. In 2005 a need for additional pedestrian infrastructure in various locations throughout the City was identified. City Council authorized Tabor funding for several pedestrian projects in 2005, including the Lone Pine pedestrian, and ADA ramp upgrades. These projects would follow the ideals of The City of Aspen Civic Master Plan (CMPAG) was adopted by City Council in December 2006. The Plan states `Aspen's future should be one in which the automobile pays a smaller role in people's everyday lives. Other modes of travel should be made as safe and convenient as possible to facilitate that goal... the level of investment in...more and better bikeways and walkways should increase. " See TABOR Project schedule and budget in table below: Total TABOR Pedestrian Improvement Funding (available 2010) $1,755,000.00 TABOR Projects Hyman Avenue Sidewalk Connection $ 50,000.00 2008 ADA Ramps $ 363,625.38 lone Pine Sidewalk Design Expenditures $ 24,514.02 Main Street Sidewalk Design/Construction $ 317,766.10 Main Street Sidewalk Retainaoe/Proiect Closeout $ 36.865.11 Total TABOR Expenditures (to 2008) $ 792,770,61 Planned/On going TABOR Project Schedule Lone Pine Sidewalk Design/Construction $ 260,000.00 ADA Ramp Replacement $ 702.229.39 Total TABOR Expenditures (2008 to 2010) $ 962,22939 Total TABOR Expenditures $1,755.000.00 DISCUSSION: Installation and replacement of ADA ramps, throughout the City as well as the installation of important pedestrian connections will continue in 2009. The 2008 TABOR Carry-forward has been made possible by the completion of under budget pedestrian improvement project in 2008. Construction of the Lone Pine Road Sidewalk connection, various ADA ramp improvements are all schedule TABOR pedestrian improvement projects for 2009. These projects were identified in the origina12005 TABOR pedestrian project list. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Carry Forward Funding TABOR Lone Pine Sidewalk $ 74,270.00 TABOR ADA Ramps $ 18,084.62 TABOR Main Street Sidewalk $225 062 71 TOTAL $317,417.33 2009 Budgeted TABOR Funding . TABOR Lone Pine Sidewalk $100,000.00 TABOR ADA Ramos $100,000.00 TOTAL $200,000.00 TOTAL Funding $517,421.99 2009 Planned Expenditures TABOR Lone Pine Sidewalk $260,000.00 TABOR ADA Ramps $200,000.00 Staff Administration $ 30,000.00 Contingencv $ 27 000 00 TOTAL $517,000.00 TOTAL 2009Expenditures $498,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the amount of $317,417.00 for the construction of various pedestrian safety projects in locations throughout the City. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., Ciry Engineer Scott Miller, Capital Asset,Dtrector. DATE OF MEMO: March 12, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: 2009 Concrete Replacement Supplemental SUMMARY: Staff recommends to carry foiward the amount of $44,400.00 for the completion, close-out, and retainage of the 2008 Concrete Replacement Project. BACKGROUND: Curb and gutter functions throughout the City of Aspen to convey Stormwater and provide safe pedestrian facilities. The curb and gutter and drain pan has deteriorated in the downtown area and in out lying side streets. Much of this infrastructure is failing and is unsafe. DISCUSSION: Close out of the 2008 Concrete Replacement Project includes completion of punch-list items and release of retainage. Expenditures for this project.will continue in 2009 therefore the remaining 2008 fund balance will need to be used in 2009. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding 2009 Budgeted ROW C&G Corrections (Account # 000.15.82002) $400,000.00 Supplemental Request $44.400.00 TOTAL $444,400.00 Expenditures 2008 Concrete Replacement Retainage $ 9,000.00 2008 Concrete Replacement Punch-List Work $24,000.00 Project Mangement $ 8,000.00 Contineency $ 3 400 00 TOTAL $44,400.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to carry forward the amount of $44,400.00 for the completion, close-out, and retainage of the 2008 Concrete Replacement Project. CITY 1VIANAGER COMMENTS: TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., Ciry Engineer Scott Miller, Capital Asset Directot DATE OF MEMO: Mazch 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: Main Street Streetscape Project Supplemental SiJMMARY: Staff recommends to carry forward the amount of $ 96,890.00 for the completion of a master plan for the Main Street corridor. BACKGROUND: City Council identified pedestrian improvements along Aspen's Main Street as one of the ten Best Yeaz Yet Goals to be complete by the end of 2009. Staff pursued development of the project in an accelerated time frame based on Council direction to construct a one (1) block "test" section of an enhanced pedestrian crossing azea to Main Street as soon as possible. This project attempted to create safer and easier pedestrian crossings of Main Street at the intersections through the use of center planted medians, enhanced pavement materials, street plantings and improved lighting at strategic locations. The Main Street Streetscape project would have a secondary, equally important benefit by enhancing the visual quality of the comdor for both motorists and pedestrians. DISCUSSION: After a public open house and a subsequent City Council work session the project was tabled. City Council directed staff to complete a master planning process for the Main Street corridor so the data, designs, and input already collected cduld be utilized at a later date. Currently this master planning process is on going. Funding available, for this project in 2008 will need to be carry forward to 2009 to complete this process. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding Budgeted 2008 Main Street Streetscape Project (000.15.81197.86000) $158,076.00 Total Expenditures 2008 Main Street Streetscape Project (000.15.81197.86000) $ 61,186.00 Carry Forward Request 2009 Main Street Streetscape Master Planning $ 96,890.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to carry forwazd the amount of $ 96,890.00 for the completion of a master plan for the Main Street corridor. CITI' MANAGER COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM, TO: ~ Mayor and' Council FROM : ~ Adam J. Trzcinski, Project Manager, Engineering. THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer ' . DATE OF MEMO: March 12, 2009 MEETING DATE: RE: City of Aspen Survey Monument Upgrades Supplemental SUMMARY: Staff recommends carrying forward the amount of $50,000.00 for the completion of upgrading the City survey monuments. BACKGROUND: The City survey monuments are an essential resource for surveyors, without which, improvement survey maps and other mapping products would not be possible. The current network of monuments is in need of professional maintenance to assure the appropriate level of accuracy. Furthermore, the network needs to be expanded to better accommodate surveying activity in the outlying azeas of the City, DISCUSSION: Maintenance work will include replacing the sleeve and cap,protecting each monument with new hazdwaze that will prevent sediment, water, and ice from building up around the monument, and resetting the monument if necessary. All new monuments will be placed in locations consistent with surveying needs and practices. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding 2008 Survey Monument Upgrades $50,000.00 Carry Forward Request 2009 Survey Monument Upgrades $50,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends carrying forward the amount of $50,000.00 for the completion of the Survey Monument Upgrades Project. CITY MANAGER COMII~NTS: MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Phil Overeynder, Utilities and Environmental Initiatives Director THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: March 13, 2009 MEETING DATE: March 17, 2009.- RE: Additional Wind Energy Purchases for Aspen Electric Utility REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting that Council consider two different mechanisms to increase the amount of wind energy purchased through the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) through an amendment to the City's 2005 contract. Staff recommends purchasing 5,000,000 kwh of additional wind energy utilizing funds set aside to increase renewable energy production and purchases. Staff further recommends that it separately purchase the "environmental attributes" for any wind energy in months where the total available supply exceeds the City's electric demands as explained in this memo and the attachment. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In March 2005, Aspen entered into an agreement with MEAN to increase wind energy purchases to approximately 28% of the electric utility's source of supply, thereby becoming one of the leading purchases of wind energy in the nation on a percentage basis. Council. has consistently duected staff to acquire the maximum amount of renewable energy available consistent with physical limitations (electric power must be used at the time it is generated and the sum of all the City's power sources must equal the total demand during a given time). Because MEAN advised that increasing the percentage of wind purchases beyond the level of the 2005 contract would violate this principle, staff was dtrected to seek other means to continue to reduce the carbon emissions from the electric sector consistent with the Canary Action Plan. BACKGROUND: In June, 2008 a work session was held including representation from Holy Cross Energy (HCE). The City Council direction at that time was to pursue an additional wind energy purchase to be used in connection with an "energy swap" with HCE. The concept was that Aspen would sell hydroelectric power from the Ruedi facility to HCE, while at the same time increasing wind energy purchases through MEAN by an equivalent amount. HCE customers in the Aspen urban growth boundary would pay the increased cost of the wind energy for the added renewable energy, thereby keeping Aspen electric customers "whole" while significantly reducing Aspen's carbon footprint. HCE had identified specific customers Page 1 of 4 who were willing to pay the increased power cost to reduce carbon emissions by purchasing the "environmental attributes" for the hydro power. DISCUSSION: The HCE "energy swap" concept has become a victim of current economic conditions. While significant progress was made by MEAN to make additional wind power available to Aspen at favorable rates and a draft contract between HCE and Aspen was developed, the potential buyers are not in a position to pay the increased power cost at this point in time. It is possible that other HCE customers within the Aspen area may be able to commit to purchasing additional power at some point in the future. Entities that have expressed interest in this concept for future application are the Aspen Valley Hospital and the Pitkin County Airport. Based on the previous discussions during the work session with City Council and HCE staff, staff requested that MEAN set aside 15,000,000 kwh from new wind projects located in Nebraska and South Dakota. These wind projects began production at the beginning of 2009 and the additional energy.is available at favorable terms relative to developing a new project at another location. Aspen has yet to commit to purchasing any of the additional wind energy that was has been reserved for Aspen. An amendment to the existing wind energy contract with MEAN is necessary to do so. In December 2008, Aspen's electric rates were revised to be effective April 1, 2009. Approximately $400,000 per year from this additional revenue source has been directed towards increasing renewable energy use for the electric utility. Staff. is requesting that City Council consider if it wishes to move forward to purchase some or all of the allotment set aside by MEAN for Aspen's electric utility using a portion of this additional rate revenue. This would differ from the original plan discussed during the June work session both in terms of the amount of wind energy and because there would be no reimbursement of increased cost by a third party located in HCE's service azea. Limitations on Purchasing Additional Wind Energy Discussions between MEAN staff and City Council during the 2005 negotiations on the existing wind energy contract focused on purchasing the maximum practical amount of wind energy, consistent with the requirement to use the energy when it is produced. Because we now have three years of actual experience with the availability of wind versus the timing of the electric system demands, it is possible to give a more accurate picture of the maximum purchase consistent with this limitation. The attached memo form MEAN explains two. different mechanisms to deliver additional wind at purchase levels of 5,000,000 or 10,000,000 kwh. Relationship to Greenhouse Gas Goals. Aspen's electric utility has made substantial progress towards reduction of its greenhouse-gas emissions. The 2004 emissions inventory . identified 39,571 tons of CO2 emissions for the electric utility. The 2007 emissions inventory identified 19,091 tons of CO2. Because Aspen's goal has been to reach a carbon neutral utility, funds were budgeted to further increase renewable energy purchases and production (refer to Financial Impacts discussion below). At the recommended 5,000,000 kwh purchase level, the total electric utility CO2 emissions would be reduced by an additional. L9 %. Page 2 of 4 Purchase of Environmental Attributes. Aspen's past policy when purchasing energy has been to purchase both the energy and "environmental attributes' as a bundled commodity. The MEAN proposal (attached) has two options for dealing with time periods when the available wind energy is higher than Aspen's demand for electric power. Option 1 continues the existing policy of buying the entire bundled (energy and "environmental attributes) commodity, but at a higher cost to Aspen than Option 2. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The 2009 budget for the electric fund included both revenue and expenditures for the HCE "energy swap". An additional $675,000 .was appropriated for increased wind energy purchases from MEAN. An additional $825,000 in offsetting revenue was budgeted from the proposed sale to HCE. Also beginning with the 2009 budget year, $412,000 was budgeted as the annual expense necessary to reduce the remaining greenhouse gas emissions of the electric utility to zero. Because the HCE energy swap will not be completed, neither the revenue nor the expense from that contract will be realized. If Council accepts staff recommendation to amend the wind energy contract with MEAN to purchase an additional 5,000,000 kwh of wind energy annually, it would utilize roughly $100,000 of the $412,000 budgeted to green the electric resource mix. ENVIIiONMENTAL IMPACTS: If Council accepts the staff recommendation for 5,000,000 kwh of additional wind energy, existing CO2 emissions from other MEAN power sources will be reduced. Using 2007 emission factors for MEAN's power sources, the estimated reduction in emissions would be 3558, tons CO2 per year. By comparison, the estimated emission reduction for the proposed Castle Creek hydroelectric plant (using higher 2004 emission factors) was estimated as 5.167 tons CO2 per year. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that we pursue option 2 as detailed in the attachment from MEAN and request that staff be directed to return with a detailed contarct to purchase an additiona15,000,000 kwh of wind energy per year. ALTERNATIVES: Two different levels of wind energy purchases are available and are described in the attachment. If the higher (10,000,000. kwh) purchase, level were adopted, it would require a higher percentage of the funds set aside for renewable energy development. If this option were chosen, it is possible that plans for some of the locally developed renewable energy (geothermal, photovoltaic, micro-hydro, hydrogen generation, etc.) would be precluded due to budget limitations. Also increasing to the higher level would mean that approximately 43% (versus 35% for the recommended purchase) of the total energy requirements would. consist of wind energy. This level of commitment to a single energy source raises concerns - about whether the "energy portfolio" contains the right mix of energy sources to min;mi~e risk if future problems are encountered in a given energy sector. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 3 of 4 ATTACI~IENTS: February 19,' 2009 Additional Wind Energy Purchase Proposal from MEAN Page 4 of 4 ~/It ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council l(: FROM: Stephen Kanipe, Chief Building Official °. THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director I j VA+A„ DATE OF MEMO: April 17, 2009 ~~~///VVVVVV1~' I MEETING DATE: Apri127, 2009 RE: First Reading of Ordinance # ~ ~ ,Series of 2009 Building & Energy Code Amendments: Title 8, Aspen Municipal Code. • Adding Chapter 8.46 - 2009 International Energy Conservation Code • Amending Chapter 8.16.020 (v) "Energy Efficiency" • Amending Chapter 8.20.020 (fj "Energy" • Deleting Chapter 8.54 "Efficient Building Code" REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests action from Council regarding an Ordinance to adopt the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code with amendments for commercial and residential renewable energy mitigation programs and amending or deleting related sections of the "Buildings and Building Regulation" title of the municipal code. Second reading and the public hearing is scheduled for May ll~h. SUMMARY: By adopting this Ordinance, the City of Aspen would be the first jurisdiction in the state to adopt the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), allowing private sector applicants to obtain federal funds intended to improve energy efficiency. Owners of commercial buildings can apply for these funds, and considering the average age and condition of such buildings in the City of Aspen, the long-term benefits could be significant. The Colorado Governor's Energy Office (GEO) is expecting about $33 million to flow from the federal government through the state, to cities and counties. As President of the Colorado Chapter of the International Code Council I met in February with Tom Plant, Director of GEO, to help the state qualify for the federal funding. The City of Aspen's building code has included exceptionally high energy efficiency standards since 1995, and the building department is now willing to adopt the 2009 IECC because this latest version now requires the same energy efficiency standards the City has followed for many years. The federal funds will be made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (HR 1). BACKGROUND: On July 22, 2008 Council met in a work session to update the progress on developing the Commercial Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP). At the time, I suggested blending the elements of the existing residential Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code and the Efficient Building Code. However, this task quickly became very complex. We soon recognized that different requirements would need to be identified for multiple types of commercial uses such as realtors, doctors, hotels, restaurants and bars. This approach is time-consuming for staff, and at the same time, it appears that such regulation may not be needed to achieve the goals of the community. Local architects, interior designers, contractors, developers and owners in the area have become aware of the benefits of using affordable "green" materials such asformaldehyde-free cabinetry and insulation. This awareness grew due to the mandatory requirements of the residential Efficient Building Program, in effect for more than seven years. After almost a year of in-house and peer review, the commercial version of REMP is ready for adoption. It essentially minors the existing residential REMP code, which has been in place since 2000. The overall concept is that when energy is used outside a commercial structure, such as snowmelt, pools and spas, the owner/developer must either install on-site renewable energy systems or exercise the REMP payment option. The commercial REMP code was introduced to a group of architects and developers before last summer's work session and was favorably received. An important change in both the commercial and residential REMP is increasing credits for on- site photovoltaic (PV) systems. The time is right for this as federal, state and local rebates and tax credits reduce the cost of PV systems about 40%. The developers at our July meeting said that strictly as a business decision, an on-site PV system would be seriously considered for compliance with a commercial REMP code. The adoption of the 2009 IECC will allow the private sector in the City of Aspen to apply for federal funds through the Governor's Energy Office in order to help meet the new requirements of the Residential and Commercial REMP code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Ordinance # / / 2009 on first reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move the adoption of Ordinance No. /~ , Series of 2009, upon first reading." 2 ORDINANCE NO. (SERIES 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW CHAPTER 8.46 TO ADOPT THE 2009 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE, AMENDING 8.16.020 (v) "Energy Efficiency", AMENDING 8.20.020 (f) "Energy" AND DELETING 8.54 "Ef£cient Building Code". WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is nationally recognized as a leader in developing, adopting and administrating progressive energy codes; and WHEREAS, in 1995 the City of Aspen was the first jurisdiction in the country to regulate exterior energy use; and WHEREAS, in 2000 the City of Aspen was the first jurisdiction in the country to adopt a mandatory Renewable Energy Mitigation Program; and WHEREAS, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act requires the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code be adopted to qualify for monies designated for energy rebates; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of and visitors to our community to continue and maintain a leadership role in energy code adoption and administration. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Title 8 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Chapter 8.46, which chapter shall read as follows: Chapter 8.46 International Energy Conservation Code Sec. 8.46.010. Adoption of the 2009 Edition of the International Energy Conservation Code. Pursuant to the powers and authority conferced by the laws of the State and the Charter of the City, there is hereby adopted and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth those regulations contained in the International Energy Conservation Code, 2009 Edition, as published by the International Code Council except as otherwise provided by amendment or deletion as contained in Section 8.46.020 of this Chapter. At least one (1) copy of the International Energy Conservation Code shall be available for inspection during regular business hours in the City Clerk's Office, second floor of City Hall. Sec. 8.46.020. Amendments. The International Energy Conservation Code, 2009 Edition, the addition of Appendix A "Residential Renewable Energy Mitigation Program" and Appendix B "Commercial Renewable Energy 1 Mitigation Program" as adopted by the City at Section 8.46.010, is hereby amended to provide and read as follows: (a) Section 101.1 Insert: "City of Aspen" for [NAME OF JURISDICTION]. (b) Section 107.2 "Schedule of permit fees" is hereby amended and to read as follows: "A permit shall not be valid until the fees prescribed by Section 2.12.100 of this Code are paid in full." (c) Section 109 "Means of appeal" is deleted in its entirety and shall read as follows: "Section 109.1 Appeals shall be in accordance with Chapter 8.08 of this Code." (d) Add Section 110 "Liability" to read as follows: "The Building Official or his or her authorized representative charged with the enforcement of this code, acting in good faith and without malice in the discharge of his or her duties, shall not thereby render himself or herself personally liable for any damage that may accrue to persons or property as a result of any act or omission in the discharge of his or her duties. "This Code shall not be construed to relieve or lessen the responsibility of any person owning, operating or controlling any building or structure for any damage to persons or property caused by defects on or in such premises, nor shall the code enforcement agency, any employee thereof or City be held as assuming any such responsibility or liability by reason of the adoption of this code or by the exercise of inspections authorized and carried out hereunder or by the issuance of any permits or certificates issued pursuant to this code." (e) Section 301 "Climate zones" is deleted in its entirety and shall read as follows: "The City of Aspen, Colorado and Pitkin County, Colorado shall use Climate Zone 7 in determining the applicable requirements from Chapters 4 and 5". (f) Section 402.4.2 "Air sealing and insulation" is hereby amended and to read as follows: "Building envelope air tightness and insulation installation shall be demonstrated to comply with the testing option section 402.4.2.1: 402.4.2.1. Testing option. Building envelope air tightness and insulation installation shall be considered acceptable when tested air leakage is less than 0.35 air changes per hour (ACH) when tested with a blower door at a pressure of 33.5 psf (50 Pa). The remainder of the section remains unchanged 402.4.2.2 is deleted in its entirety. Add "Appendix A" to read as follows: "Residential Renewable Energy Mitigation Program" SECTION 101 SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATION Section 101.1 Scope. Residential snowmelt, outside pool, or outside spa systems and equipment may be installed only if the supplemental energy meets the requirements of the Residential Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (RREMP) Appendix A. This applies to all installations for which an application for a permit or renewal of an existing permit is filed or is by law required to be Fled with or without an associated Building Permit that include systems described in section 101.1. Section 101.2 Residential Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (RREMP) Option -Exterior energy use for residential snowmelt systems, outdoor spas, and outdoor pools are calculated as directed by Section 201. Section 101.3 On-site Renewable Credits Option -Renewable credit options are calculated as directed by Section 301. Section 102 Payment option. The RREMP payment option is the difference in energy use calculated in section 202 and on-site renewable credits calculated in section 302 and shall be paid at the time of issuance of the building permit. The payment, if any, is based on the amount of energy required, expressed as dollars per square foot, to operate the exterior energy use systems. No payment shall be made to an applicant that exceeds the energy use with on-site renewable credits. All monies collected pursuant to this section shall be recorded in a separate fund by the City Finance Director and shall be spent in accordance with a joint resolution by the Aspen City Council and Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. Section 103 Credits for on-site renewable energy. This RREMP payment option is voluntary. Applicants interested in exterior energy use systems can alternatively choose to produce on-site renewable energy (Section 301) with solar photovoltaics and/or solar hot water. Also the energy efficient technology of ground source heat pumps is permitted for supplemental on-site energy. Section 104 Pre-existing systems. Pre-existing snowmelt, pools or spas which are being overhauled or renovated qualify for exterior energy credit. This credit can only be applied towards an installation of exterior energy on the same parcel. The calculation of the credit shall be based on section 301. SECTION 105 -RESIDENTIAL REPAIRS. Repairs to building components, systems, or equipment which do not increase their pre-existing energy consumption need not comply with RREMP. All replacement mechanical equipment shall be Energy Star© rated. Section 201 Exterior Energy Use Calculations Section 201.1 Snow melt energy consumption shall be calculated as a RREMP payment option at $34.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Section 201.2 Outdoor pool energy use shall be calculated as a RREMP payment option at $136.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Section 201.3 Spa energy use shall be calculated as a RREMP payment option at $176.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Package spas not more than 64 square feet are exempt. Section 202 The total RREMP payment option is the total sum of exterior energy use of sections 201.1, 201.2 and 201.3. Section 301 ON-SITE RENEWABLE CREDITS Section 301.1 Photovoltaic Systems - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $6,241.20 per 1 Kilowatt of the system design. Solar electric (photovoltaic) systems tied to the electric grid, are eligible for on-site renewable credit. Systems must be sited, oriented and installed for solar electric panels to supply at least 90% of rated capacity of the installed KW. System designer/installer must be certified by COSEIA (Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association). Section 301.2 Solar Hot Water - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $224.65 per 1 square foot of the system design. Section 301.3 Ground Source Heat Pump - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $6.84 per 100,000 BTU per year of the system design. In order to use a GSHP for on-site renewable credit the GSHP system must supply at least 20% of the peak load for heating the house and all the exterior energy uses. Section 302 The total RREMP on-site renewable credit is the total sum of sections 301.1, 301.2 and 301.3. PUBLIC DOMAIN SOFTWARE Section 401 A free calculation program known as RREMP 2009 shall be made available to the public. EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR RES[DENTIAL RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM 4 ON-SITE RENEWABLE CREDITS 96 square feet of solar hot water panels*$224.65 per square foot = $21,566.24 RREMP payment option will be $8,323.87 OR 4.8 KW photovoltaic system *$6,241.20 per kilowatt = $29,957.76 will be Add "Appendix B" to read as follows: "Commercial Renewable Energy Mitigation Program" SECTION 101 SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATION Section 101.1 Scope. Commercial snowmelt, outside pool, or outside spa systems and equipment may be instal-ed only if the supplemental energy meets the requirements of the Commercial Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (CREMP) Appendix B. This applies to all installations for which an application for a permit or renewal of an existing permit is filed or is by law required to be filed with or without an associated Building Permit that include systems described in section 101.1. Section 101.2 Commercial Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (CREMP) Option -Exterior energy use for residential snowmelt systems, outdoor spas, and outdoor pools are calculated as directed by Section 201. Section 101.3 On-site Renewable Credits Option -Renewable credit options are calculated as directed by Section 301. Section 102 Payment option. The CREMP payment option is the difference in energy use calculated in section 202 and on-site renewable credits calculated in section 302 and shall be paid at the time of issuance of the building permit. The payment, if any, is based on the amount of energy required, expressed as dollars per square Foot, to operate the exterior energy use systems. No payment shall be made to an applicant that exceeds the energy use with on-site renewable credits. All monies collected pursuant to this section shall be recorded in a separate fund by the City Finance Director and shall be spent in accordance with a joint resolution by the Aspen City Council and Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. Section 103 Credits for on-site renewable energy. This CREMP payment option is voluntary. Applicants interested in exterior energy use systems can alternatively choose to produace on-site renewable energy (Section 301) with solar photovoltaics and/or solar hot water. Also the energy efficient technology of ground source heat pumps is permitted for supplemental on-site energy. Section 104 Pre-existing systems. Pre-existing snowmelt, pools or spas which are being overhauled or renovated qualify for exterior energy credit. This credit can only be applied towards an installation of exterior energy on the same parcel. The calculation of the credit shall be based on section 301. SECTION 105 -Commercial REPAIRS. Repairs to building components, systems, or equipment which do not increase their pre-existing energy consumption need not comply with CREMP. Section 201 Exterior Energy Use Calculations Section 201.1 Snow melt energy consumption shall be calculated as a CREMP payment option at $60.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Section 201.2 Outdoor pool energy use shall be calculated as a CREMP payment option at $170.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Section 201.3 Spa energy use shall be calculated as a CREMP payment option at $176.00 per square foot divided the boiler efficiency (AFUE). Package spas not more than 64 square feet are exempt. Section 202 The total CREMP payment option is the total sum of exterior energy use of sections 201.1, 201.2 and 201.3. Section 301 ON-SITE RENEWABLE CREDITS Section 301.1 Photovoltaic Systems - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $6,241.20 per 1 Kilowatt of the system design. Solar electric (photovoltaic) systems tied to the electric grid, are eligible for on-site renewable credit. Systems must be sited, oriented and installed for solar electric panels to supply at least 90% of rated capacity of the installed KW. System designer/installer must be certified by COSEIA (Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association). Section 301.2 Solar Hot Water - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $224.65 per 1 square foot of the system design. Section 301.3 Ground Source Heat Pump - On-site renewable credit shall be calculated as $6.84 per 100,000 BTU per year of the system design. In order to use a GSHP for on-site renewable credit the GSHP system must supply at least 20% of the peak load for heating the building and all the exterior energy uses. Section 302 The total CREMP on-site renewable credit is the total sum of sections 301.1, 301.2 and 301.3. PUBLIC DOMAIN SOFTWARE Section 401 A free calculation program known as CREMP 2009 shall be made available to the public. EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR RESIDENTIAL RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM Snowmelt area 1200 sq. ft. $60.00* 1,200/.92 (efficiency rating of boiler) _ $78,260.87 Pool area 700 sq. ft, $170.00*700/.92(efficiency rating of boiler= $119000.00 Spa area 80 sq. ft. $176.00*80/.92(efficiency rating of boiler=$15,304.35 RREMP payment option for exterior energy use will be $222,913.04 ON-SITE RENEWABLE CREDITS 448 square feet of solar hot water panels*$224.65 per square foot = $100,642.44 20 KW photovoltaic system *$6,241.20 per kilowatt = $124,824.00 RREMP a ment o tion will be $0 Section 2. Section 8.16.020 (v) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado is amended to read as follows: (v) Delete Chapter 11 in its entirety and replace as follows: 7 Chapter 11 Energy Efficiency -The provision of the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended as Section 8.46 shall apply to all matters governing the design and construction of buildings for energy efficiency. Section 3. Section 8.20.020 (f) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado is amended to read as follows: (f) Section 101.4.7 "Energy" is hereby amended and to read as follows: Section 101.4.7 The provisions of the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended as Section 8.46 shall apply to all matters governing the design and construction of buildings for energy efficiency. Section 4. Section 8.54 "Efficient Building Code" is deleted in its entirety. Section 5. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days following passage and publication. Section 6. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 11~' of May, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2008. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John P. Worcester, City Attorney FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: Aspen Valley Hospital -Master Facilities Plan (401 Castle Creek Road) - Conceptual Planned Unit Development -Resolution No. 3, Series 2009 - Public Hearing (continued from April 13, 2009) MEETING DATE: Apri127, 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: Aspen Valley Hospital, David Ressler, CEO. REPRESENTATIVE: Leslie Lamont, Lamont Planning Services. LOCATION: Parcel C, Aspen Valley Hospital District Subdivision, commonly known as 401 Castle Creek Road. CURRENT ZONING & USE Located in the Public (PUB) zone district. Lot C contains 19.1 acres or approximately 832,085 sq. ft. of lot area. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to develop a master plan for the redevelopment and expansion of the hospital campus. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends conceptual approval of a Planned Unit Development with conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has prepared a draft Resolution which would grant Conceptual approval. Staff recommends an overview of this resolution and then continuation to the May 11tH meeting. The Applicant would also like to provide updates on three items from the last hearing: on-site child care, detox facilities, and senior care facilities. Page 1 of 6 Photo of the hospital's main entry. REVIEW SCHEDULE: January 12, 2009: January 26, 2009: Februazy 9, 2009: April 13, 2009 April 27, 2009: May 11, 2009 Project Overview: Operational Needs, Program, Trends, Phasing, Architecture & Design Employee Housing, Site Improvements (grading, drainage, trail location), Noise Analysis, Housekeeping items Transportation (parking generation, trail easement, site, roads, bikes, trails, pazking gazage), Miscellaneous Items, Conditions of approval. On-site affordable housing, Expansion of Whitcomb Terrace. Discussion on transportation. Overview of draft resolution. Update from AVH on childcare, detox and senior care. Final review of resolution. UPDATE ITEMS' The Applicant will provide an update on three items on Monday night - Detox facilities, on-site childcaze, and senior services. Following, is a suammryof each update: Detoxification Unit AVH is working as part of a community task force to address the detoxification services needs in the community and region (as a regional approach enables us to capitalize upon the resources of multiple communities and avoid unnecessazy duplication). The task force members, to date, include Dave Ressler (AVH CEO), Bill Linn (APD), Don Bird (PCSO -Jail administrator), Nan Sundeen (PitCo HHS), Brad Osborn and Dave Crutchfield (Right Door), and another member to be identified to represent Aspen Counseling. The task force is presently pursuing a concept that has been advanced by Colorado West, the regional behavioral health provider, through a series of community meetings it has held with the various municipalities and agencies in the Roazing Fork Valley and I-70 corridor (from Rifle to Eagle). That concept is to develop a regional modified medical detoxification program, along with a mental health crisis stabilization unit, at the current centralized location of the detoxification center in Glenwood Springs. As opposed to the current program, which only provides "social detoxification" without medical monitoring, the new concept would provide a higher level of service, keep patients for a longer period of time, be more focused on rehabilitation to "break the cycle," and have an accompanying mental health stabilization unit with a broader scope of capabilities to treat patients in crisis. These services, combined with the case management and transportation capabilities of Right Door and its peer programs in other communities, would be vastly superior to social Page 2 of 6 detoxification services that could be provided in Aspen. This is particularly the case due to low local volumes of difficult patients and the high costs of operating a 24/7 operation. However, if the regional approach falls through, the task force may need to reconsider a less comprehensive local service, or maintain the status quo. Employee Child Care A child caze service for hospital employees has been considered in the past, but is not currently a part of the program for the master facilities plan. It is a programmatic question that is dictated by need, operational capacity, licensure and cost-effectiveness. At this time, AVH has not identified a pressing need for child caze services. Hospital employees did not indicate a substantial need for child care services during master facilities plan reviews, employee meetings or in response to employee surveys. Nor have we had difficulty recruiting or retaining employees due to a lack of on-site child care. A specific human resources survey of hospital managers in recent years failed to identify any need when asked directly about child care services. Despite the lack of interest, it is possible that there would be a few employees that would avail themselves to the services if they were properly licensed, cost-competitive and easily accessible on hospital property. Based on communications with employees, interest has not been established due to the fact that the majority of employees work non-traditional shifts that allow young parents to work at times and on days when the other spouse is available to assist with child care. Also, the majority of AVH employees live down valley, in which case they may not want to have small children commuting with them to Aspen, or they prefer to have their children go to day care with the same kids they will play with in their neighborhood and ultimately go to school with. For a variety of reasons, child caze has not surfaced as a priority for AVH at this time. If this should become a larger area of need in the future, AVH would be willing to revisit the issue of anon-site or adjacent location for child care. Continuing Care Retirement Community ICCRC) Conceit Presently, the Aspen community strives to meet the diverse needs of seniors in a vaziety of ways. Included among these are an affordable housing complex for independent seniors (Aspen Country Inn), Pitkin County Senior Center (providing meals, activities, and support for community seniors), and a 15-unit assisted living facility for any individual with qualifying needs (Whitcomb Terrace). The hospital has proposed a conceptual site plan accommodation of an expansion to Whitcomb Terrace with 10 additional assisted living units. The community senior center is co-located with the assisted living center, creating a small nexus of senior services at a central location. However, the identified services represent only fragmented parts of a larger system that is necessary to meet the existing and anticipated needs of Aspen's growing senior population. Many communities, like Aspen, aze taking proactive steps to plan for the needs of the aging population (with specific needs and lifestyle preferences) that may not be accommodated within existing housing and community services. Specifically, seniors desire a full spectrum of housing, dining, and lifestyle-oriented services. These services should be easily accessible and Page 3 of 6 available and should not require relocation. Ideally, they aze offered in the framework of a planned community with a continuum of services addressing evolving needs. This concept is referred to as a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). Throughout the U.S., this is a very popular option for senior living and health care. A CCRC is usually a non- profit organization that provides a full housing spectrum of independent living units, assisted living units, and skilled nursing/dementia care. There aze typically common facilities for recreation and other services such as housekeeping, meals and support for activities of daily living. An entry fee is typically charged, depending on the size/type of the independent living unit that serves as the first step in the continuum. This fee may be largely refundable. In addition, residents aze charged a monthly fee to cover various operating costs. As residents require advanced support such as assisted living or nursing care, they are moved to those facilities on the same campus as the independent living unit. The entry fee covers the additional cost of the increased assistance. In essence, once the individual enters the CCRC, future care is assured. In order to determine if a CCRC makes sense in Aspen, an ad hoc group (the CCRC task force) reseazched the concept. The members of the task force include representatives from the Pitkin County Senior Center, Pitkin County Senior Council, Pitkin County Health and Human Services Department, Pitkin County BOCC, Aspen Valley Hospital, Aspen Valley Medical Foundation, Aspen City Council (represented by the original and succeeding Mayor), a developer, and interested community residents. The CCRC task force member organizations initially funded a survey of the community (Pitkin Senior Council Survey in 2006) by Venturoni and the Highland Group from Boulder. A sampling of local residents and second homeowners 45 yeazs and older were surveyed. 642 responses were received and the results indicated a high level of interest in retirement housing. Based on the interest shown in the survey, it was decided that the task force should continue with the analysis by contracting with New Life Management and Development Company, a principal in the industry with projects throughout the U.S., to determine the potential size of an Aspen CCRC that could be supported by the local demand. Their study consisted of an additional survey of those aged 62 and older. The resulting 230 responses were considered an extremely high rate of response. In addition, six focus groups were held with 66 participants. Based on their research, New Life concluded that a CCRC with 70 independent living units, 20 assisted living units and 20 skilled nursing units could be supported by local demand. As of now, the task force has determined that the next necessary step is to identify and control an attractive and suitable site for a CCRC that would afford residents access to important lifestyle amenities such as restaurants, shopping, recreation, entertainment, and healthcare providers. A minimum of five acres is required to establish aself-contained campus, but 15-20 acres would be ideal for independent cottages and open space. Survey responses indicate a strong preference for an Aspen azea location as opposed to down valley, due to the aforementioned access to local amenities. There are a couple such sites currently under consideration. However, land is obviously scarce, expensive, and an important first hurdle to be overcome. Page 4 of 6 PROJECT SUMMARY (PROVIDED IN EACH MEMO): The Applicant, Aspen Valley Hospital District, LLC has requested approval to redevelop and expand the existing hospital campus which was annexed into the city in 2003. The focus of the proposal is on Parcel C of the campus, where the hospital, senior center/assisted living (Whitcomb Terrace), ambulance barn, heli-pad and the hospital CEO's residence is located. Parcel A of the campus includes the Schultz building and Mountain Oaks employee housing. Pazcel C contains approximately 19.1 acres or 832,085 square feet. A site map is provided below in Figure 1. The Applicant would like to redevelop the parcel taking into account a twenty year program life cycle with an anticipated 2016 build-out timeline. The following tables compaze existing and proposed development for the site and the buildings on the campus. Table 1. Existine and Pronnsed ~nnrlitinnc Existin Conditions Pro osed Conditions Parcel Area 832,085 s . ft. 832,085 sq. ft. Building Footprint (residence, hospital, bus barn, & hase I) 90,849 sq. ft. 171,164 sq. ft. O en Space 550,536 sq, ft. 471,067 s . ft. Surface parking 175 110* Notes: * The proposed surface azea does not include parking structure spaces, with parking arage s aces the total equals 339 s aces. Table 2: Existine and Proposed Gross Square Feet of T~evelnnmenr Existin Facili Pro osed Total at Build-Out Below Grade 5,000 24,558 29,558 Above Grade 70,700 96,121 166,821 Med. Office 0 17,716 17,716 Sub-Total 75,700 138,395 214,095 Parking Gazage 0 76,000 76,000 Total 75,700 214,395 290,095 Figure 1: Subject Site / r`'~ ~'°a(~ I w ~ ~~ ~ ij°i Jn~ \ C~1 ~ ~ ~, ' `vl ~'~ ~, ~ \~~ '\~ `~ i ~j ,.,~,II y ~ \\ (~ ~ ~ _~h~ ..I ~ ~ ~.~, 1 ~~ ~'>~ ~. "o Vin, ``~'Lh> ~'=_ Page 5 of 6 RECOMMENDATION: Staff supports the AVH Facilities Master Plan and is recommending approval. Staff has drafred a resolution that provides Conceptual PUD approval. Given the possible lengthy agenda, staff will provide a brief overview of the resolution and ask City Council to continue the heazing until May l ltn. The Applicant would also like to update City Council on three issues that were raised at the previous meetings. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to continue the hearing on the AVH Master Facilities plan to May 11, 2009." ALTERNATE MOTION: "I move to grant conceptual approval of the Aspen Valley Hospital Facilities Master Plan and approve Resolution No. 3, Series of 2009." CURRENT ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution No 3, Series 2009. EXHBIT A -PUD Review Criteria (provided 1/12/09, 1/26/09, 2/9/09, 4/27/09) PREVIOUS ATTACHMENTS: ExxtstT B -Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008 (provided 1/12/09) ExxtatT C -Planning and Zoning Commission minutes: July 151, July 15~', August Stn and August 19, 2008 (provided 1/12/09) ExxtstT D -Map of hospital district boundazies (provided 1 /12/09) EXHIBIT E -Application dated January 2008 (provided 1/12/09) ExxtatT F - APCHA Referral dated July 3, 2008 (provided 1/26/09) ExatatT G -Engineering Referral dated May 17, 2008 (provided 1/26/09) EXHIBIT H -Parks Department Referral (provided 1/26/09) EXHIBIT I -Draft snow storage/drainage design changes (provided 1 /26/09) EXHIBIT J - Pitkin County referral comments dated May 6, 2008 (provided 2/9/09) EXHIBIT K -Transportation Department referral (provided 2/9/09) ExxtstT L -Public comment from Karen Ryman dated July 2, 2008 (provided 2/9/09) EXHIBIT M -Environmental Initiatives Team referral dated March 30, 2009 (provided 4/13/09) Page 6 of 6 RESOLUTION N0.3 (SERIES OF 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN, LOCATED ON PARCEL C, ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT SUBDISVION, COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 401 CASTLE CREEK ROAD, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. ParcellD: 2735-121-29-809 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Aspen Valley Hospital District (Applicant), represented by Leslie Lamont of Lamont Planning Services, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of a Conceptual Development Plan for a Plazmed Unit Development (PUD) for the Aspen Valley Hospital District Facilities Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, the application for the Aspen Valley Hospital District, proposed on pazcel C of the Aspen Valley Hospital Subdivision, includes a redeveloped and expanded multi-story hospital building and parking gazage as more fully described in Exhibit A of this resolution; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Fire Protection District, Pitkin County Community Development Department, Environmental Initiatives Team, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority, and the Transportation Department as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed Conceptual PUD and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual PUD approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public heazing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, Conceptual PUD review by the Planning and Zoning Commission requires a public heazing and this application was reviewed at multiple public hearings where the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were heazd; and, WHEREAS, during a regulaz meeting on July 1, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public heazing to consider the project and continued the public heazing to July 15, 2008 for further discussion. At the July 15, 2008 public heazing, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and continued the hearing until August 5, 2008 for further discussion. At the August 5, 2008 public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and continued the project to August 19, 2008 for further discussion. At the August 19, 2008 public heazing, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed City Council Resolution No. 3, Series 2009. Page 1 of 5 public hearing to consider the project and recommended City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development application by a six to zero (6-0) vote, with the findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Aspen Valley Hospital Facilities Master Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Council finds that the development application meets the review standards for a Conceptual PUD approval as long as certain conditions are implemented. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for Aspen Valley Hospital Master Facilities Plan, subject to the conditions listed herein. Section 1: Master Facility Plan The Aspen Valley Hospital Facilities Master Plan ...Exhibit A. Section 2: Revisions and Considerations The Master Facilities Plans Conceptual Approval is granted with the following revisions and requests for further analysis: A. Overall Building Size, Uses, Architecture, and Site Design. The proposed building size, massing and scale aze appropriate for the site and the proposed uses. The parking garage aesthetics should be evaluated and treated to minimize visual impact.'The proposed materials and azchitecture of the building are appropriate for the site. The site plan for the proposed expansion of Whitcomb Terrace and on-site affordable housing shall be reconsidered to enable a less auto-centric living environment. See Exhibit A -Site plan and renderings. B. Green Technologies. The Applicant shall continue to collaborate with the City of Aspen to explore ways to incorporate environmental "green" technologies into the project. The energy conservation plan for AVH shall include program(s) to encourage transit usage by employees and customers. C. Employee Generation & Mitigation. The consideration of volume, support services, decompression and increased efficiency as outlined in the Conceptual Application dated January 2008 is appropriate in determining Employee Generation for the Hospital. On-Site medical office space employee generation should be evaluated by using the Mixed-Use Zone District standards for offices. The APCHA board recommends that credits be allowed to be used for the employee mitigation requirement. A credit shall be applied recognizing existing employees housed by AVH through efforts prior to the Master Facilities Plan. A detailed inventory of the total number of employees expected to be generated by each phase and applicable credits is attached as City Council Resolution No. 3, Series 2009. Page 2 of 5 Exhibit B. The credit is based on actual FTEs housed in 2009. The credit may be used in future phases as determined by AVH. Applications for each phase shall include an updated actual employee generation from the previous phase of development. Discrepancies between expected and actual employee needs shall be assessed to the phase of development being considered for approval. D. Nordic Trail Location. Any relocation of the Nordic trail will be finalized with the input of neighbors and the City of Aspen Pazks Department. E. Drainage & Snow Storage. The Applicant shall further evaluate the feasibility of using the proposed detention ponds for snow storage, as the proposed vehiculaz use of the trail to access the ponds is not permitted by the City. An alternative solution for access to the ponds or for snow storage should be considered. F. RFTA Bus Stop Refinement. The Applicant shall continue to refine the design of the RFTA bus stop to enable queuing of two busses and ensuring that wheel paths and turning radiuses work appropriately. The Applicant should consider installing the improvements to the bus stop and pedestrian crossing during Phase Two rather than Phase Four of the redevelopment. Pedestrian pathways and crossings (which will change as development occurs in phases) will be reviewed and evaluated for safety and conflicts during construction of that phase and in their final configuration. The geometry of the pedestrian bicycle path crossing of Castle Creek Road shall be finalized during the review of Phase Two with the City Engineering and City Parks Departments. G. Castle Creek Road Elevation. Based upon the concerns voiced by the City Engineer with regazd to raising the height of Castle Creek Road and the associated construction impacts, staff recommends that the Applicant continue evaluating options that that aze less impactful and meet the goals of the master plan. The Applicant shall continue to work with staff on the improvements associated with development of the service road. H. Transportation Demand Management Program. The AVH shall be subject to a TDM Program approved by the City of Aspen as pazt of the Phase Two approvals. The purpose of this plan is to minimize single-occupant auto trips to or from the Hospital campus. The TDM Program shall be re-evaluated and adjusted from time to time but not more frequently that once per year or as necessary during the review for each phase. Elements of the TDM program should include increased transit service, van pooling, carpooling, preferential HOV parking, paid parking, car shazing, and other strategies. I. Subdivision Platting and PUD Documents. Phase Two approvals shall include a re-filing of a subdivision plat and recording of PUD Plans for all phases. The affordable housing `pazcel' designation shall be vacated as part of the re-platting. The 100-foot trail easement shall be vacated as part of the re-platting and replaced with an easement(s) that coincides with actual trail locations. Section 3: Conceptual Anaroval Approval of this conceptual development plan does not constitute final approval or permission to proceed with any aspect of the development. Approval of this conceptual development plan City Council Resolution No. 3, Series 2009. Page 3 of 5 authorizes the an applicant to submit an application for a final PUD development plan in accordance with the City Council Resolution granting conceptual PUD approval. The Aspen Valley Hospital Facilities Master Plan contemplates four (4) phases of development over time to enable the hospital to maintain daily operations of the facility as development occurs. The Applicant anticipates as much as a 20-yeaz build-out timeline. Each Phase shall require Final PUD approval and associated land use reviews as applicable. Future phases shall continue to be reviewed as an Essential Public Facility. Components of the Conceptual PUD plan shall be confirmed or amended in conjunction with the final approval of each phase. Development program, components, operational characteristics, or design characteristics of future phases or of the entire facility plan may be amended in conjunction with final approval for each phase. In consideration of the phased aspect of the Facilities Master Plan, City Council hereby exempts the development from the limitations of Conceptual Development Plan approval as specified in Section 26.445.030.D of the Land Use Code. No prescribed limit or timeframe for submitting a final development plan for the project, or phases thereof, shall apply. Section 4: Final PUD Aanlications: General Conditions of Annroval The Final PUD application for each phase shall reflect and demonstrate compliance with the Conceptual approval, as may be amended. The Final PUD application for each phase shall include: 1. An application for Final PUD and associated land use review approvals pursuant to the Municipal Code. Apre-application. conference with a member of the Community Development Department is required prior to submitting an application. 2. Delineation of all dimensional provisions to become requirements of the PUD. 3. Final PUD Plans showing existing and planned development and remaining future phases. 4. A proposed PUD Agreement. 5. An employee generation summary which includes actual employee generation for the prior phase and number of credits to be assigned to the current phase. 6. An azchitectural character plan showing the chazacter and materials of proposed buildings. This may be a model, digital model, detailed elevations, or renderings. 7. A proposed Subdivision Plat (Phase Two) highlighting proposed amendments to the plat of record. A drainage report and grading & drainage plan developed using the criteria and specifications of the City Engineer. This analysis must account for all off site basins and must consider downstream facilities and whether these facilities aze sized appropriately. The report must also include the analysis of drainage along Castle Creek Road associated with project improvements. 9. A snow storage and snow removal operations plan. City Council Resolution No. 3, Series 2009. Page 4 of 5 10. A detailed civil plan showing the geometric design for improvements to Castle Creek, vehicle and ped/bike path intersections, and improvements to RFTA bus stops, including bus staging and turning radii. 11. Proposed Transportation Demand Management Program, or amendments thereto as applicable. 12. A detailed landscape plan for all areas affected by that phase. A formal vegetation protection plan shall be required with building permit application. An approved tree permit will be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work takes place. Final layout of the plantings and pazk designs require Pazk Department approval. Section 5: School Lands Dedication and Impact Fees School Land Dedication is not required for the Hospital facilities, but shall be required for on- site affordable housing development. All other Impact Fees aze not required for Hospital facilities but shall be required for on-site affordable housing and medical office space. The Applicant shall pay applicable impact fees and the school lands dedication according to the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit acceptance. All fees shall be paid at building permit issuance. Section 6• This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor. Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Exhibit A -Summary of AVH Master Facility Plan Exhibit B -Employee Generation Expectations and Credits City Council Resolution No. 3, Series 2009. Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Chapter 26.445, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Sec. 26.445.050. Review Criteria conceptual, t'inal, consolidated and minor PUD. A development application for conceptual, final, consolidated, conceptual and final or minor PUD shall comply with the following standazds and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with conceptual reviews and properties eligible for minor PUD review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff believes that a number of the goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan are met at a conceptual level including: "containing development...to ensure development is contained and sprawl minimized," "maintain and improve the appeal of walking and bicycling," and "protect and enhance the natural environment." The development is located with the urban growth botmdazy, has multimodal opportunities for getting to the hospital, and minimizes the development footprint of the site. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed development is on a large tract of land that acts as a campus setting for the hospital, senior housing, ambulance barn, and health and human services building. The property is close to open space and some dense neighborhoods. The development is an expansion of an existing use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff believes that this development will not adversely affect the future development of the area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Not Applicable at this point in the review. The Applicant will be required to make a Growth Management Application as part of the Final PUD. Under the current proposal, the application will be reviewed as an essential public facility, and may Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 1 of 10 require growth management approval for the development of new commercial space/medical clinics (net leasable) and the development of affordable housing. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The PUD development plans establish dimensional requirements for all properties in a PUD. The dimensions of the PUD shall be memorialized during the Final PUD review. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following in, fluences on the property: a. The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. The dimensional requirements allow for the expansion of the hospital while minimizing the footprint of the hospital and maintaining open space. At a conceptual level, the proposed building expansion and its location on the site is compatible with the chazacter of the area. b. Natural or man-made hazards. No known natural hazards exist on the lot. The relocation of the heli-pad will reduce a potential man-made hazazd. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c. Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. Most of the development proposed is within azeas of the site that have already been impacted by development. The applicant is proposing to maintain a lazge percentage of open space and natural vegetation on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. The applicant is proposing a service loop road with certain improvements to sepazate circulation by use. Improvements with regard to vehicular circulation Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria- AVH Master Plan Page 2 of 10 aze proposed as well as pedestrian improvements. At a conceptual level, staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. The Applicant is proposing to concentrate the redevelopment to an azea that is already developed, minimizing the impact of the new development and maintaining a large amount of undeveloped land on the site. As noted eazlier, a large portion of the site is undeveloped and the proposal will maintain that feeling of openness. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access andlor the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development d. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. The Applicant provided a summary of the parking needs analysis in the application. The consultant undertaking the analysis considered alternative modes of transportation that can be used to get to the hospital and reduced the estimated number of off-street parking spaces needed for the redevelopment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.• a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities or other utilities to service the proposed development. b. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development. The applicant is not proposing any housing for this review. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - A V H Master Plan Page 3 of 10 S. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.• a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution. c. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. The applicant is not proposing any housing for this review. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a signiftcant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. a. The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b. The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated c. The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses and characteristics. Notes: a. Lot sizes for individual lots within a PUD may be established at a higher or lower rate than specified in the underlying Zone District as long as, on average, the entire PUD conforms to the maximum density provisions of the respective Zone District or as otherwise established as the maximum allowable density pursuant to a final PUD Development Plan. b. The approved dimensional requirements for all lots within the PUD are required to be reflected in the final PUD development plans. The applicant is not proposing any housing for this review. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 4 of 10 spaces, and ensures the publlc's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. A lazge portion of the site is undeveloped and in a natural state. The redevelopment is proposed to maintain that feel and limit the developed area of the 19 acre site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. As mentioned previously, a lazge portion of the site is undeveloped and in a natural state. The redevelopment is proposed so as to maintain that feel and limit the developed area of the 19 acre site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. The proposed building is generally oriented towards the public street but is set back from the street which contributes to the more operi feel of Castle Creek Road. Existing vegetation currently screens the hospital. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. The City of Aspen Fire Marshal has reviewed the proposal, and has noted that final details on the service loop road will be necessazy in the future. Staff finds this criterion to be met at a conceptual level. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. According to the Application, the project will comply with all applicable requirements. Improvements aze being proposed for the pedestrian trail. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. According to a letter submitted by the- Applicant's engineer, site drainage will be handled with retention ponds in the more natural, undeveloped area of the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met at a conceptual level. Exhibit A - PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 5 of 10 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. The Application has developed the master plan to accommodate the multiple functions at the site: helicopter access, ambulance and service access, as well as patient access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: The Applicant provided a draft landscaping plan as part of the original Conceptual application. An updated version will be provided as part of the Final PUD Application. 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves extsting significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. The Applicant has provided some conceptual landscaping on the site plan in the application and has developed the landscaping to correspond with the two development zones of the project: developed and natural. A number of new plantings are proposed with a more intensive/traditional landscaping neaz the hospital and natural grasses, serviceberry and gambel oak in the natural areas. A final landscape plan will be submitted as part of the Final PUD application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. The undeveloped area of the site provides a natural open setting. Enhancements in this area need to preserve these features. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. The Applicant will provide a final landscape plan in with the Final PUD. This will ensure existing landscaping is preserved or mitigated for if it is to be removed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Architectural Character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a Exhibit A-PUD Review Criteria-AVH Master Plan Page 6 of ] 0 character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. A variety of materials aze being proposed for the redevelopment of the hospital: glass, masonry, and stone. As an institutional type of use, the conceptual design reflects the use of the building with a palette of materials that fit well on the site. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. The Applicant has noted that the building is expected to be designed to achieve LEED certification and that it is anticipated that the building is designed and constructed in an environmentally sustainable way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. The Applicant has submitted a conceptual plan for snow removal and storage as part of the application. A final detailed plan will be required to be addressed at final application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Lighting. 1. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the ftnal PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development The Applicant will comply with all lighting regulations in place. Amore detailed plan will be provided as part of the Final PUD. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 7 of ]0 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument jor the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. There are no common park, open space or recreation azeas proposed by the Applicant. The site contains the existing Nordic trail and Pedestrian trail that have easements allowing for public use on private property. Changes or improvements to these two trails will need to be approved by city staff. The Applicant is proposing a new passive use area in the vicinity of the proposed retention ponds. There is no public access easement being proposed at this time for the passive use area. Staff finds this criterion to be met at a conceptual level. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose ojthis standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development The Water, Sanitation, and Electric Departments reviewed this application and determined there is adequate service for this development. This will be addressed in greater detail at Final PUD. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. At this time no adverse impacts on the public infrastructure aze anticipated. This will be addressed in greater detail at Final PUD. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. This criterion will be addressed at Final PUD when a finalized site plan and associated materials are available for City Departments to review. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 8 of 10 recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff believes that all structures and uses will have appropriate access to a public street. A thorough traffic impact analysis with final application will detail any necessary improvements related to access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development Staff believes the conceptual design of adding a service access road, potential improvements to Doolittle Drive and a new parking circulation scheme will ease congestion at this site. Staff does find this criterion met. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. The proposed development has existing trail easements on the property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. The Parks department has reviewed the application and found that no additional easements are necessary at a conceptual level. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. There are no internal streets proposed as part of this PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 9 of 10 There are no gates or guard posts proposed as part of this PUD. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted fmal PUD development plan. Does not apply to conceptual review; however, the applicant is proposing a phased final development plan. Exhibit A -PUD Review Criteria - AVH Master Plan Page 10 of t0 G MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~,~ RE: Aspen Jewish Community Center at the Silver Lining Ranch Consolidated SPA Amendment, Growth Management Review 2"a Reading of Ordinance No. S, Series of 2009 MEETING DATE: April 27, 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: s H-N .. ~ ,'~~'`f~`.. ~;~:, .. f _' . _ + i tl+ ; .~ , ~ ... The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of %';,;_;! ~ , ~ ~.'~'`~ ~ ~ ,"° ~:~ ' ;~ . ' ;'~.: ~~.;: , Aspen. ~ ~f -~ ~ ~ _ .: REPRESENTATIVE: :~~';~ '' ~~ ~`~•J•°'~+, ~ Alan Richman, Alan Richman Planning ~ •• ~ ~ ,' • C~, f _~ t~•.: ~ ' . Services ~'••,~. „~ ,t~~•, t- . LOCATION: ~', ~ ~ ' ~ - . ~~~. Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch, commonly known as ~. ; ~`'~ ~ r~ ~ ~'~ ~ t- ,s ~ ,,.~~ the Silver Lining Ranch - 1490 Ute Avenue - ;~ .f ~~ F ~ ~: • ,. .a:::. ~;~~.;,` Parcel ID # 2737-184-06-805 ! ' ' ~"~ ~~ • +' '~` ~~ ~~F ~~ ,`` •=^~i~f~'F.,, CURRENT ZONING: f; V - ~ i ~4 ~., ,.~ (~ ~~~ '~~~~ ~~ ,, '~ Academic (A) zone district with a Specially i•,r-:,4„ . • ~' , ~ ,, _ {. . Planned Area (SPA) overlay, and ,,' ~ _ Conservation (C) with a Specially Planned ;~j - ~ , ~~ri, ~ -y',,., 's 1~ ~~P"i'> ~: ~ .: ~: Area (SPA) overlay . ~'~ ~:~ ~ • ~ ~ '~~ `:,=._. 3c : •... .~ Photo: The Silver Lining Ranch -Academic zone district shown at left /Conservation zone district shown at right - SUMMARY: separated by the high water line. The Applicant requests conversion of the Silver Lining Ranch, anon-profit facility to help kids with cancer and similar afflictions, STAFF 1~r.COMMENDATION: into a Jewish Community Center. Minor Staff recommends that the City Council approve the physical changes are needed to accommodate Jewish Community Center application, with conditions. this new use including the addition of an affordable housing cabin. The changes require an SPA Amendment, and Growth Management approvals. 1 REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL: The City Council will be reviewing the following land use actions for the conversion of the Silver Lining Ranch to a Jewish Community Center: • Specially Planned Area (SPA) -Consolidated Review (Section 26.440.040 B) to allow for the conversion to a Jewish Community Center, the affordable housing cabin, parking, and associated landscaping modifications. The application shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council. • Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility (Section 26.470.090.4(a), The Community Development Director has determined the Jewish Community Center to be an Essential Public Facility, according to the adopted definition. The application shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council. A Specially Planned Area (SPA) is a process in which a site specific development plan is created by allowing the variation of the underlying zone district's land uses and dimensional requirements. The parcel currently exists with an SPA overlay. Based upon the new proposal the site specific development must be amended to allow the additional development. The Growth Management Review is to determine the number of employees generated by the use and to asses the appropriate affordable housing mitigation. The City Council may waive or partially waive these requirements. BACKGROUND: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen recently entered into a contract to purchase Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch, commonly known as the Silver Lining Ranch, located at 1490 Ute Avenue. The Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD (Planned Unit Development) was approved by the Boazd of County Commissioners pursuant to Resolution 94-233. In 1996, the owner of Lot 5, the Little Star Foundation, submitted a petition to annex the property to the City of Aspen. The Aspen City Council adopted Ordinance 10, Series of 1997 annexing the property to the City of Aspen, and Ordinance 11, Series of 1997, zoning Lot 5 Academic/Conservation/SPA, approving the Conceptual/Final SPA plan and granting a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility. The approvals allowed for the operation of anon-profit kids camp for children with cancer, directed by Andrea Jaeger, commonly known as the Silver Lining Ranch. The Little Staz Foundation operated programs at the Silver Lining Ranch from 1999, when the building was completed, until 2006. The property has had limited occupancy since that time, and the Foundation has been trying to sell for the last two years so that the proceeds can be used to fund its charitable mission. In 2007, the Foundation applied to the City of Aspen to either "de-annex" (disconnect) or rezone to its former single-family residential use. The City Council denied both requests, viewing the non- profidinstitutional use of the property as an important community value, and was not willing to sacrifice the use to convert to a single family residence and miss an opportunity of providing a place for a community facility. 2 PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS /PROPOSED CHANGES Dimensional Standard Approved SPA Plan Proposed Dimension Dimensions Minimum Lot Size 6 acres no change Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit 2 acres per unit no change Minimum Lot Width 200 feet no change Minimum Front Yard Setback 30 feet no change Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 feet Amend building envelope to accommodate revised arkin Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet no change Maximum Height 28 feet (Measured to the mid- no change point of the roof on all sides o the building, except for the east-facing elevation, which was limited to 32.5 to the mid point of the roof Minimum Distance Between Principal and No Requirement no change Accessory Buildings Percent of Open Space Required for Building Site As shown on site plan (30%) Add small cabin Floor Area Ratio Allowable floor area shall not Add 700 sq. ft. for exceed 14,000 square feet the affordable housin cabin Off-Street Parking 3 garage spaces, 10 outdoor 3 garage spaces, 20 s aces outdoors aces PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to amend the SPA (in a consolidated review) in order to convert the existing Silver Lining Ranch into a Jewish Community Center. The applicant proposes few changes to the property. The existing building will be remodeled, but only on the interior - no exterior changes are proposed. Minor changes to the site plan are proposed including; the addition of a small affordable housing cabin located northwest of the existing building, adding parking to the west edge (the Aspen Club common lot line), modifying the vehicular entry/exit loop and landscape improvements, and adding a ten (10) foot wide sidewalk connecting the property to Ute Avenue. The applicant is requesting minor changes to the dimensional requirements in the SPA for the property. The building envelope would need to be amended to allow for the new parking along the west edge of the property (as shown on the site plan), and the maximum allowable floor area is proposed to be amended to allow for the addition of a small affordable housing cabin -approximately 700 square feet (please see the chart above). The applicant is proposing to amend the SPA in order to add to the permitted uses for the property in the Academic (A) zone district. The requested uses are: Arts, Cultural, and Civic Uses; and Affordable housing for employees of the Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses. The proposed activities in the Jewish 3 Community Center include; apre-school, Hebrew school, adult education, religious services, and special events (please see the summary of activities in the chart below). SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES AT THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER Activity Time Period Frequency Attendance Proposed TDM* measures Pre-School Sam to Spm 5 days per week 35-40 children Pick-up and drop off at Koch Lumber Yazd Park Hebrew 3:30pm to Spm 2 days per week 8-10 children Aspen Club & Cross School Town Shuttle Teen Program 6pm to Spm 1 night per 20-25 persons Aspen Club & Cross month Town Shuttle Adult 10:30am to 11:30 am 1 day per week 5-10 persons Aspen Club & Cross Education 7:30pm to Spm 1 night per 15-20 persons Town Shuttle week Religious Friday around sundown every week 10-20 persons No special services Saturday gam to Noon 10-40 ersons measures** Special events Evenings and weekends 5-10 events per more than SQ less Pick-up and drop off year than 200 per at Rio Grande event Pazking Gazage and Little Nell Hotel Affordable Year round 3 units on-site 5.75 employees Bicycles will be Housing provided. Caz shazing with Aspen Club employees? *Transportation Demand Management (TDM) **A significant percentage of the persons who attend religious services in the congregation aze observant Jews and will not drive a caz or take a shuttle to services. These persons can be expected to walk to and from the facility. ***Schedule and frequency of activities shown in this table aze based on current plans and may vary slightly. Substantial changes to the schedule or frequency of activities, as determined by the Community Development Director, may require an amendment to be submitted to this application. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: During the Planning and Zoning Commission review, several questions were raised. Following is a brief summary of these questions and the relevant information: 1) Provide the minutes from the 2007 determination from the City Council (May 14, 2007 hearing) regarding the de-annexation request and denial. • Minutes aze provided as Exhibit G. A motion to approve the de-annexation of the Silver Lining Ranch from the City of Aspen did not carry at the May 14, 2007 hearing. The City Council denied the request citing the non-profit/institutional use of the property as an important community value. 2) Who funds the Cross Town shuttle? Are there `vouchers' for the off-season? What is the Aspen Club's role in the Cross Town shuttle? 4 • According to the Transportation Department, the Aspen Club has, in the past, contributed to the Cross Town shuttle service monetarily. Please see the attached memos and letters associated with the Aspen Club contribution to the Cross Town Shuttle -Exhibit H • The Cross Town shuttle is a seasonal service, with winter and summer service only. In the off-season, adial-a-ride service is provided through High Mountain Taxi, currently funded by the City of Aspen. • From 1999 through 2003, the Aspen Club contributed to the funding of the Cross Town shuttle. In December, 2003 after review from the City of Aspen Transportation Department, the Aspen Club initiated its own shuttle service, and was allowed to stop the contribution to the Cross Town shuttle. • The City Council will discuss the potential for partial funding by the applicant of the Cross Town Shuttle at a March 16, 2009 work session. Direction from this meeting will be incorporated into the second reading packet. 3) Is the Fire Department okay with the access to the existing hydrant and location of the new path? • The Fire Marshall has reviewed the proposed site plan and has determined that the proposal is in compliance, and that the proposed condition azound the existing hydrant is acceptable. 4) Are (private) gates allowed in the City of Aspen? • Gated entrances to private property are not prohibited in the City of Aspen provided that they meet the requirements of the Aspen Fire Department. The existing gate on the property has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and is in compliance. STAFF COMMENTS: SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA -CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A Specially Planned Area (SPA) is a process in which a site specific development plan is created which encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of land and promotes objectives outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan by allowing the variation of the underlying zone district's land uses and dimensional requirements for the benefit of the public. The pazcel currently exists with an SPA overlay. Based upon the new proposal the site specific development must be amended to allow the additional development. In the Arts, Culture, and Education section in the AACP, the first and last goals are to "encourage collaboration in Arts, Culture, and Education" and to "ensure the provision of public facilities and services to sustain art, culture, and education in the community. "The creation of affordable housing meets a Housing section goal to "reinforce and enhance a healthy social balance for our community and enhance the character and charm of Aspen. " 5 Staff recommends the City Council amend the SPA to allow for the addition of a small cabin - approximately 700 square feet -for the creation of an affordable housing unit. Staff recommends amending the SPA to add to the permitted uses for the property in the Academic (A) zone district to allow Arts, Cultural, and Civic Uses and Affordable housing for employees of the Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses to promote and encourage diversity and education in the community. Staff, based on the previous determination for the Specially Planned Area for the Stillwater Ranch in Ordinance 11, Series of 1997, and recommends that the proposed conversion to the Jewish Community Center be approved The Land Use Code states; "the dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. " Staff finds that the proposal meets the requirements of the underlying Academic (A) zone district, is compatible, and enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. See ExhibitA for additional SPA review criteria'and Stafffzndings GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM: With Ordinance' 11, Series of 1997 (Exhibit #7 of the application -Exhibit D), the City Council granted final approval of the Stillwater Ranch Specially Planned Area (SPA), which also granted a Growth Management exemption for an Essential Public Facility. The Jewish Community Center was reviewed and approved as an essential public facility in Ordinance No. 36, Series of 2006 (Exhibit #8 in the application -Exhibit D). As the Jewish Community Center and the Stillwater Ranch have been determined to be essential public facilities in the past, it is logical to continue to consider the relocated center an essential public facility,. When determined to be "an essential public facility, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission" "the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purposes of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals". Pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations, "each Essential Public Facility proposal shall be evaluated for actual employee generation". The applicant proposes providing housing for 5.75 employees, a mitigation of approximately 60% for the 9-10 employees that will be generated. In the employee analysis provided with the application (see page 20 of the application -Exhibit D) a calculation from the Land Use Code using 1.75 employees for each one-bedroom unit and 2.25 employees for each two-bedroom unit would equa15.75 for the proposed on-site affordable housing. APCHA Staff recommends that the applicant submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two yeazs after issuance of C.O. the form and methodology of the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and be consistent for both audits. The applicant shall provide mitigation for any increase in employees unless otherwise waived by City Council. 6 Staff finds that the proposal meets the requirements of "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by, or benefit of, the general public and serves the need of the community". The Ciry Council shall review the essential public facility to determine the rate for affordable housing mitigation. The applicant is not seeking a "waiver" of the affordable housing requirement, but is proposing to house 5.75 employees on-site (1.75 employees for (2) one-bedroom units and 2.25 employees for the two-bedroom unit). Approximately 9 to 10 full time employees (FTE's) are expected to be generated, therefore, approximately 60% (5.75/9.5=0.6) of the affordable housing demand will be mitigated by the applicant. Ordinance No. I1, Series of 1997 granted a GMQS exemption for a non profit entity for the Kids Stuff Foundation, which qualified as an essential public facility. In 2006, Ordinance 36 was approved, determining that "9.63 FTE's shall be generated by the Jewish Community Center (at the 435 W. Main street location), and established mitigation for 4.25 employees (three category 2 rental affordable housing units). It is important to note that the new request to convert the existing facility (which was allowed to waive the mitigation) is proposing to provide mitigation for affordable housing rather than request a waiver. Staff, based on the previous determination in Ordinance 11, Series of 1997, recommends that the proposed affordable housing mitigation of 60% (5.75 employees) be accepted and approved. See Exhibit B for additional GMQS review criteria and Staff findings STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the application for a consolidated Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment and GMQS review for an essential public facility to convert the Silver Lining Ranch into a Jewish Community Center, including the addition of a small affordable housing cabin and associated parking and site planning changes. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE~: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Specially Planned Area (SPA) -review standards and Staff findings EXHIBIT B -GMQS -review criteria and Staff findings EXHBIT C - DRC Comments ExtttetT D -Application -provided at first reading ExxtatT E -Supplemental Drawing -Site Plan -provided at first reading 7 EXHIBIT F -Letters from neighbors Exxis[T G -Minutes from May 14, 2007 City Council, de-annexation of Silver Lining Ranch Exx[aiT H -Cross Town /Aspen Club shuttle documents EXHBIT I -Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes from the 1/20/09 and 2/17/09 Public Hearings ORDINANCE N0. 8 (SERIES OF 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A CONSOLIDATED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) AMENDMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW AS AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY FOR THE CONVERSION OF THE SILVER LINING RANCH INTO A JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER, LOCATED ON LOT 5 OF THE STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE SILVER LINING RANCH, 1490 UTE AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. PARCEL ID: 2735-184-06-805 WHEREAS, The Community Development Department received an application from the Aspen Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning Services, for review for Arts, Cultural, and Civic Use in the Academic zone district; Special Review for parking-requirements in the Academic zone district; 8040 Greenline Review; Stream Margin Review; and Conceptual/Final Specially Planned Area (SPA) Review for the property commonly known and referred to as the "Silver Lining Ranch" which has previously been designated a specially planned area (SPA) on the City of Aspen Official Zone District Map; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4, Series of 1997, of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen, granted approval of the Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision for Conditional Use Review in the Academic zone district; Special Review for parking requirements in the Academic zone district; 8040 Greenline Review; Stream Margin Review; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1997, of the City Council of the City of Aspen, granted final approval of the Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision Specially Planned Area (SPA) final development plan, and granted a GMQS exemption for anon-profit entity qualifying as an essential public facility; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 24, Series of 2006, of the Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions, a Growth Management Review to determine employee generation, and Special Review to establish off-street parking requirements; and recommended approval to City Council of a Growth Management Review as an essential public facility for the Jewish Community Center, proposed to be located at 435 West Main Street; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 36, Series of 2006, of the City Council of the City of Aspen, granted approval of the Growth Management Review as an essential public facility for the Jewish Community Center, proposed to be located at 435 West Main Street; and WHEREAS, upon initial review of the subject application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval with conditions of a Specially Planned Area (SPA); and, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 1 WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 20, 2009, continued to February 17, 2009, upon further public testimony, discussion and consideration, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted Resolution No. 5, Series of 2009 by a five to one (5-1) vote; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public heazing on April 27, 2009, the Aspen City Council approved an SPA amendment and Growth Management Review to allow for the Jewish Community Center at the Silver Lining Ranch, as described herein, by a vote of to (_-~~ NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council approves a Consolidated Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment and Growth Management Quota System Review for an Essential Public Facility for the Jewish Community Center at the Silver Lining Ranch. Section 2: Engineerine Requirements The building permit application shall include a drainage and stormwater study for all impervious area on site. The developer will be required to be granted permission from the Aspen Club to construct the retaining wall on the western side of the property. Impacts of construction outside the site's property boundary must be agreed upon with neighboring properties and addressed in the construction management plan. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. The plan shall describe mitigation for: pazking, staging/encroachments, truck traffic, noise, dust, and erosion sediment pollution. The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, and all design and construction standards published by the Engineering Department. Section 3: Affordable Housin¢ and Audit The proposal generates nine and one half (9.5) employees. 5.75 employees will be housed on site through the provision of aone-bedroom unit and atwo-bedroom unit. This reflects the applicant's commitment to provide housing for a minimum of 60% of the employees generated by the project. The applicant shall submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two years afrer issuance of C.O. The form and methodology of the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and be consistent for both audits. It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the audits. Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 2 The applicant shall provide mitigation for 60% of employees associated with the operation in excess of 9.5 employees unless otherwise waived by City Council. Section 4: Sanitation District Requirements Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled commercial kitchens and food processing establishments. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways including hazd landscaping which will impact public ROW or easements owned by the district. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which aze on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. ACSD will not approve service to food processing establishments retrofitted for this use at a later date. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells, elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation foundation or access/infrastructure permit. Section 5: Approved Dimensional Standards The dimensional requirements which shall apply to this property are as follows: Dimensional Standard Approved SPA Plan Dimension Minimum Lot Size 6 acres Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit 2 acres per unit Minimum Lot Width 200 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback 30 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 feet, with an amended building envelo e to accommodate azkin . Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet Maximum Height 28 feet (Measured to the mid-point of the roof on all sides of the building, except for the east-facing elevation, which was limited to 32.5 to the mid-point of the roof Minimum Distance Between Principal and Accesso Buildin s No Requirement Percent of Open Space Required for Building Site As shown on site plan, with the addition of an affordable housin cabin. Floor Area Ratio Allowable floor azea shall not exceed 14,700 s uaze feet. Off-Street Pazking 3 garage spaces, 20 outdoor spaces Section 6: Allowed Uses: In addition to the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the Academic and Conservation zone districts, this property is also allowed to be used for Arts, Cultural, and Civic Uses, and Affordable housing for employees of the Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses. The proposed activities Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 3 in the Jewish Community Center include; apre-school, Hebrew school, adult education, religious services, and special events. The proposed scope of activities for this property are as follows: SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES AT THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER Activity Time Period Frequency Attendance Pre-School Sam to Spm 5 days per week 35-40 children Hebrew 3:30pm to Spm 2 days per week 8-10 children School Teen Program 6pm to Spm 1 night per 20-25 persons month Adult 10:30am to 11:30 am 1 day per week 5-10 persons Education 7:30pm to Spm 1 night per 15-20 persons week Religious Friday azound sundown every week 10-20 persons services Saturday gam to Noon 10-40 ersons Special events Evenings and weekends 5-10 events per more than 50, less year than 200 per event Affordable Yeaz round 3 units on-site 5.75 employees Housing The schedule and frequency of activities shown in this table are based on current plans and may vary slightly over time. Insubstantial changes to the timing or profile of the above approved uses and activities may be authorized by the Community Development Director. Substantial changes, such as new and significant programming or a dramatic increase in activity, may require a substantial amendment to the SPA Plan. Section 7• Parks An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set (decrease the amount of spruce trees, increase in aspen, cottonwood, Douglas fir, and service berry bushes). The new grading and planting will require City seed mixes and approval of the landscaping. All new plantings will need to be irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by Parks Department. Tree protection fences must be in place and inspected by the city forester or his/her designee before any construction activities are to commence. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. Hand work only will be approved within the protection zones and for the re-opening of the irrigation ditch. Section 8: Ute Avenue Trail Improvements The Jewish Community Center shall construct a ten (10) foot wide trail within the JCC property connecting the primary facility to the boundary of the Aspen Club property as depicted on the proposed site plan attached as Exhibit A. The City shall grant the necessary encroachment licenses to accommodate this trail connection. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any necessary trail easements from the neighboring Aspen Club property. The design Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 4 specifications for the trail connection shall be finalized with the City Parks Department prior to construction. The applicant has offered to contribute a proportionate share to the completion of the Ute Avenue Trail from the proposed construction noted above to the existing concrete trail to the west. The proportionate shaze is based on 50% of the capital costs of the trail improvement not including costs associated with land or easement acquisition or project management. The total Jewish Community Center obligation shall not exceed $70,000 (2009 dollars). This trail contribution shall be payable to the City of Aspen in one of two ways: 1) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new facility. In this case the $70,000 shall be held by the City of Aspen in a separate interest bearing account to be used solely for the construction of the Ute Avenue Trail. If the funds aze not used within seven (7) years of the issuance of a Development Order, the City shall return the funds to the Applicant, with interest. 2) At the time of trail development, within 30 days written notice from the City to proceed with the construction of the trail. In this case the pending contribution shall be secured through a bond, letter of credit, or other similar means of security acceptable to the City Attorney. The $70,000 shall be adjusted annually according to the Consumer Price Index starting in 2010. The security shall be provided prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new facility. This obligation shall be valid for a period of seven (7) years and shall terminate on the seventh anniversary of the issuance of the Development Order. Section 9: Transuortation The Jewish Community Center shall meet with Transportation Department Staff prior to each summer season to discuss their schedule of events and associated transportation/pazking impacts as well as mitigation such as increased shuttle service, etc. The Jewish Community Center shall communicate with event staff/attendees about alternative transportation options prior to lazge events. Afrer one complete year of sustained operation, the Jewish Community Center shall provide a traffic audit measuring the percentage of mass transit use. If actual mass transit use is less than represented by the applicant, then the applicant shall work with the City of Aspen Transportation Department staff to discuss additional measures to achieve close to 100% transit usage for the pre-school and special events. Section 10: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 5 Section 11• This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 12: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 13: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of April, 2009, at a meeting of the City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 23rd day of March, 2009. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Attached: Exhibit A -Site Plan -10' wide Ute Avenue path, revised driveway and parking, and AH cabin Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 6 -------~--------- .w -.:.~---------T-----~ .... ~.. ... .... . µ `;`~ t w,s ;~ - ~'~'" '-~ a an -... ~ ' 1 .. '.{ - s ~k 1 ~_.~ _.. !~ r ~.ux ~'°': ~ r `~ r ~ •/, i =: ar~r~N.: ,~c.Exo {~ ~•.. .. Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Page 7 Exhibit A, Ordinance No. 8, Series 2009. OTTENJOHNSON RQBiP~1S0~d (JEFF+RA~ONETTIo~ April 22, 2009 VIA HAND DELIVERY Aspen City Council City Hall t30 S. Galena St. Aspen. CO 8161 1 C HERVL A. MALCOLM 9]0 Sdd d618 CMALCOLMQpOTTENJOHNSON COM Re: Application Concerning Lo[ 5, Stillwater Ranch; Stillwater Open Space Association Dear City Council Members: We are council to the Stillwater Open Space Association ("Association"), and are writing in connection with the pending land use application (the "Application") previously submitted by The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen. The Application concerns a proposed change in use of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch from a home for terminally ill children to a Jewish Community Center. As you are probably aware, Lot 5 is a member of the Association and is subject to the Protective Covenants for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD (as amended, "Covenants"). The Covenants restrict [he use of Lot 5 to either single family use, or the current use as a permanent home for terminally ill children as se[ forth in Ordinances 10 and 11, Series of 1997 and per [he SPA Plat recorded in Plat Book 43 at Page 69. Any modification of the current use, as proposed in the Application, would be prohibited under the Covenants. While we recognize that private covenants are a matter of private property law and that the City has no obligation to enforce such covenants, the restrictions on use se[ forth in the Covenants are relevant factors to any consideration of the types of uses that would ultimately he permitted on Lo[ 5. To the extent the City were [o approve the Application and change the use, such an approval would virtually ensure that the Lot 5 remains unusable. Very truly yours, Ch I A. Malcolm for the Firm CAM/wle evnacd i 950 SE4EN7ECNTH GTR<_Ei SUITE IG-OG DENVER CGLORADB 88282 P 303 825 8400 r 383 925 6525 GTTENJ9HNSON.C OA1 CENVER ASPEN VAIL VALLEV STEAMBOAT SPRINt3S April 22, 2009 BY E-MAIL AND HAND DELIVERY Aspen City Council City Hall 130 5. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Proposed Change in Use of Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch a/k/a/Silver Lining Ranch Dear City Council Members: I am writing this letter, on behalf of the Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association (the "Association"), concerning the proposed application (the "Application') for the change in use of Lot 5 from a home for terminally ill children, to the Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen. The Association is opposed to the Application because it seeks to intensify and expand the use permitted on Lot 5 in a way that does not fit the character of the surrounding neighborhood, will negatively impact the open space and wildlife corridors located adjacent to Lot 5, and because the proposed use will create increased traffic and parking burdens on Ute Avenue and the surrounding neighborhood that neither Ute Avenue nor the existing neighborhood was designed to accommodate. Moreover, the Association is opposed to the use because it is not permitted by the private covenants (the "Covenants") which were recorded against Lot 5 (as well as against the other lots in the Stillwater subdivision). These Covenants limit the use of Lot 5 to that of single family use, or the limited use as a home for terminally ill children. The remainder of the lots in the subdivision are limited by the Covenants to single family use, or as a permanent open space parcels, as applicable. We feel it is important to consider that the only use intended for Lot 5 by the donor of Lot 5 (Fabienne Benedict) was the limited use as a home for terminally ill children. Attached for your reference is a copy of an April 7, 1999 letter to the City from Fabienne Benedict's lawyer, seeking to extend the vested rights for Lot 5. In Section 2(b) of the letter, it expressly states: "Fabi Benedict deeded Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivsion/PUD to Kid's Stuff Foundation, Inc. for purposes of a facility for children with cancer and other life threatening diseases:' This same intent and related restriction to limit the use of Lot 5 to a home for terminally ill children was realized through recordation of the Covenants; the owner of Lot 5 agreed to be bound by the Covenants when it accepted the deed, which expressly states that being bound by the Covenants and being part of the Association is a condition for the acceptance of the deed. I've attached a copy of the deed for your reference. Apri122, 2009 Page 2 In sum, the proposed broadened and intensified use for Lot 5 sought by the Application does not fit with character of the neighborhood, can not be properly served by Ute Avenue and is not allowed by the Covenants. For all of these reasons the Association is opposed to the Application. Respectfully submitted, Tom Reagan President Stillwater Ranch Homeowners Association FROM JL.LP itJC Pf{;rE !~, 9'7l3 925 8275 M9V. 12. 1999 2: S1PM P 2 MrrvtR • n59Er+ aeVteER • COW`R.1o0 YRMg3 oa+yea retu cErrER auR+es•eoae c~evewa • :AWOr+ r!ou cur i..xe err HOLLAND & HART LLP n77tNtNEri AT LAW sunt!o. aoo utr R.w siRCRr RSRFK COWRADa U al ! •1957 rnevHOne (OTa %a.7Q6 rRCS~ae Ma ns.%aT Aarxua C. DAILY .aNrr~pneiluwna't.nm April 7, 1999 Ms. Cindy Houben, Community Development Director AspenlPitkin County Planning OtTce Aspen City Hall 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE' ~StilLwatar Ranch Subdiviaion/PUD - Aoolication for E ion of Vested Proge~-1 '¢hts Dear Cindy: Please consider this a formal application for an extension of the vested property rimhts appurtenant to the Stillwater Ranch Subdivisioa/PUD, pursuant to Section 4-140-30 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The background of the matter is as follows. Stillwater Ranch SubdIvision/PUD was developed by Fabienne Benedict, and is comprised of Lots 1-6 and a large Open Space Parcel. Pitkin County approvals for the project, and the terms and conditions of those approvals, are embodied in the following instruments, copies of which are enclosed for your reference: (i} BOCC Resolution No. 94.156 adopted on Au ust 30, ] 994, granting General Submission approval to the project. ~;~C. Qom, /L, (ii) BOCC Resolution No. 94-233 adopted on December 20, 1994, granting Detailed Submission and Final Plat approvat to the project. (~!~ 97oG~f~ >~3~ (iii) Final Plat of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD recorded December 30, t994 in Plat Book 35 at Pagc 86. i (iv) Subdivision Improvemrnts Agreement for the Stillwater Ranch SubdivisioNPUD recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 7'10 at Ptge 818. ............._ . FRpM JLA.P INC PF+rNJE ~. 970 925 8275 MRY, 12. 1999 2: S1PM P 3 April 7, 1999 Page 2 HOLLAND & HART ur ATTORNEYS AT L~ W (v) protective Covenants for Stillwater Ranch Subdivisiotl/PUD recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 a[ Page 796. Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD is incomplete compliance with the following criteria established in Code Section 4-140-36, to wit: 1. THE APPLICANT'S COMPLIANCE WITH ANY CONDITIONS REQUIRING PERFORIvIANCE PRIOR TO THE DATE OF APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS. (a) A11 conditions to approval set forth in BOCC Resolution No. 94-233 (Detailed Submission and Final Plat Approval) have been met. More specifically, all required amendments to the Protective Covenants were incorporated therein prior to recording, a public fishing casement was dedicated along the Roazing Fork River as it traverses the property by Fisherman's Easement Agreement recorded December 30, 1994 in Hook 770 at Fage 821, Fabi Benedict made a cash contribution to the Pitkin County trails program in the amount of 512,600.00, Pabi Benedict entered into a Water Service Agreement for Lots 1-5 with the City of Aspen Water Department end made a cast[ payment to the Dcpaztment in the amount of 528,000,00 in connection therewith, and Fabi Benedict formed the Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association and conveytd the Open Space Parcel to the Association. (b) The applicant has completed construction of a sewer line extension to servo Lots 2, 3 and 4 of the Subdivision, at a cost of approximately $130,000.00, as required by the Subdivision Improvements Agreement recorded Decembor 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 818. 2. THE PROGRESS MADE IN PURSUING THE PROJECT TO DATE, INCLUDING THE EFFORT TO OBTAIN ANY OTHER PERMITS, SUCH AS BUILDING PERMITS, AND THE EXPENDITURES MADE BY THE APPLICANT IN PURSUING THIi PROJECT. (a) Aa set forth above, Ms. Benedict made cash payments to the Pitkin County traits program in the amount of $12,600,00 and to the City oP Aspen Water Department in the amount of $28,000.00, and the applicant has constructed a sewer line extension to Lots 2, 3 and 4 (and obtained an excavation permit in connection therewith) at an approximate coat of $ 13 0.000.00. F~ : ~ tNc April 7, 1999 Page 3 PFaFJE tom. :970 925 8275 HOLLAND & HART u.r ATTORNEYS AT LAw rtR'f. 12. 19'39 2: 52Fi1 P 4 (b) Febi Benedict deeded Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivisiott/PUD, containing 6.457 acres, to Kid's Stuff Foundation, Inc., for purposes of a facility for children with cancer and other lift-threatening diseas by instrument recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 826. At the time of the conveyance, the value of this donation was in the range of ~ $3,000,000.00. Lot S has since been extensively developed by Kid'a Stuff Foundation with the cancer facility that was Fabi's dream, all in accordance w, duly issued building permits. (c) Lot 6, containing the Benedict residence, has been sold by Fabi's Estate to third parties. Under the terms of Fabi's Will, the net proceeds of this sate witl eventually be distributed to four charitable organizations, after all estate taxes aze paid. (d) Fabi's Estate ie presently negotiating a contract for thu installation of electrical, phone and cable tv lints to serve Lota 1-4, at an estimated cost of 5100,000,00. 3. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF ANY BENEFITS ALREADY RECEIVED BY THE COUNTY AS A RESULT OF PROJECT APPROVAL SUCH AS IMPACT FEES OR LAND DEDICATIONS. (a) The public Fisherman's Easement Agreement, and the S12,600.00 donation to the Pitkin Countyy trails program, are discussed above. (b) 5igniScantiy, following final approval of the project, Fnbi Benedict deeded Lot 1 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, containing 4,179 acres, to the Board of County Commissioners oP Pitkin County, Colorado, fot employee housing purposes, by instrument recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Paga 82g. At the time of the conveyance, the valuo of this contribution Eor the benefit of the community was in the range of $2,000,000.00, (c) On the Final Plat, Ms. Benedict dedicated the portion of Ute Avenue and the Ute Avenue Cul-.de-Sac lying within the Subdivision to the City of Aspen For purposes of a public roadway. 4. THE NEED5 OF TI'IE COUNTY AND THE APPLICANT THAT WOULD BE SERVED BY APPROVAL OF TFIE EXTENSION REQUEST. f RrJM SI,~P (NC PHONE ~, 970 925 8275 t~KiY, 12. 1499 Z:53PFt P S HOLLAND & HART tlr ,~rroaNevs er uw April 7, 1499 Page 4 (a) Lot 1 of the Subdivision is owned by Pitkin County. Lots 2, 3 and 4 are still in the Estate of Fabienne Benedict. Under the terms of Fabi's Will, Lot 2 (or the net proceeds from the sale thereof) will eventually pass to. her daughter lassie Benedict Gordon; the proceeds from the sale of Lot 3 will be distributed to three more charitable organizations; and Lot 4 (or the net proceeds fYom the sale thereof) will eventually pass to her son Nicolas Benedict. Lot 3 is presently under contract for sale to a third party,, and Lot 4 is fisted for sale. A significant share of the proceeds from those sales wilt be applied to the reduction of estate taxes and other costs of administration before the balance of the proceeds are distributed to the beneficiaries. The three-year vested rights period for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD expired on or about December 20, 1997. As you are aware, prospective buyers of vacant residential sites in Pitkin County now almost uniformly require that vested rights be in place before they are willing to close. It is important to the Estate that an extension be granted before the May 7, 1949 expiration of the due diligence period under the Lot 3 purchase contract. The extension of vested property rights will also substantially enhance the marketability of Lots 2 and 4. (b} Aa set forth above, the County has enjoyed significant benefits from the approval and implementation of the Stillwater Ranch SubdlvisionlPUD. Many elements of the approval, including the 6,500 square foot allowable floor area (single family residence and affordable housing unit combined), were negotiated in good faith between Fabi Benedict and the County, and represented important concessions on the part of the applicant. It is in the clear and Icgidmate interest of the County that it continue to honor the terms and conditions of the original approvals that were granted in connection with this project, In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that the Board approve an extension of vested property rights for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD as approved by Pitkin County and pursuant to the terms and conditions of those approvals, specifically including without limstation the ¢,500 square foot allowable floor area (single family residence and affordable housing unit combined), for a period of 20 years from the date of adoption of the extension, and that the extension be embodied in a simple form of development .. FRgf1 : SW,P ttJC Pt+~t~E N0. :979 925 8275 hWY. 12. 1999 2:53PM P 6 HOLLAND & HART u.r nrrortNers nT tnw April 7, 1999 Page 5 agreement between the applicant and the County as contemplated by Section 4- 140-30(5) of the Code. This application should not be construed to alter or impair in any way the applicant's position that the' Stillwater Rench Subdivision/PLTD already enjoys permanent vested rights status under the common law, a3 set forth in the applicant's Letter to County Attorney John Ely of February 1, 1999. Sincerely, The Estate of Fab~i a Benedict hur C. Daily Personal Representative cc: Nicolas Benedict (vin fax to903-741-0486) Jessie Benedict Gordon (via fax to 925-480751) Sunny Vann (via Fax to 920-9310) aSPEN:oozs~as.as s~~~ ~, .:776&5 8-770 p-A26 1:?/3Q1/94 04i15p pG 1 VF c SILVIA DAVIS pITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER XlD011 ALL lIE1i BY TEEBE PAESEH'f8s REC DQC 1 a. me e. ae THAT lOA A1D A8 A CHARITABLE Gill A11D DONATIOIi, the undersigned lAHZE1IHE EEIIEDiCT (pDonor") hereby donates, sells and conveys to xID/' STD!! IOQHDATIOA, I1sC., a Colorado not-for-profit oorporatioa (pDonse^), whose address is P.O. Box 10970, Aspen, Colorado 81612, the following real property situate in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, to wit: Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, according to the Final Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1994 in Plat Hook 3,Z at Page ~ o! the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado, together with a perpetual, non- exclusive easement, right-oP-way and joint user right along, within and beneath the existing road easement between the Ute Avenue Cul-De-Sac and the Out Parcel, as shown on said Final Plat (as said road easement was created in the Deed recorded in Book 188 at Page 82 of the Pitkin County records), for purposes oP access, ingress and egress to Lot 5 and the installation of underground utilities serving lot 5. With all its appurtenances, subject to the following: (a) In the event that Donee utili2as part of the existing road easement between the Ute Avenue Cul-Da-Sac and the Out Parcel !or purposes of access to Lot 5, Donee shall share equally with the owner of the Out Parcel the costs and expenses of maintaining and snow-plowing the portion of said access road actually used by Donee. (b) Lot 5 and the road and utility easement are conveyed hereby in an pas is" condition, subject to all patent or latent conditions or problems of any kind or nature, and further subject to all title matters of record or otherwise, specifically including without limitation: (i) Road easement and other matters described in Deed recorded in Book 188 at Page 82 and in instrument recorded in Book 380 at Paqe 425. (11} All matters contained on the first Amended Plat of the Stillwater Ranch Parcels recorded in Plat Book 33 at Page 34. (iii BOCC Resolution No. 94-013. recorded in Book')' ~0 at Page '. _ (iv) All matters contained on the Final Plat of Stillwa er Ranch Subdivision/PUD recorded in Plat Book ~ilw at Page ~. 377685 8-770 P-827 12/30/94 04:15P PG 2 OF (v) Subdivision Improvements Agreement recorded in Book ak Page ~/~ (vi) Protective Covenants~7 for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD recorded in Book f-'-fat Paga/7~, (vii) Fisherman's Easement Agreement recorded in Book ~0 at Paga ~j~, (viii Grant of Utility Easement recorded in Hook ~ at Paga'Z,~. (ix) Water service Agreement between the City of Aspen and Donor recorded in Book7,J,lZ at Page7~. (c) In accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3(c) of the Protective Covenants for Stillwater Ranch subdivision/PUD, on or before Harch 1, 1995, Donor is obligated to form a Homeowners' Association to own, govern and maintain the open space Parcel depicted on the Final Plat of Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD. The members of the Association will be the owners o! the six (6) Lots in Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, and the Association will have the power to levy and collect general and spacial assessments on such members for purposes of paying the costa and expenses o! owning, improving, maintaining, caring for and operating the Open Space Parcel. By its acceptance of this Bargain and sale Deed, Donee shall ba deemed to have consented to and approved the formation of said Aomaownara' Association, to have consented to being a member thereof, and to have agreed to execute any and all documents that may be required in connection with the formation thereof. Signed and dellvared this 30th day o! December, 1994. D01iOR: BTATE O? COLORADO ) > ss. COUYTY 07 PZTxZY ) ~a~ie.sa.~ !~*.rte~~ Fab sane Bene ct Tha foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ma this 30th day of December, 1994, by Fabienna Benedict. 11ITatBBS my hand and offs i~~,sal. My commission expires:.S~~S (SEAL) :i~~~. Z EXHIBIT B GMQS Sec. 26.470.050. General requirements. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Finding: If determined to be an essential public facility, the additional cabin square footage will not be applicable. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Stafl'Finding: From the AACP; "Aspen as a unique community... in which arts, culture and education provide cornerstones of our lifestyle, character, and economy. " The Jewish Community Center will provide a venue to facilitate many of the goals of AACP, specifically Arts, Culture, Education, and Housing. Staffftnds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. S[affFinding: The Land use Code states; "the dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. The Academic (A) zone district requirements are set by the SPA, no variations from the requirements and limitations are requested or necessary. Stafffands this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staff Finding.• Not applicable. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. 1 Sta(fFinding: The applicant is not seeking a "waiver" of the affordable housing requirement, but is proposeing to house 5.75 employees on-site (1.75 employees for (2) one-bedroom units and 2.25 employees for the two-bedroom unit). Approximately 9 to 10 full time employees (FTE's) will be generated, therefore, approximately 60% (5.75/9.5=0.6) of the affordable housing demand will be mitigated by the applicant. Staff fonds this criterion to be met. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-mazket residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. Sta Finding: Not Applicable. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, § 1) Staff Finding: Please see SPA criterion 2. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Sec. 26.470.090. City Council applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments and development ceiling levels. 4. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. StaffFinding.• The applicant is requesting that the Jewish Community Center continue to be an Essential Public Facility as determined in Ordinance No. 36, Series of 2006 (see Exhibit #8 in the application). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2 ~[k Date: December 2008 Project: Aspen Jewish Community Center At The Silver Lining Ranch City of Aspen Engineering Department DRC Comments 26.440 26.440.050 Review Standazds for Development in a SPA 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development o Currently there are not adequate pedestrian/trail facilities for the proposed facility and the Aspen Club. The community center will need to submit a plan, contribution schedule, and overall cost estimate for the sidewalk and trail connection. The developer will need to show these infrastructure improvements mitigate any quality of service impacts on the neighborhood. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flows, rock falls, avalanche dangers, and flood hazards. o Shown on site map. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. o Existing Trail and Sidewalk infrastructure is not adequate for the needs of additional development in the neighborhood. Any additional trail or sidewalk infrastructure will need to be provided by the developed in conjunction with the Aspen Club. Cost estimates, layout and contribution schedule will need to be provided to the City for review. 26.435 8040 Review 26.435.030 Review Standazds 2. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion, or have consequent effect on water pollution. o The application states stormwater will be detained on site. The City is unable to determine where and how this will occur. Limited room due to the flood plain and stream mazgin will make stormwater quality infrastructure difficult to install. 4. The design and location of any proposed development, road, or trail is compatible with the terrain on the parcel on which the proposed development is to be located. o See 26.440 (6) above 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. o Developer will be required to be granted permission from the Aspen Club to construction the retaining wall on the western side of the property. Impacts of construction outside the sites property boundary must be agree upon with neighboring property and addressed in the construction management plan. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development; and said roads can be properly maintained o Application complies 11. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Trails Plan aze implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical. o Applicant will need to determine what sidewalk and trail infrastructure will ultimately be installed in conjunction with the Aspen Club project. 26.435 Stream Margin Review 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review Standards L It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Areas will not increased the base flood elevation on the pazce] proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepazed by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised including but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increased caused by the development. 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and /or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope. o The City is unable to determine what impacts increased impervious surfaces would have on the site. The developer will need to provide a drainage and stormwater study for all impervious azea on site. Miscellaneous Construction Management - A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. The plan shall describe mitigation for: pazking, staging/encroachments, truck traffic, noise, dust, and erosion sediment pollution. Detailed plans are required prior to council -please see engineering department for specific details. DRC 12-10-08 ACSD Review Comments AJCC-Silver Lining Ranch Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office at the time of construction. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains), including entrances to underground parking garages. On-site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and specifications. On-site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled commercial kitchens and food processing establishments. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by the applicant and approval prior to building permit. Glycol snowmelt and heating systems must have containment provisions and must preclude discharge to the public sanitary sewer system. Below grade development will require installation of a pumping system. One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. Permanent improvements are prohibited in areas covered by sewer easements or right of ways to the lot line of each development. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. Page 1 of 1 Chris Bendon '~ (,, From: Cindy Christensen Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:07 PM To: Jason Lasser Subject: Silver Lining Ranch I am so sorry 1 missed this meeting. I had every intention of being there and another meeting came up. My concern is with that the deed-restricted units that the Jewish Community Center currently has on Main Street are out of compliance. Housing has not seen any one come in and get qualified for this units since 2000, so they are currently out of compliance with their current location. There are three units located at the L'Auberge -Category 2 - 2 studios and lone-bedroom unit. As to the other location, I agree that the three units that they intend to provide would mitigate at 5.75 FTE's. At 9.5 employees, this would mitigate at 60%. An audit would definitely need to be required after two years of CO. Any questions, please let me know. Again, I am sorry I missed this meeting. Cindy Christensen Aspen/Pitktn County Housing Authority Operations Manager 970-920-5455/Fax 970-920-5580 4/20/2009 DRC EXHIBIT G November 13, 2008 ~ City Parks Department Requirements Property: Jewish Community Center Conditions of Approval: 1) Tree Protection: A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site and their represented drip lines. A formal elan indicating the location of the tree protection will be reauired for the bldg uermit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree remaining on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. Please note the tree protection code includes native species or serviceberry, gamble oak and other shrubs. These have not been reflected in the application. The applicant should be aware that these species will affect the overall mitigation requirements. 2) Plant Snacin~ Appropriate spacing will be required for all new plantings. Coniferous Trees will require adequate spacing between trees and distance from buildings or structures to allow for mature growth. Deciduous Trees will require adequate spacing from structures to accommodate mature growth in height. 3) Seed Mix and Irrigation: Applicant shall use the City of Aspen approved native seed mix and a temporary or permanent irrigation system will be required for establishment of native area disturbed during construction. 4) Weed Management: Applicant shall detail and define how it will manage noxious weeds during the seed establishment period. 5) Trail Easements: City Parks Department will require a 15-foot public trail easement around the follows property line from the corner adjacent to the Fabi Benedict Bridge along the river and back up to the driveway entrance on Ute Ave. In addition the City is requiring a 15-foot public trail easement, location to be determined, on the triangular portion of the property located across the river. The actual location of the public trails will be determined and located in the field prior to any approvals. 6) Stream Margin: The applicant has requested to maintain several structures which are currently located within the floodplain. As required by the Stream Margin Review all non-exempt structures located within the flood plain are to be removed and the azea re-vegetated back to its native state. A detailed plan should be provided showing the removal of these items and the plans for re-vegetating the azeas of impact. ~\ Elmhurst GROUP Suite 630 phone: 412.281.8731 One Bigelow Square iax: 412.281.9483 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 www.elmhuretgrp.com February 16, 2009 Deaz Members of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission: My name is Bill Hunt. Along with my two sisters, we own the residence at 1500 Ute Avenue. Our family has owned the property since the 1950s. My grandparents were long-time Aspen residents and my grandfather was the past-president of The Aspen Institute. As you know, Ute Avenue has transformed from a rural dirt road, to a residential street, and now a partially commercial avenue, with the arrival, in the 1970s, of the Aspen Club and, subsequently, the Silver Lining Ranch. The traffic along Ute Avenue has currently reached an excessive level of congestion. This will only be exacerbated by the proposed Jewish Community Center. Therefore, we must oppose the Jewish Community Center's Land Use Application due to the dramatic increase in traffic alone Ute Avenue. Originally there was no parking permitted for the Aspen Club entering off Ute Avenue, and now there aze 58 spaces. The Silver Lining Ranch always had extremely low intensity of usage with only 10 pazking spaces for 28 weeks of camp per yeaz and no more than 12 annual special events; thus the traffic was easily controlled. Unfortunately, The Jewish Community Center is an entirely different story. The JCC will increase the traffic with ongoing activities of preschool, teen programs, adult education, special events (evenings and weekends), summer camps, and the addition of 22 parking spaces with a much higher number of vehicle trips per day. Therefore, any future limitations on the JCC would cleazly be ineffective since such organizations aze intended to grow over time and it will be impossible to control the driving choices of families and guests attending special events. There will also inevitably be families who do not live in Aspen utilizing the JCC, and our concern would be who would monitor all of this traffic and activity? The Aspen community deserves to have afirst-class Jewish Community Center, but not at this proposed residential location with already inadequate access along Ute Avenue. Thank you for your consideration. QSi~nQcerely~7~'/ ,~G William Hunt Local Residence: 1500 Ute Avenue Aspen, Colorado Jennifer Phelan From: Gina Pogliano [GPogliano@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 1:21 PM To: Jennifer Phelan; ben@ci.aspen.co.us Subject: Jewish Community Center Dear Jennifer and Ben, I have been a resident at the Ute Park Townhomes employee housing project since 1994 and as I am unable to attend the P&Z meeting tonight would like to comment by email on the proposed Jewish Community Center (JCC). The proposed use of this facility is far too broad for the Ute Avenue neighborhood. As it stands now, we have huge traffic and safety concerns on Ute Avenue and adding an additional facility that would be used daily, for special events, and evening events would not only add to these safety concerns but also increase noise and lighting pollution. Lest you think I am an employee housing "nimby" I would like to mention that I personally support the redevelopment of the Aspen Club and Spa and consider it appropriate to the site. Mr. Fox has taken care in addressing the neighborhood's concerns and is committed to improving traffic and pedestrian safety on our street; I do not find that the proponents of the JCC have adequately addressed the many negative impacts of the scope of this proposed project. Please do not misconstrue my opposition as being non-supportive of a Jewish Community Center - in my opinion this is simply not the right location for the project. Respectfully, Gina Pogliano 1467 Ute Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Page 1 of 2 Chris Bendon From: ROSS [with_a_tail@hotmail.comj Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:46 PM To: Chris Bendon Subject: Re: Ute Andy: You may have spoken with Jason (?) Please email your letter again and I can make sure it is forwarded to the P&Z. Cheers, Chris Chris, This is Andy on Ute ave. I spoke to someone before the last P&Z meeting. I think it was you. I emailed a letter to have it entered into the records. Again, I can't make meeting on Tuesdays in the winter. Can I confirm that my last letter was received and submitted? Thanks. Andy Munves Andrew Ross Munves P.O. BOX 24 ASPEN, CO 81612 I apologize for not making the 1/20/09 P&Z meeting. I have a prior obligation in Glenwood Springs at 6:30 PM.. I would like this letter to be entered into the official Yecords. After spending eight years at Centennial and Hunter Creek we moved to Ute Ave. It was November of 2005 and we considered ourselves to be lucky to have a nice home in a quiet corner of town. When December came around we were in for a rude awakening. There is a massive amount of truck and private vehicle traffic on the block with a heavy concentration from 5 - 7pm. South Original and Ute Ave. Are narrow streets with no outlet. They are becoming one lane in several places when it has snowed recently. The proposed development at the Silver Lining Ranch would add an unbearable volume of traffic to our community. Proposals for shuttles and other incentives for not driving fall on deaf ears when it comes to affluent people. This is a simple fact. This is a residential neighborhood that we are talking about. Six, Seven and Eight year old children live at the East end of Ute Ave. There should be less traffic roaring by them when they play after school, not more. Let's control the development of our community. 2/17/2009 Page 1 of 2 Jason Lasser From: Alan Richman [arichman@sopris.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:32 AM To: Jason Lasser Subject: Fwd: Parking Lot ason, received the message below from Michael Fox and wanted you to have it for the record. \t the start of our item tonight I would request 5 minutes or so fora "refresher" presentation. I just want to briefly highlight the main points we made at the prior meeting plus show the P&Z a new map of the entire Stillwater Ranch PUD that I made with the GIS. 'lease call if we need to talk prior to the meeting. Thanks! X-Eon-Dm: dm0210 Subject: Parking Lot Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:30:11 -0700 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-M S-T N EF-Correl ato r: Thread-Topic: Parking Lot Thread-Index: AcmClXDhkMiiA4V24R4igGmJhbIUOhA== From: "Michael Fox" To: "Alan Richman" X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 8.0.237 [270.10.2511955] Alan We have reviewed the proposed parking plan for the Silver Lining Ranch and, at this moment, it looks fine. All the Best, Michael Michael Fox Aspen Club International 1450 Crystal Lake Road Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-8900(0) 711 717 0 0 9 Page 2 of 2 970-544-0355 (f) 970-948-8558 (c) F Thomas P. Reagan President Stillwater Open Space Association Re: Proposed Use of Lot 5 (Lot S), Stillwater Ranch a/k/a Silver Lining Ranch Dear Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission: I am writing this letter as President of and on behalf of the Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association (HOA) concerning the proposed use of Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision (Stillwater Ranch). The HOA administers the Protective Covenants (Covenants) governing the use of Lot 5 and the other lots within Stillwater Ranch. A copy of the Covenants is attached with a copy of their most recent amendment. Proposed Use is Underestimated and Cannot Reasonably be Controlled The HOA believes that the proposed use of Lot 5 would have a dramatic and irreversible impact on Stillwater Ranch, and is inconsistent with Stillwater Ranch's historical and current use and character. The HOA also believes that the proposed use of Lots could not be undertaken in a manner that sufficiently minimizes its impact on Stillwater Ranch, while still permitting Lot 5 to have reasonable utility for its proposed use. It is apparent to the HOA that the land use application for Lot 5: (i) dramatically underestimates the likely impact of the proposed use on Stillwater Ranch and surrounding streets and neighborhoods; (2) does not account for the impracticality of monitoring and enforcing restrictions that the City may impose to mitigate the impact of the proposed use, especially given its nature; and (3) does not account for the fact that the proposed use is of a type that naturally expands over time, yet no opportunity for expansion exists in Lot 5 or the surrounding areas. Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch and the surrounding streets and neighborhoods do not have the capacity to support the proposed use in any form, whether it is the form optimistically proposed in the current land use application, or in the form that can more realistically be expected to take shape. The HOA is willing to discuss these issues in greater detail, but believes there is a threshold issue that should be resolved before the parties expend additional time and effort on the land use approval process: the proposed use is clearly not permitted by the Covenants. Proposed Use is Prohibited by Covenants At the time the Covenants were recorded, it was contemplated that Lot 5 might be donated by Fabienne Benedict to Kid's Stuff Foundation (now Silver Lining Ranch) for the purpose of providing a "permanent home" (per the original land use application) to operate a camp for seriously ill children (Camp). At that time, Lot 5 was not yet approved for use as the Camp, but in anticipation of that approval, the Covenants were drafted with acarve-out that would release Lot 5 from certain single family use restrictions when the use was approved. The City ultimately approved the use of Lot 5 for the Camp, and Lot 5 was released from the single family restrictions. It was the intent of the Covenants to release Lot 5 from the single family restrictions for operation of the Camp, and not for any other use. 886730.1 In fact, the Covenants contain a mechanism to protect Stillwater Ranch against the use of Lot 5 for purposes other than the Camp. When Lot 5 was released from the single family restrictions, the right of Lot 5 to vote on amendments to the Covenants was suspended. This suspension gives the HOA the authority to ensure that Lot 5 is restricted to the only two uses that the Covenants and the HOA permit: single family use and the Camp. The suspension also serves to place potential owners of Lot 5 on notice that their use of the property will be limited to uses permitted by the Covenants and the HOA. The HOA recently exercised this protective mechanism by amending the Covenants to: (1) clarify the Covenants' intent that Lot 5 be exempted from the single family use restrictions only for operation of the Camp; and (2) outline a specific contingency for Lot 5's use if it is not to be used as the Camp--the single family use restrictions are re-imposed on Lot 5, and, if it returns to single family use, its voting rights are restored. The currentty-proposed use of Lot 5 is neither of the two uses that the Covenants permit for Lot 5, and is therefore prohibited by the Covenants. The HOA intends to take whatever action is necessary to enforce the Covenants, and continues to retain the right to amend the covenants without the consent of Lot 5. Conclusion The HOA understands that it is not appropriate for the City to enforce the Covenants or to determine their precise meaning. However, the HOA believes that it is appropriate for the City to acknowledge that a significant disagreement exists concerning the permissibility of the proposed use under the Covenants, an issue which could render the current land use approval process moot. Unfortunately, for the reasons discussed above, the HOA anticipates that this will be the case. While the HOA is willing to discuss the specific merits of the proposed use of Lot 5 with the City, the HOA believes that, for the sake of efficiency, this discussion should be suspended while the HOA and the applicant discuss the permissibility of the proposed use under the Covenants. Accordingly, the HOA requests that the City suspend the approval process until it receives satisfactory evidence that this issue has been resolved. Please feel free to contact me with any questions about the Covenants or any other issues concerning the land use application for Lot 5. Sinc ' Thomas P. Ran President, Stillwater Ranch Space Association 886730.1 EXHIBIT'~~ Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council Mav 14.2007 Ferguson to the city attorney about restricting the hotel units under one ownership, and he would like a legal opinion on what that means. Councilman Torre said he is still concerned about the use of the interior spaces and this could be a better project. Councilman Torre commended the applicant on where this project has come. Councilman Tone said compatibility with other projects in this azea is important. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #17. SERIES OF 2007 -Historic Designation - 827 Dean Street Councilmembers Johnson and Tygre returned. Sara Adams, community development department, told Council this is a voluntary designation for a residential neighborhood on Dean street and it exemplifies the chalet style. This was built in 1956 by Hany Poschman. Ms. Adams said this home illustrates two aspects of local post WWII history; the chalet style and the significance of Harry Poschman to Aspen's cultural heritage. HPC found all review criteria were met and voted unanimously to recommend historic designation. Ms. Adams told Council Poschman was part of the Tenth Mountain Division along with other local notables. Poschman developed an appreciation for chalet azchitecture while serving overseas in WWII. Poschman helped built lift 1 in 1947. Poschman built and operated the Edelweiss Chalet. Ms. Adams stated staff finds Poschman important to '~ Aspen, his representation of Aspen sentiment and his values which reflect the cultural heritage of [his town. Ms. Adams presented color photographs of the house, pointing out this structure is oriented towazd the mountain, which is one thing the historic preservation officers look for in the chalet style. Ms. Adams noted a generous gable roof, materials indicated of chalet architectwe -wood details and stucco. The house has had minor alterations. Mayor Kianderud opened the public hearing. Ms. Adams entered a letter into the record from Ada Lamont in favor of designation; letter from Janet Boelen in favor and from Les Holst in favor of designation. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Tone moved to adopt Ordinance # 17, Series of 2007, on second reading; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes; Tygre, yes; DeVilbiss, yes; Tone, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #18. SERIES OF 2007 -Disconnect Lot 5 Stillwater Ranch ,~ Regular Meeting Aspen City Council Mav 14.2007 Councilwoman Tygre recused herself due to a connections to her other office. Jim True, representing this city, stated this decision is within the sole discretion of Council finding whether or not it is in the best interest of the community to allow disconnection of this property. Jessica Garrow, community development department, passed out a map of the subject property with surrounding zoning. The subject property is zoned Academic and Conservation with an SPA overlay. Ms. Garrow noted the delineation of the Stillwater subdivision. Ms. Garrow said this property is part of the Stillwater ranch subdivision and its pazcels are zoned AR-2 in the county. This zone district is to create a moderate density transition zone between moderate and low density residential uses. Ms. Gatrow said it is presumed if this were to revert back to the county, it would be zoned AR-2 and would abide by the subdivision covenants. This means it would be limited to 6500 squaze feet of FAR with 4,000 squaze feet exempt basement space, 700 squaze feet of exempt gazage. The applicants would be required to provide on-site affordable housing mitigation. Ms. Gaaow told Council this parcel received a growth management allotment when approved as part of the subdivision in the county. Ms. Garrow said if it were to remain in the city and to revert to a single family home, it would need to go through an administrative growth management review and to provide affordable housing. Ms. Garrow said a permitted use in the conservation zone is a single family house; this is not a permitted use in the Academic zone district. Ms. Garrow stated staff recommends against granting this request. If this does revert to a single family home, it would pay property taxes to the city, if it remains in the city. Ms. Garrow said the FARs aze compazable between the city and county. Rick Neiley, representing the applicant Sister Andrea Jaeger, told Council Sister Andrea started Little Staz Foundation in 1990. Sister Andrea received a gift of this land from Fabienne Benedict in 1994 and through the zoning and annexation process established a charitable foundation that provides raze for children with cancer and their families. Neiley said there was no equivalent zoning in the county at that time, which is why it was annexed to the city. Neiley said during the 16 yeazs of operating the charitable foundation in Aspen, it has become more difficult to get and treat patients at this altitude. The objective is to disconnect the pazcel; rezone it in the county as a single family ]ot, sell the property to create an endowment and allow construction of a new facility south of Durango. Neiley requested Council approve this ordinance de-annexing the property so that it can revert to the Stillwater zoning. Neiley said the property taxes that maybe lost to the city would be around $6,000/annually. Neiley told Council the applicants discussed rezoning the property and leaving it in the city; however, all that is possible is what was approved during annexation. The conservation zone is not intended to be developed. Neiley said the rezoning process in the city would take much longer than the foundation can wait. Sister Andrea said her foundation provides long term raze of children with cancer. When "` the foundation started, they provided housing at local hotels. Sister Andrea told Council ~, 10 ReQUlar Meetioe Asoeu City Council Mav 14, 2007 she contacted the Benedicts about land they owned east of town for this foundation. The ~ Benedicts gave the land to the foundation to sell or to use for a building for the foundation. Sister Andrea said the high altitude affects the health of some of the children. Sister Andrea told Council 9/11 has affected fund raising. Glenn Hom, representing the applicant, told Council it will be a much shorter process in the county to get the property marketable. Ms. Garrow said a single family house is not allowed in the academic zone; it is allowed in the conservation zone but only if the SPA is lifted. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. The executive director of the Aspen Cancer survivor center told Council they looked at this center as an opportunity to continue the work in town. The director said they have discussed with other non-profits about purchasing this property and there is interest to preserve this as a cancer retreat center. Mayor Klandemd closed the public hearing. Sister Andrea said this foundation has worked with a lot of non-profit organizations to support children and young adults. Sister Andrea told Council they have a responsibility to work with these children and to continue that work. Sister Andrea said they need this endowment to carry on this work. Councilman DeVilbiss asked the access to the property. Sister Andrea said Ute avenue is the only access. Councilman DeVilbiss asked if this could be sold for 3 single family houses in the county. Neiley said it was approved in the county and the number of lots and density was established for one single family residence. This also has a growth management allocation in the county. There could be a single family house with a deed restricted employee unit. No further subdivision would be permitted. Councilman DeVilbiss said the difference seems to be that the applicants could get a single family house approved more quickly through the county process than the city process. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to adopt Ordinance #18, Series of 2007, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Councilman Torre said he is not in favor of disconnection. Councilman Torre said he is no[ in favor of properties being developed in the city and then when it is convenient for disconnection, to apply for that. Councilman Tone stated it is in the city's best interest to retain this property under the city's guidelines. The property was deeded for non-profit work; it was accepted by the city as such and was zoned for academic and conservation and it should remain so and not revert to single family house usage not in line with the original approvals. Mayor IClandemd said this was gifted with no stipulations from the donor. Mayor Klanderud said she has mixed feelings about this application. One decision is made when it benefits the land owner and when it doesn't a different decision is sought. Mayor Klanderud said it would be great if it were awin/win for everyone. The property +... 11 Reeular Meetln2 Asaen City Council Mav 14, 2007 is developed for certain uses and it would a good solufion if it could be used for similar ~_. uses by other non-profits. Councilman Johnson stated he does not feel it is in the city's best interest to allow de- annexation for the reasons stated by staff nor is it wise public policy to set precedents of de-annexation for the sole purpose of increasing value for free market residences. Councilman Johnson noted there are too many single family residence and too few non- profit institutions like this. Councilman Torre asked if the conservation zone allows for a single family residence. Ms. Garrow said it does but in this instance the SPA overlay prevents it. Councilman DeVilbiss asked the rationale for the SPA overlay. Chris Bendon, community development department, said this was a specific request and the zoning was academic as most closely associated with the proposed use, and conservation zoning because of the flood plain azeas. The SPA was tailored to the applicant's proposal and it meshed with the homeowners' covenants. Mayor Klanderud noted there have been discussions on the traffic on Ute Avenue for other projects. If this were a different non-profit use, there could be increases in traffic on Ute Avenue which may not be in the best interests of the city. A single family residence would be a wash city or county. Councilman DeVilbiss stated the best interests of the city will not be served by disconnection. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, no; Torre, no; DeVilbiss, no; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion NOT carried. APPEAL OF P&Z RESOLUTION 1001 UTE AVENUE Councilman Torre recused himself due to a connection with the Gant. Jessica Garrow, community development department, submitted two resolutions, #42, reversing the decision of P&Z and Resolution #41, upholding the decision of P&Z. Jim True, representing the city, told Council this is an appeal of a decision made by P&Z granting 8040 green line and residential design standazd variance and a PUD amendment. The appeal standazd to be addressed by Council is based on a review of the record to determine whether there was a denial of due process, abuse of discretion or finding that P&Z exceeded its jurisdiction. True stated no additional evidence other than the record presented to P&Z should be considered by Council. Ms. Garrow outlined the documents in Council's packet that are part of the P&Z record for this approval. Ms. Ganrow stated this is an appeal from Richard and Susan Wells of a decision made Apri13, 2007, by P&Z where they ganted approval of Resolution #9, 2007, granting 8040 green line review to two residences at 1001 Ute avenue; a residential design standard variance from secondary mass and two PUD amendments; one for building along the property line between the two residences and one to transfer a small amount of FAR from lot 2 to lot 1. 12 EXHIBIT MEMORANDUM T0: David Hoefer, Attorney's Office Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Department FROM: Claude Morelli, Transportation Planner CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager Lysa Usher, Transportation Coordinator DATE: ~ vember1999~ RE: Potential Asoen Club Contribution to the Cross Town Shuttle SUMMARY: The purpose of this memorandum is to develop a recommendation for a ro '7"'`~eyp~speri Club for ope~ratton of- a-.Cross Town Shuttle durirg_ ,t ~,yYirttei• o X19 9/?00'07"The recommended contribution is ~ ~ o~'o>• eaeh~ to which the shuttle operates. Staff also recommends. however, that this amount be reduced by $2.00 for each shuttle rider that the Aspen Club generates. The purpose of [he reduction is to provide an incentive for the Aspen Club to promote use of the service. BACKGROUND: At a recent work session on transportation, Council gave preliminary approval for the operation and mazketing of a new in-town transit service cal]ed the Cross Town Shuttle. This service will run during the winter of 1999/2000 between the east end of Ute Avenue and the Music Associates bus stop in the West End via the Aspen Core Area (see Figure A). Service will be provided every 30 minutes in each direction. The purposes of the shuttle include (a) reducing traffic and demand for core-area parking by providing an alternative to automobile travel, and (b) filling gaps in transit service coverage that currently exist in Aspen. In a November 4; 1999 memorandum to Council, staff presented estimates of potential shuttle ridership. Staff estimates that, on average, approximately l33 riders per day will use the shuttle over the course of [he operating season. Of this total, approximately 57 are expected to boazd or alight in ttte West End and 76 are expected to board or alight along Ute Avenue (see Table 1). ~. ~ ~_ The November 4 memo noted th~otett,,,,,~#,o3,~arrner~,~~t~n Club t,~,anc~~ of ' See the Aspen Club development approval documents for information on [he Club's traffic-mitigation Mertro_.45pen Club_l"ontributionl Pale I of 2 • • +r"l ~r RECOMMENDED ASPEN CLUB CONTRIBUTION: Staff s methodology for developing a reasonable Aspen Club contribution level is a two-step process. The first step involves apportioning the totaE cost of the shuttle service between the west and east sesments of the shuttle route on a mileage basis. The west segment extends from the Music Associates stop to Rubey Park, while the east segment extends from Rubey Park to the east end of Ute Avenue. Step two involves further apportioning the cost of operating and marketing the east segment to the Aspen Club. The apportionment of cost to the Aspen Club is based on its estimated.shuttle rider generation rate relative to other land uses along Ute Avenue. Step 1: When measured on a round-trip basis, the route of the Cross Town Shuttle is approximately 3.9 miles long. That is, each trip of the shuttle from the eas ndaf U -.,! Avenue to the Music Associates bus stop and back totals about 3.9 mtles t a~eltn out ~1 peicenf of`toial foute mileage`. Since the cost of is~projected to Total approximately $726 per dav,~ tg the servtce over the east portion is about $297.80_per ;;,rte 2). Step 2: Ute Avenue land uses are expected to generate about 76 shuttle riders per dav. Of this amount, at least o0 nders are expected to board or alight at the Aspen Club Thus~rtder _ generated by the~Aspet n Club ale expected to represent about 26 percenC,gf all,Ute ven, e n ers. Iv1ui>=ipTving the mtleaee apportioned cost of the east segment of the Cross Town Shuttle Service (= $ 297,80) by the Aspen Clubs share of all Ute Avenue riders (= 0?6) yields a t' , ommerided Aspen Club contrbunolj of;$77,8p per;~day_~See Table 3). 3u~,.w SHUTTLE PROMOTION INCENTIVE: As an incentive for the Aspen Club to promote use of the Cross Town Shuttle, staff recommends that the contribution level of $77.85 per day be reduced by $2.00 for each rider generated by the club. For example. if the Aspen Club were to generate an average of 30 riders per day. the required daily contribution would be $17.85 (_ $77.85 - [$2.00 x 30]). Generation of 39 or more riders per day nn average would reduce the Aspen Club's daily contribution to zero. Measurement of ridership should be by means of periodic random samples of shuttle boardinss and alightings at the Aspen Club stop. obligations: Ordinance Number?0, Series of ]996, Section 2, hems 4 and IQ. Sze also the July I5. 1996 memorandum from Alan Richman to the Aspen City Council, referenced in Item 4 of Ordinance 30. M<mo Aspcn Club_Comributionl Page ? Of 2 RECOMMENDED ASPEN CLUB CONTRIBUTION: Staffs methodology for developing a reasonable Aspen Club contribution level is a two-step process. The first step involves apportioning the total cost of the shuttle service between the west and east segments of the shuttle route on a mileage basis. The west segment extends from the Music Associates stop to Rubey Pazk, while the east segment extends from Rubey Park to the east end of Ute Avenue. Step two involves further apportioning the cost of operating and mazketing the east segment to the Aspen Club. The apportionment of cost to the Aspen Club is based on its estimated shuttle rider generation rate relative to other land uses along Ute Avenue. Step l: When measured on a round-trip basis, the route of the Cross Town Shuttle is approximately 3.9 miles long. That is, each trip of the shuttle from the east end of Ute Avenue to the Music Associates bus stop and back totals about 3.9 miles. Traveling from Rubey Park to the east end of Ute Avenue and back totals about 1.6 miles. Thus, the east segment of the shuttle represents about 41 percent of total route mileage. Since the cost of operating and marketing the shuttle is projected to total approximately $726 per day, the mileage-apportioned cost of operating the service over the east portion is about $297.80 per day (see Table 2). Step 2: Ute Avenue land uses are expected to generate about 76 shuttle riders per day. Of this amount, at least 20 riders are expected to boazd or alight at the Aspen Club. Thus, riders generated by the Aspen Club aze expected to represent about 26 percent of all Ute Avenue riders. Multiplying the mileage-apportioned cost of the east segment of the Cross Town Shuttle Service (_ $ 297.80) by the Aspen Club's share of all Ute Avenue riders (= 0.26) yields a recommended Aspen Club contribution of $77.85 per day (see Table 3). SHUTTLE PROMOTION INCENTIVE: As an incentive for the Aspen Club to promote use of the Cross Town Shuttle, staff recommends that the contribution level of $77.85 per day be reduced by $2.00 for each rider generated by the club. For example, if the Aspen Club were to generate an average of 30 riders per day, the required daily contribution would be $17.85 (_ $77.85 - [$2.00 x 30]}. Generation of 39 or more riders per day on average would reduce the Aspen Club's daily contribution to zero. Measurement of ridership should be by means of periodic random samples of shuttle hoardings and alightings at the Aspen Club stop. obligations: Ordinance Number 20, Series of 1996, Section 2, Items 4 and 10. See also the Juty 35, 1996 memorandum from Alan Richman to the Aspen City Council, refemnced in Item 4 of Ordinance 20. merra_aspen_club c1_shuUle contribulionl.doc page 2 of 2 December 3, 2003 r"`cm "`ns~EN Aspen Club and Spa 1450 Crystal Lake Road Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: General Manager n f ~ ti As the Aspen Club and Spa will not be contributing to the Cross Town Shuttle this season, the business will be required to provide van services as represented as part of a 1996 approval for the relocation of the Aspen Club parking lot and expansion of the club. The requirements aze as follows: 1. Nature of service: The service will be point to point, between the Aspen Club Lodge and the Aspen Club. The shuttle will also have at least one cross-town pick up point. 2. Route: Along Highway 82 and Crystal Lake Road, but may deviate to Ute Avenue for therapy patients. 3. Timing: The service will operate during the morning (8-9:30am), mid-day (12-1:30pm) and evening (4-6:OOpm) peak hours, on the half hour and the hour, for a total of 13 round trips daily. It will be a year-round service. 4. Vehicle type: Van service. 5. Public information: Members and employees will be given materials describing the shuttle service and encouraging them to use it. Members and employees will also be reminded that RFTA operates a shuttle along Highway 82 that they can use. A sign will be posted in a conspicuous place on the property describing the time and place of the Club's shuttle service. 6. Completion of former issues of compliance: City of Aspen records indicate that the Aspen Club has not fulfilled its required 2003 Cross Town Shuttle contribution. The Club must provide proof of payment of prior invoices, or alternatively, pay the enclosed invoice by December 15, 2003. 2. Detailed information on how the van service meets the above requirements 3. Remittance of 2003 Cross Town Shuttle contribution 4. Proposed plan for annual proof ofcompliance - ie annual report, meeting, etc. Regards, .8~~ S O.~ Lynn Bader, Transportation Coordinator Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer A transportation management plan, including the following elements, will also be due to the City of Aspen Transportation Department by December 15, 2003. 1. Commencement date of van service Aspen Club & Spa Traffic Management Plan Specific Requirements for Shuttle Service Source: Alan Richman Memo dated July I5, 1996 Shuttle Service 1. Nature of service: The service will be point to point, between the Aspen Club Lodge and the Aspen Club. The shuttle will also have at least one cross-town pick up point. 2. Route: Along Highway 82 and Crystal Lake Road, but may deviate to Ute Avenue for therapy patients. 3. Timing: The service will operate during the morning (8-9:30am), mid-day (12-1:30pm) and evening (4-6:OOpm) peak hours, on the half hour and the hour, for a total of 13 round trips daily. It will be a year-round service. 4. Vehicle type: Van service. 5. Public information: Members and employees will be given materials describing the shuttle service and encouraging them to use it. Members and employees will also be reminded that RFTA operates a shuttle along Highway 82 that they can use. A sign will be posted in a conspicuous place on the property describing the time and place of the Club's shuttle service. 6. Reporting A report including pazking lot counts, ridership data, etc was required to be submitted to Council within one year of construction completion. Is there any way to require similar reporting to ensure compliance? (ex: annual check in with Transportation staff) ASPEN CLUB PRO RATA SHARE OF CROSSTOWN SERVICE 2003 CALCULATIONS Total Annual Cost $ 163,823 Total Operating Days 190 Total Operating Cost/day $ 862.23 WINTER COST CALCULATIONS Total Operating days 114 Hours of Operation 13 Roundtrips/hour to Aspen Club 2 Total Daily Trips 26 Total Winter Trips 2964 Total Winter Cost $ 98,293.80 Cost per trip $ 33.16 Winter Aspen Club Cost per Day Aspen Clubs Required Mitigation T3 trips per day ($33.16 x .41 x .50x13 trips) $ 88.38 Aspen Club Cost for Total Winter Operations (114 days x $89.00/day) $ 10,075.11 $ SUMMER COST CALCULATIONS Total Operating days Hours of Operation Round trips/hour to Aspen Club Daily Trips Total Summer Trips Total Summer Cost Cost per trip Summer Aspen Club Cost per Day Aspen Clubs Required Mitigation ($29.73 x .41 x .50 xl3 trips) Aspen Club Cost for Total Winter Operations (76 days x $79.24/day) TOTAL WINTER & SUMMER COSTS 76 14.5 2 29 2204 $ 65,529.20 $ 29.73 13 trips/day $ 79.24 10,076.00 $ 6,021.91 $ 6,022.00 $ 16,098.00 The ~f ~ ASPEN CLUB &SPA December 30, 2003 The City of Aspen Club & Spa Lynn Bader, Transportation Coordinator Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer Please consider the following in response to your letter dated December 3, 2003. requesting a plan for our shuttle service: ,._,, _:, 2. The Vehicle in use is a 2004 GMC Savannah 7-passenger van. 3. From December 15 through April 15, and from June 15 through September 30, the van will run continuously from 8:30 am until 8:00 pm on Saturday and Sunday and until 9:00 pm on weekdays. This itinerary yields approximately 40-50 trips per day. 4. From April 16 through June 14, and from October 1 through December 14, the van will run twice per hour, on the 10 and 40 minute past the hour, during the same hours. This itinerary will yield approximately 20-30 trips per day. 5. We are currently testing a route that begins and ends at the Aspen Club and loops through town, stopping at taxi pick-up points and at Rubey Park. 6. We are open to the City's recommendation of compliance proof-we can provide an annual report, or attend a meeting, whichever pleases the City. Please advise. We have written a check in the amount of $10,000 that will be mailed on January 2, 2004. The remainder will follow on January 9. Thank you so much for your consideration. Please call me with any questions, comments, or concerns. Linda Schmehl General Manager Mazch 8, 2004 CERTIFIED MAIL Linda Schmehl Aspen Club 1450 Crystal Lake Road Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Payment for 2003 Cross Town Shuttle Dear Linda, The City of Transportation Department has not received the final payment due for the Aspen Club's contribution to operation of the Cross Town Shuttle in 2003. Per your letter dated December 30, 2003, a payment was to be made January 2, 2004 and January 15, 2002. To our knowledge the January 15, 2004 payment has not been received. Further, the Transportation Department staff has also not received information related to a marketing plan for the shuttle (i.e. how the Aspen Club is informing clients and staff of the service). As you are aware, the Aspen Club was required to provide some sort of public transportation program as part of 1996 approvalsF `~ glir"~'~-n~ub~chos~e,Yo; provide fundine to the Citfoithe Cross_TownFSfitiLtl . Since payment has not been made for a portion of the Cross Town Shuttle for 2003, the Aspen Club is violation o its approvals. Please remit payment and a marketing plan within ten (10) days from the date of this letter or a court citation may be issued. We appreciate your attention in this matter. Regards, Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer City of Aspen cc: Lynn Bader, Transportation Department ~xN~Br~ I City PlanninE & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 District; seconded by Michael Wampler. Erspamer, yes; Gibbs, yes; Bloom yes; Weiss, yes; Wampler, yes; Myrin, yes. APPROVED 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER AT THE SILVER LINING RANCH LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing for 1490 Ute Avenue the Aspen Jewish Community Center SPA Amendment. The legal notice was provided and Jim True said that it was compliant. Jason Lasser, Special Projects Planner for the City of Aspen, distributed emails that were received by Community Development today. Lasser said that this was an SPA Amendment, GMQS, Special Review for Parking, Stream Margin and 8040 Greenline Reviews. The Planning & Zoning Commission's task was to review the Special Planned Area Amendment. Cliff Weiss asked about the 2 letters from the public that stated they did not receive notice for the public hearing. Jim True responded that the legal notice appears in order; there was an affidavit of mailing. Alan Richman stated that the public notice was done according to what the City of Aspen requires; he went to the GIS Department to obtain the most current records. Richman said that if the property owners are not diligent in keeping the Assessor up to date on their mailing addresses then the address would not be correct and there was a 300 foot radius for noticing. Richman said that the Rabbi has had multiple contacts with Mr. Bellock and Mr. Reagan about this project. Jason Lasser said there were 2 reviews by the Planning & Zoning Commission to go to City Council; one is for the Specially Planned Area (SPA Amendment) and the other is for Growth Management Review. P&Z has 3 reviews that are final at P&Z; Special Review for Parking to add 10 spaces, Stream Margin Review and 8040 Greenline Review. Lasser said the SPA Amendment allows for flexibility for uses and for dimensional requirements; the SPA Amendment is to allow for arts, cultural and civic uses on the upper bench. Lasser said the applicant was looking to amend the building envelope to accommodate revised parking on the west edge, the property line adjacent to the Aspen Club. Lasser said the changes to the existing building were primarily interior changes to accommodate the Jewish Community Center; what was being added to the property was a small cabin to the north edge of the property. Staff recommends approval of the SPA Amendment. 4 City Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 Lasser said for Special Events they would drop off and pick up at the Rio Grande Parking Garage and the preschool at Koch Lumber Yard Park. Richman said for weddings the people would be picked up at their hotels. Lasser said for the GMQS the employee generation would be determined by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The applicant proposed based on research were 5.75 employees, which was approximately 60% of the affordable housing mitigation that APCHA requested. Lasser said the Special Review for Parking was adding 10 spaces as well as the shuttle and a 10 foot wide pedestrian and bike path that connects from Ute Avenue directly to the front door of the Community Center. Lasser said the 8040 Greenline doesn't touch any development or buildings it just crosses the driveway. Lasser said the Stream Margin Review meets the criteria and was previously approved and there were no significant changes to the lower bench being made. Staff recommends approval of all of the reviews. Cliff Weiss asked if the cabin will be for 1 FTE. Alan Richman replied that for each bedroom you get credit for 1.75. Weiss asked where the others were housed. Richman replied inside the main building. LJ Erspamer asked what the 30% of the open space meant on page 24. Richman replied that it would be 30% of the site of 6 '/z acres was required to be open space. Bert Myrin asked about the 60% of FTEs housed. Jennifer Phelan responded that this was an essential public facility and there was not a table for employee generation but each essential public facility was reviewed separately. Phelan said that the commission could lock in that 60% mitigation and if something changes then the applicant would come back with a change. Mike Wampler spoke to Shirley Ritter about child care; infants require more employees than middle school children; he asked if that played into this at all. Richman replied that they think they know what their employee generation will be; there was not a magic formula so they are looking at their planned operation. Richman said there will be an audit 2 years after they operate and if turns out that the generation is somewhat in excess then they will be responsible for more and they will adjust; if it turns out to be less they are still providing 3 housing units. 5 City PlanninE & ZOnInE MeetinE -Minutes -January 20, 2009 Alan Richman introduced Rabbi Mintz; Susan Richman helping with the site plan; Art Chabon, the architect; Jeff Ream helping with the traffic study and Neil Karbank, legal counsel. Richman provided the background of the property; he agreed with the staff presentation and resolution with the changes. Richman said that the Silver Lining Ranch operated from 1999 to 2006 and the foundation decided to move the operation out of this property and relocated to southwest Colorado, outside of Durango; there has been very little activity on this property for the last several years. In 2007 the foundation submitted a petition to the City Council asking to either disconnect the property from the City, which would revert back to a County parcel of land and would have gone to the County Commissioners to see if they could revert back to R-15 single family zoning or ask the City Council to rezone to RR, the lowest intensity residential use or R-15. City Council denied both requests and made a clear determination that they wanted the property to stay an institutional use. Richman said the Jewish Community Center is appropriate for this property. Richman said the existing condition were the property as a whole is 6 '/z acres on 2 benches, an upper bench and lower bench; there was a slope between the 2 benches that drops about 20 to 30 feet. The upper bench was rather flat and was immediately adjacent to the Aspen Club, which was located on the map on the first page of the memo. Rabbi Mintz thanked City staff and the Commission for all of their time. Rabbi Mintz gave the background of the Jewish Community Center which was founded about 8 years ago and purchased the L'Auberge Cabins on Main Street about 5 years ago. Rabbi Mintz said that after seeing the Silver Lining Ranch several times he realized that it was perfect for their needs and because it takes advantage of the beauty of Aspen with almost no work and looking at the Main Street location for children was not that compatible with all of the traffic. Richman said although this was a significant project the proposed changes to the property were very minor. They were making an internal remodel to each of the 3 floors in the building and there were some line of sight changes. The second floor will stay the same with the bedrooms used as employee housing and the Rabbi's office; the lower level will be the 3 preschool classrooms. Richman said the traffic projections were from Ute Avenue where the entrance was located and public transportation is emphasized as the way to access this property and begins with the preschool. Richman said the number of parking spaces proposed is adequate to handle the religious services on Friday evenings and 6 City Planning & ZOning Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 Saturday mornings and adult education. Richman said that they will inform parents when signing preschool children up that there were shuttles and parents that drive routinely would be charged an additional fee. Richman said the same shuttle services would be used for special events such as major religious celebrations like the Jewish New Year, bar mitzvahs and weddings; the special events would be limited to 10 per year. Richman said employees living on site will be discouraged from having a car except for the caretaker who needs a vehicle. Richman said the Aspen Club will have car-sharing and welcomed this applicant to take part in that car-sharing and they have agreed to place bicycles on the property. Cliff Weiss asked the existing FAR of the building. Richman replied it was approved at 14,000 square feet. Jeff Ream, senior transportation engineer, said that he took a lot of the discussions of operations from the original Main Street site and applied them to this site. Ream said this was a fairly unique site; there were typical daily activities such as the daycare, employee trips and the less frequent activities of the services and classes and special events. Ream said this site had limited parking and the applicant was taking an active approach to limiting traffic through travel demand management measures most specifically the preschool and special event shuttles. Ream said the Crosstown Shuttle provides service twice an hour; the Aspen Club Shuttle has been proposed and for the employees there was car-sharing and bicycles. The memo contained the traffic studies. Richman reminded the commission of the major project benefits to create a place of worship, education and culture to serve to serve the Aspen Community. The Community Center will provide desperately needed preschool facility for approximately 40 children and will be built with no public subsidy. Richman said the property has been sitting idle for.the last 3 years. Richman asked for commission approval. Cliff Weiss asked what the traffic volumes looked like on Friday nights and Saturday mornings. Jeff Ream responded on Friday night and Saturday morning the background traffic was lower; there were about 15 additional vehicles added to the traffic. Background traffic was the club and the residences on Ute Avenue. Richman said that his understanding was that the Wildwood School does drop off and pickup at Koch Park. Bert Myrin asked about the parking spaces being for employees only. Richman responded the goal was for 20 parking spaces because they believe that number 7 City Planning & ZOninE Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 will accommodate the basic day to day uses of this site. Myrin asked if the employees would take 10 of the spaces. Richman replied there were multiple employees living on site and they would be discouraged from having cars and the spaces would not be dominated by employees. Myrin was concerned that parking was being doubled and at the same time trying to discourage traffic. Myrin asked if the city would fund the Crosstown Shuttle service or if they funded the Crosstown Shuttle for the Aspen Club. Myrin asked if this project could participate in some funding for the Crosstown Shuttle. Stan Gibbs asked what the Aspen Club traffic analysis was. Gibbs asked if the base line for this project included the Aspen Club traffic generation; he said if that number was not included then it was a piecemeal approach toward transportation for that street (Ute). Ream said that he spoke to the Aspen Club and tried to get as much information as possible but the Aspen Club was not in a position to give those numbers out; they were still figuring it out. Mike Wampler said that according to his number crunching if there were 12 hours a day at 200 an hour that came up to 2200; generating a car every 3 minutes so that would be anon-issue. Gibbs asked if the preschool shuttle was just used for the preschool. Richman replied that it was used for the preschool and special events. Rabbi Mintz said there were only about 4 or 8 cars that come on Friday night and less on Saturday morning because there is the concept of not driving on the Jewish Sabbath, which was something to keep in mind. Wampler said there was a locked gate there and suggested the fine for driving kids should be substantial. Dina Bloom asked if they were going toward an agreement with the Aspen Club for a ride share program, car share program, bike program and shuttle. Richman said there were 2 ways to look at the Aspen Club Shuttle which today operated on a demand only basis and if the project that is on the table were to go forward that shuttle service would expand considerably. MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to extend the meeting until 7:30 pm; seconded by Michael Wampler. All in favor, APPROVED. Myrin asked if the neighbors of Koch Park were notified. Myrin asked if there was a gate and asked if a gate was allowed in the city. Weiss asked why they were adding a 700 square foot structure. Rabbi Mintz replied that he wasn't comfortable with the caretaker living in the building with 8 City Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 children. Phelan said that community development require accessory dwelling units to be detached; affordable housing units can be inside a building but encourage detached units. Erspamer requested a site visit and an avalanche survey to be included in the next packet. Public Comments: 1. Tom Regan, public, stated that he was president of the Stillwater open space association; he said Fabi Benedict carved out Lot 5 for the permanent home for the Silver Lining Ranch, Kids Foundation. Regan said that the restrictions and covenants were to provide protection to the homeowners to resort to a single family home if Andrea's foundation moved out. 2. Bill Krimmel, public, stated that he has been involved with the kids at the Silver Lining Ranch since 1998 when the building was being built. Krimmel stated that he was in favor of this project. 3. Janie Rosenberg, public, stated that daycare was needed in this town. Rosenberg said that if there was a way to house teachers here that would be a huge benefit. 4. Barbara Fleck, public, said that she lives at Stillwater and they want to keep this a quiet neighborhood; she spoke to members of the synagogue and wanted to know where they were putting the summer camp because their covenants won't allow it. 5. Rick Neiley, public, stated that he represented Sister Andrea Yaeger. Neiley said that in 2007 City Council denied the request for this property to revert back to a single family use originally permitted by Pitkin County. Neiley said that City Council gave very specific instructions to find an organization that would continue non-profit work on this property and this proposal is an almost perfect fit for the existing facilities, for the nature of the infrastructure and the benefits to the community. Neiley said that the parking and transportation issues had a framework to make it work. Neiley said that he studied the covenants and there was nothing in those covenants that say that the use can't change. 6. Larry Rosenfeld, public, said if the concern was having kids back out there; Aspen has kids now. Weiss said that a site visit was needed for parking, traffic, and the layout of the new parking spaces. 9 City Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -January 20, 2009 MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to continue the public hearing for the Jewish Community Center to February 17, 2008; seconded by Bert Myrin. All in favor. APPROVED. Discussion: Weiss, Myrin and Erspamer stated that the parking and transportation concerned them the most. There will be a site visit at noon on Tuesday, February 17`h. Myrin requested the minutes from the Council meeting mentioned on page 13 of the memo. Erspamer asked for a zoning map in the Sister Cities Meeting Room. Adjourned at 7:30pm. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 10 Regular Meetin¢ Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17, 2009 Bert Myrin asked about the airlock for new structures not being met. Jennifer Phelan responded that they were remodeling and were proposing the airlock; she stated that guideline did not have to be applied. Mike Wampler asked Denis Murray if he approved of everything that was proposed. Denis Murray replied yes and they worked with engineering as well but might have to adjust the grade of the sidewalk and that would help them gain the elevation to make the ramp work out. Gideon Kaufman provided the affidavits for posting and mailing to Mr. True. Kaufman said that they have worked together with staff and took suggestions and modified the plan to meet with the approval. Linda Wong explained the airlock and how it worked. Stan Gibbs noted that the drawing of the remodeled building doesn't really show the delivery access on the side; does that move. Linda Wong replied the current building had delivery access and she said that she believed that would be retained. Gibbs said that he just wanted to make sure that alley access was retained because it was required for deliveries. Jim DeFrancia asked if this commission was the final authority on the application. Phelan replied that they were. Public Comments: Jeffrey Halferty, public, said that he worked on that building when it was Ozzie's and thought that this was a great proposal. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #5, series 2009, approving the request for commercial design review for 312 South Hunter conditioned on retaining the existing delivery door along the alley and delete the word "not"; Cliff Weiss seconded. Roll call vote: Wampler, yes; Bloom, yes; Myrin, yes; Weiss, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 6-0. Continued Public Hearing: 1490 Ute Avenue -Jewish Community Center, SPA Amendment Stan Gibbs opened the continued public hearing for 1490 Ute Avenue, Jewish Community Center, SPA Amendment. Jennifer Phelan asked Jim True to speak on covenants; she asked for clarification on the role of covenants with regard to public Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17, 2009 hearing and the criteria that the planning and zoning commission uses in reviewing an application. Jim True stated that it was really very simple and had explained this before. The City of Aspen is not in a position to enforce private covenants. What the P&Z must do is consider this pursuant to the City's Landuse Code and the terms and conditions of the Landuse Code. Private covenants are a separate issue that are individually enforced; the history in this situation is (as he understands it) the covenants were in place and there was a lot of discussion at the last meeting about the covenants. If the applicant wishes to request to have time to address covenant issues that's up to them but it is not P&Z's place to review, interrupt, make determinations as to what the covenants do or do not say. True recommended that P&Z simply address what's in the Landuse Code and not address representations regarding what the covenants say this; it is not P&Z's position to make determinations for what private covenants do or do not say. Jim DeFrancia said that he appreciated that advice and should we ignore covenants that have to do with building restrictions. True said that it is not P&Z's position to make determinations as to whether it does or doesn't comply with private covenants. True noted that was a whole array of legal issues for a judge to determine and not P&Z. True said that there are certainly issues that the homeowners can bring up that are related to your consideration; he did not say not to consider homeowner's concerns but keep it in the context of the Landuse Code and not enforcing private covenants. Jason Lasser, special project planner with the City of Aspen, said this was a continuation for the Aspen Jewish Community Center at Silver Lining Ranch, consolidated SPA amendment application and growth management review. Lasser sated questions from the last P&Z meeting were who runs the crosstown shuttle, is the fire hydrant placement okay with the fire department, how does the city treat private gates and additional information for the avalanche study. Some answers to those questions were provided in the packet as well as new additional information, exhibit M (letters from homeowners, neighbors and interested public). That was handed out today. Staff recommends approval of this application. Bert Myrin asked about the employee housing mitigation from the January 20`h memo page 6 says that the employee housing mitigation was 60% of the 9 employees; P&Z is just determining the number of employees. Lasser replied that was included because the applicant was now requesting a waiver and they were 4 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17, 2009 actually going to provide 60% of the affordable housing. So as an essential public they can request a waiver from City Council. Alan Richman, representing the Aspen Jewish Community Center, stated that he did not want to repeat the presentation from the January 20`h that was rather lengthy. Richman provided the key points from the original presentation plus one more. 1. The owner of the property is Kids Stuff Foundation. 2. We believe that the property and the building represent an excellent fit for the Jewish Community Center; the property offers wonderful opportunities for play areas for preschool, represents an awe inspiring place for religious worship. 3. The proposed changes to the property include the new pedestrian section, the driveway loop improvements and the addition of about 10 parking spaces. 4. They have placed a strong emphasis on programs to reduce the need for users to drive to the facility; there was a free shuttle service for the preschool; there was a need for financial penalties for parents who do not use the preschool shuttle service; special events shuttle service; car share program. 5. The traffic volumes on the surrounding road system are low and the traffic increase from this Center would have little to no on those traffic operations. 6. The Community Center will provide a desperately needed preschool facility for approximately 40 children. 7. (addition) GIS created an aerial photograph map of the entire Stillwater Ranch PUD. Richman said that no roads are shared with the Stillwater Ranch properties. The distances from the closest neighbor is just less than 650 feet away, which is just over 2 city blocks. Richman said they were not building a new facility but reusing an existing building. Cliff Weiss asked about other homeowners impacted besides the Stillwater neighbors. Richman responded that there were other neighbors and Ute Avenue neighbors. Weiss inquired about outdoor activities and what were the plans, for summer camp on the open space. Richman replied that nothing was proposed on the conservation open space. Stan Gibbs asked for Alan to point out where the open space was located on the map. Cliff Weiss asked where the children's play area was located. Weiss asked about the false fronts of a western town. Richman replied those false front play areas were put up by the Kids Stuff Foundation called Kid Town and hope that area will remain there. Richman said they were open to conditions in the Resolution. Jim DeFrancia asked how many full time employee were anticipated. Richman replied 9-10. DeFrancia asked how many employees the Silver Lining Ranch had. Richman replied that there were quite a number when the sessions were in 5 Regular MeetinH Aspen Planning and Zonine February 17, 2009 operation of medical staff from 10-15 personnel; there were 7 one week sessions and then it went to 7 two week sessions. There were administrative employees in the building full time but each kid needed medical staff and there were 20 kids for each session. DeFrancia asked what was proposed for employee housing mitigation for staff. Richman replied that there were 3 units inside the building currently but they would have 2 units inside the building because the lower level unit would be displaced by the preschool rooms and they would have 750 square foot caretaker unit built. Bert Myrin asked if the affordable unit was proposed where the dumpster was located. Richman replied next to it. Myrin asked who would use the 23 parking spaces. Richman responded that when there were religious activities there would be some spaces used for the adult education and drop off spaces. Myrin asked how many bedrooms would there be on site for employee housing. Richman answered there's a 2 bedroom and 2 1 bedrooms. Rabbi Mintz stated that he currently has 5 employees and only 1 uses a car. Myrin asked if there was a distinction between a parking space and a drop off space. Richman replied there were some spaces that were obvious spaces and there were identified ones as drop off spaces. Cliff Weiss asked the distance between the Aspen Club parking lot and Silver Lining Ranch. At least 300 yards was the reply. Richman replied that there was no way to get from the Aspen Club parking lot without going back to Ute Avenue to get to this property. Public Comments: 1. Dick Bell, public, said that he worked for the Silver Lining Ranch and there was a horse ranch on the property. Bell stated that he goes on site every week. 2. Barbara Fleck, public, said that shuttles don't work; mother's don't want to leave their children so they drop them off. There were activities so the parents stay so they have those cars parking. The covenants do not allow them to use the open space so the horseback riding and the camp do not fit into the whole program. 3. Peter Gerson, public, stated that he bought from Fritz and Fabi and the land was a sanctuary with birds, fox, bears, coyote and deer. This land was a flood plain and they have kept it in the natural state; when the children go outside they will impact this area. 4. Tom Regan, public, stated that he was president of the Stillwater open space association. This area was developed as a neighborhood and was connected together by the common area and by the use of the different properties. 6 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17, 2009 Regan said that they were not asking P&Z to adjudicate on the covenants. Regan requested further analysis for the traffic study prior to anything being voted on; he asked for a continuance. 5. Rick Neiley, public, said that he represented Sister Andrea Yeager the founder of Silver Lining Ranch. Neiley stated the original application from 1996 or 1997 anticipated 20 kids, family members, 20 staff members (some would live there year round) and a variety of other uses when kids' camp was not in session. The portion of the property that was currently developed should be rezoned to Academic Zone District, which is established for lands for education and cultural activities with attendant research, housing, and administrative facilities, private schools, auditoriums and facilities for performances and lectures, library and museum. That seems to be what we are talking about with this applicant. 6. Aaron Fleck, public, said that there would be 7-10 special events in addition to their services and activities of the temple. Previously the facility was used 14 weeks a year with 20 students and a few people besides and now they are proposing a school with 40 students, other activities, 23 parking spaces. Fleck said that the traffic study did not account for 200 people at an event even though he did not live on Ute Avenue and that was not his concern but it should be of concern to the city and this organization. 7. Cathy Pike, public, said that she was a Ute Avenue neighbor and she was in support of a Jewish Center but this location choice was very poor. Pike said that she has had to call because of the Aspen Club parking overflow onto Ute Avenue and that a fire truck could not get through the street. There were small children that play on the street, people walk their dogs on the street and the when city plows snow the street becomes about a lane and a half wide. Pike said that she would like to see the traffic survey from 7 am to 9:30 am and from 3 pm to 7 pm; there was a lot of traffic on Ute. 8. Pete McClain, public, said that he was Cathy's neighbor and completely agrees with her assessment of the situation. This was an inappropriate place to have the Community Center. 9. Rick Head, public, agreed with Cathy and Pete. Alan Richman stated there were a couple of clarifications from public comments. The Jewish Center application proposed 5-10 special events per year; a special event is the Jewish New Year, Passover Service. Most of those 5-10 events would be religious services that happen within the sanctuary and the dining hall; there is a potential for a bar mitzvah or a wedding. Richman said that apre-condition of a special event is that shuttle service is utilized. 7 Regular Meeting Aspen Plannine and Zonip¢ February 17, 2009 Richman said they would stand by the traffic analysis; the consultants find that the traffic volumes on Ute Avenue are low, the intersections function adequately and the amount of traffic for the projects proposed really doesn't threaten the level of service on the road; this is not a physical capacity issue on that road. Mike Wampler said the parents of Wildwood School use the shuttles and these kids' shuttles will be used. Wampler noted that the city has made it clear that they do not want that property to go back to a single family house, keeping that in mind this is probably the best use and a good cause. Wampler stated that this still had to go to council. Jim DeFrancia stated there was a policy decision made in 2007 with the application to rezone to single family use and the city decided not to do that; the city felt this property was valuable for non-profit institutional use. DeFrancia said he had problems with the traffic study; the study should be done between November and April on any morning or afternoon because of the weather conditions and snow piling up in the-street. Cliff Weiss said that he was not ready to approve the additional parking spaces; he did think by approving the additional parking spaces the applicant was not thinking creatively. Weiss asked what was meant by the children's camp or play area; he asked what the limitations are; it was only fair to the neighbors to be good neighbors. Weiss said that he couldn't justify the additional 700 square foot cabin; he didn't know why the caretaker needed to be on site. Dina Bloom stated the building was very fitted for a Jewish Community Center but traffic was still her issue and wished there could be a solution. Bert Myrin said that Section 3 in the Resolution says there was an employee generation audit; in Section 1 the 8040 Greenline and the stream margin review hasn't had much discussion and he would like this to move forward. Myrin said that parking was an issue for him because parking draws cars and if there is a place to park or drop off it draws vehicles. Richman said there was no parking standard for this use so the commission is establishing it. Myrin said parking was final at P&Z. Richman said that council has purview over parking within the SPA but P&Z sets the special review. Weiss said that he was not just for passing things onto council otherwise what exactly if the purpose of this commission. Wampler said that there was one more review session after the commission's review. 8 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17, 2009 Wampler noted that he lives past Park Avenue and when the snow piles up it's a one lane road and it slows traffic down. Stan Gibbs agreed with Jim on the City establishing the non-profit use for this property and he couldn't think of another use other than another Silver Lining Ranch that would be much lower in usage than what is being proposed here. Gibbs said that this was a reasonable use for this parcel given that the city believes that it should stay connected to the city and that it should be anon-profit, culturally and socially useful function. Gibbs asked if the applicant was willing to commit to a percentage of people coming onto the site by shuttle service and if it's not met after a year then there would be a higher level. Richman stated they have clearly set their goal for both the preschool and special events at a 100% use of the shuttles. Gibbs said that he would like to see parking not increase. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve Resolution #6, series of 2009, Mike Wampler seconded. Bert Myrin amended the motion under section 5 the off street parking to require 3 garage spaces and 10 outdoor spaces. Jim DeFrancia second. Roll call vote: DeFrancia, yes; Bloom, no; Wampler, no; Cliff, yes; Myrin, yes; Gibbs, no. Motion fails. Discussion of motion: Stan Gibbs wanted to amend the motion to require a traffic audit by the applicant for their use of mass transit and that parking not be increased beyond the current parking. Gibbs said that a drop off space wasn't a parking space. Richman said there were a few spaces but it was mostly of the drop off nature; there were 10 or less outside spaces. Gibbs withdrew his amendment on the parking issue. MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to extend the meeting to 7: 30 pm. Jim DeFrancia seconded. All in favor, APPROVED. Weiss said the concept of doing studies later was not favorable. Weiss said that he still objected to the addition of the 750 square foot caretaker unit; the project was already at the maximum FAR at 14,000. DeFrancia said this was an employee housing unit. Richman stated that someone (caretaker) had to be on site if it would open early for preschool. Richman stated the property had to be plowed, maintained and systems in the building to be maintained. Rabbi Mintz stated that it was precise that the property be maintained and opened at 8:00 am. Rabbi Mintz said that he received a lot of questions from parents and the employees living on the second floor were full time employees. Weiss said he just wanted to have this discussion on the cabin. 9 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning February 17 2009 MOTION.• Stan Gibbs offered an amendment to the prior motion for a traffic audit after one year to be provided by the applicant and evaluated by the City and if the mass transit expectations are close to 100% for preschool and special events; individual car uses can be demonstrated to be incidental and not a major factor on Ute Avenue. Jim DeFrancia seconded. Roll call: Wampler, yes; Weiss, no; DeFrancia, yes; Bloom, yes; Myrin, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 5-1. Discussion: Alan Richman accepted the condition.. Bert Myrin asked how the Crosstown Shuttle route was originally funded for the Aspen Club; if we have some idea of the number and use today. Lasser replied that the Aspen Club provided their own shuttle service and that was why they did not use the Crosstown shuttle. Myrin asked for the Crosstown to be incorporated into the motion and a proportionate share paid by this applicant. MOTION: Bert Myrin proposed a motion to recommend to Council to consider the Aspen Club calculations in looking for contributions for the Crosstown Shuttle (the model for the subsidy) by the applicant and to meet with transportation prior to going to Council. Jim DeFrancia seconded. Roll call: Weiss, no; Bloom, yes; Wampler, no; DeFrancia, yes; Myrin, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 4-2. MOTION: Bert Myrin said that P&Z finds this applicant generates 9-10 full time employees. Cliff Weiss seconded. Roll call: Wampler, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Bloom, yes; Weiss, yes; Myrin, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 6-0. Discussion: Richman said they would provide specific program to Council for the outdoor uses. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to amend the Resolution overall to approve; seconded by Mike Wampler. Roll call: Weiss, no; DeFrancia, yes; Bloom, yes; Wampler, yes; Myrin, yes; Gibbs, yes. Approved 5-1. Adjourned at 7:30pm. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 10 ~ . ;' ,. a , f i" ~ / ~~ ~/ F~ ' °Y /' _ ~; ~ ~' H ~ '~, € r ~ ~ ~ -~`' i ~~ ,,~, ~; ~~, j~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ / /., .'.` .. ' , .; ~r _ ~ i -,, rl r~ ~ * ~ _ K -= J/ ~/ / 1 ~~ /11111 'as. ~ ~1, ~ ~ ~ II ._ / /, ~ # I i ` __ / - 3\ A , ~. - it ~ ' ~ ~ ,, ~ ~ t ,~ ~ ~. ~~ A- \ ~ ~ ~ r 1 / \S's. ® rr~ \ ` ~ ~\ ~ ` ~ D \ ~ , I x ~ ~ ` c .~ I _ \ ---- ..~ \ / / ': \ ~ / ,~ i ~`_ J i ~~ ~~_ ' . ~® ~I! III~III'~Q o ~ ~ ~y r s ~~ ~ '° a '• ~ a~ ~ $;(~ ~ ; R ~ SILVER LINING RANCH t ~~ ~ ~~ -a Z m ~ ~` "~ ~il~ ASPEN, COLORADO %~~~$ `_ ; ~ ~ '• 3 t V~11d MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner -R7" THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director DATE OF MEMO: Apri120`", 2009 MEETING DATE: Apri127`h, 2009 RE: Lot 1, Boomerang Lot Split - 501 W Hopkins Ave -Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights Public Hearing of Resolution No. 22 Series of 2009 SUMMARY: The Applicant requests City Council approve an exemption from expiration of vested rights of an approval to build a single-family home on Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split, at 501 W. Hopkins Ave. APPLICANT /OWNER: 501 West Hopkins LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Vann Associates LOCATION: 510 W. Hopkins Ave.; Legal Description - Lot 1, Boomerang Lot Split; Parcel Identification Number - 2735- 124-66-001 CURRENT ZONING Bc USE Located in the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone district. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant proposes to be exempt from the expiration of vested rights. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and City Council approve an extension of vested rights rather than the requested exemption from the expiration of vested rights, with conditions. This would provide a three year extension rather than the requested perpetual extension. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the City Council: • Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights The City Council may by resolution at a public hearing noticed by publication, mailing and posting [see section 26.308:010(B)] approve an exemption from the expiration of vested rights in accordance with this Revised 4/21/2009 Page 1 of 3 section. Only subdivisions composed of detached residential or duplex units shall be eligible for the exemption. City Council is the final review authority who may approve or deny the proposal. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant has requested an exemption from the expiration of vested rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision approved by Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006, which allows for the development of asingle-family home on the subject lot and is commonly known as 501 W. Hopkins Ave. The Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision is a two lot subdivision that consists of adeed-restricted duplex and two single-family detached homes on Lot 2, and asingle-family home on Lot 1. The affordable housing duplex and one single-family home on Lot 2 are completed and occupied, with the second single-family home on Lot 2 almost completed. A building permit was issued for Lot 1, and basement excavation was near completion when 510 W. Hopkins LLC decided not to continue going forwazd with construction. The Boomerang Lot Split Ordinance vested the approval until Apri128, 2009. A site specific approval is typically vested for a period of three (3) yeazs from the date of the approval. This vesting period allows a developer to build what was approved, subsequent to the approval, without having to meet any regulation changes that may occur during the vesting period. The time period also protects the municipality by ensuring that an approved development is constructed in a timely manner or the development is required to meet regulation changes after the vesting period has expired. STAFF COMMENTS: The Engineering Department is requiring the applicant to obtain a Right of Way permit for the driveway, which will also require the seeding of a Swale along the sidewalk and minor repairs to some portions of the sidewalk. Obtaining this Right of Way permit is a condition of approving the exemption from expiration of vested rights. Following discussions with neighbors, the owner has agreed to exceed the City's standards for exemption from expiration of vested rights by agreeing to remove all construction trailers and equipment, fill in the excavated area and plant grass over the reclaimed area. These conditions aze included in the Resolution. This is a laudable action by the applicant. However, the final single-family dwelling unit in this subdivision has not been constructed. If an exemption from the expiration of vested rights were approved, the applicant could choose not to construct the single-family dwelling for 20 years or for anv period of time. In the case that the single-family dwelling is not constructed for a substantial period of time, the land use code may change dramatically during that period, potentially requiring significant public improvements that would not apply to the applicant. The fundamental purpose of setting a term for vested rights is to allow the applicant some level of assurance that new requirements will not be imposed, while allowing the City to apply new Revised 4/21/2009 Page 2 of 3 requirements over the long-term in the event that the public through its representatives deem them necessary. A permanent exemption of vested rights tends to work against the rights reserved under the land use code to amend the title from time to time. Although the Applicant has requested an exemption from the expiration of vested rights, Staff recommends that the Applicant be provided a three (3) year extension of the vested rights associated with Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 until April 28, 2012. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the exemption from the expiration of vested rights be denied but that an extension of vested rights be approved until April 28, 2012, with conditions. Two resolutions are included with this memo. Resolution 22- A provides for an exemption from vested rights as requested by the Applicant while Resolution 22- B provides for the extension of vested rights for three years until Apri128, 2012. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Resolution No. , Series of 2009." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Staff Findings, Exemption from Vested Rights Exhibit B -Staff Findings, Extention of Vested Rights Exhibit C -Application Revised 4/21/2009 Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. ~ -A (SERIES 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, TO APPROVE AN EXEMPTION FROM EXPIRATION OF VESTED RIGHTS GRANTED BY ORDINANCE N0.6 SERIES OF 2006 BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 501 WEST HOPHINS AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel Identification Number 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 501 W. Hopkins LLC, requesting An Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights Exemption pursuant to Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006; and WHEREAS, The Aspen City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006, which approved the Boomerang Lot Split, creating Lot 1 and Lot 2, and awarded Vested Property Rights status for two detached free mazket residential units and two "for sale" ADU/Carriage House units in a duplex configuration on Lot 2, and one free market residential unit on Lot 1, until Apri128, 2009; and, WHEREAS, the applicant submitted the application for Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights before the vested rights expired in 2009; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.308.010 Vested Property Rights of the Land Use Code, City Council may grant an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights after a public hearing is held and a resolution is adopted; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the application and recommended an approval of the Extension of Vested Rights rather than an approval for an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the request of an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split under the provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights proposal meets or exceeds all applicable land use standazds and that the approval of the Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. Resolution _ A Page 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1• Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the request for an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split that was approved by Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 by the Aspen City Council, with the following conditions: 1. That the establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application or regulations which aze general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to the land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical, and mechanical codes, and all adopted impact fees that are in effect at the time of building permit, unless an exemption granted in writing. Section 2• The applicant shall obtain approval for a retroactive Right of Way permit from the City of Aspen Engineering Department fot the driveway, for seeding of the Swale adjacent to the W. Hopkins sidewalk and minor repairs to sidewalk uplift that has occurred. The Right of Way permit is to be obtained by July 1, 2009. Applicant shall remove any construction trailers and construction equipment, remove the construction fence, fill in the excavation and use grass seed to vegetate the reclaimed area, this work to be completed by July 1, 2009. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public heazing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4• This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions. Section 5• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Resolution A Page 2 Section 6• A public hearing on this resolution was held the 13`h day of April, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, 15 days prior to which public notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 13`h day of April, 2009 by a vote. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Resolution A Page 3 RESOLUTION N0.22- B (SERIES 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, TO APPROVE AN EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS GRANTED BY ORDINANCE N0.6 SERIES OF 2006 BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 501 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel Identification Number 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 501 W. Hopkins LLC, requesting An Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights Exemption pursuant to Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006; and WHEREAS, The Aspen City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006, which approved the Boomerang Lot Split, creating Lot 1 and Lot 2, and awazded Vested Property Rights status for two detached free mazket residential units and two "for sale" ADU/Carriage House units in a duplex configuration on Lot 2, and one free market residential unit on Lot 1, until, Apri128, 2009; and, WHEREAS, the applicant submitted the application for an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights on March 16`h, 2009 before the vested rights expired; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.308.010 Vested Property Rights of the Land Use Code, City Council may grant an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights afrer a public heazing is held and a resolution is adopted; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the application and recommended an extension of vested rights rather than an exemption from the Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split for a three year period; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the request of an Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split under the provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public heazing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Exemption from Expiration of Vested Rights with conditions, is not consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; however, an extension of vested rights is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. Resolution _ B Page 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the Extension of Vested Rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split that was approved by Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 by the Aspen City Council, with the following conditions: 1. That the establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to the land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical, and mechanical codes, and all adopted impact fees that aze in effect at the time of building permit, unless an exemption granted in writing. 2. That the new expiration date for vested rights is April 28, 2012. Section 2• The applicant shall obtain approval for a retroactive Right of Way permit from the City of Aspen Engineering Department for the driveway, for seeding of the swale adjacent to the W. Hopkins sidewalk and minor repairs to sidewalk uplift that has occurred. The Right of Way permit is to be obtained by July 1, 2009. Applicant shall remove any construction trailers and construction equipment, remove the construction Fence, fill in the excavation and use grass seed to vegetate the reclaimed area, this work to be completed by July 1, 2009. Section 3• All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4• This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Resolution _ B Page 2 Section 6• A public hearing on this resolution was held the 13`h day of April, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, 15 days prior to which public notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 13`h day of April, 2009 by a vote. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Resolution _ B Page 3 Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings 26.308.010(B)1 Exemption from expiration of Vested Rights. The City Council may by resolution at a public hearing noticed by publication, mailing and posting approve an exemption of the expiration of vested rights in accordance with this Section. Only subdivisions composed of detached residential or duplex units shall be eligible for the exemption from the expiration provisions of Subsection 26.304.070.D. To obtain an exemption, an application for exemption shall be submitted at any time prior to the third ('/3) anniversary of the effective date of the development order which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of City Council that: a. Those conditions applied to a project at the time of final approval that were to have been met as of the date of application for exemption have been complied with; Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard as the affordable housing mitigation that was required for the entire subdivision was constructed and is currently occupied, the Trail easement has been provided and a trail installed, as well as other provisions of the ordinance. b. Any public or private improvements that were required to be installed by the applicant prior to construction of any dwelling unit have been installed. Staff Finding: The final single-family dwelling unit in this subdivision has not been constructed. If an exemption from the expiration of vested rights were approved, the applicant could choose not to construct the single-family dwelling for 20 years or for ep riod of time. In the case that the single-family dwelling is not constructed for a substantial period of time, the land use code may change dramatically during that period, potentially requiring significant public improvements that would not apply to the applicant. The fundamental purpose of setting a term for vested rights is to allow the applicant some level of assurance that new requirements will not be imposed, while allowing the City to apply new requirements over the long-term in the event that the public through its representatives deem them necessary. A permanent exemption of vested rights tends to work against the rights reserved under the land use code to amend the title from time to time. Staff finds the proposal does not fully comply with this standard. Exhibit B Review Criteria & Staff Findings C. Extension or reinstatement of vested rights. The City Council may, by resolution at a public heazing noticed by publication, mailing and posting (See Subpazagraphs 26.304.060[E][3][a][b] and [c]) approve an extension or reinstatement of expired vested rights or a revoked development order in accordance with this Section. 1. In reviewing a request for the extension or reinstatement of vested rights the City Council shall consider, but not be limited to, the following criteria: a. The applicant's compliance with any conditions requiring performance prior to the date of application for extension or reinstatement; Staff Finding: The applicant has complied with required conditions. Staff finds this criterion has been met. b. The progress made in pursuing the project to date including the effort to obtain any other permits, including a building permit and the expenditures made by the applicant in pursuing the project; Staff Finding: The applicant has pursued the project to date, including efforts to obtain necessazy pennits. Staff finds this criterion has been met. c. The nature and extent of any benefits already received by the City as a result of the project approval such as impact fees or land dedications; Staff Finding: The applicant has paid all required fees and constructed the affordable housing that was required as mitigation. Staff finds this criterion has been met. d. The needs of the City and the applicant that would be served by the approval of the extension or reinstatement request. Staff Finding: The needs of the applicant are served by gaining an extension of vested rights. The needs of the City would be met by extending vested rights for a limited period of three years so that if changes to the land use code aze made after three years with the intention of providing added benefits to the community, the applicant would have to comply with new requirements. Staff finds this criterion has been met. ~~~~ .~ G VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants March 16, 2009 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Jennifer Phelan Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 ~~~~~':~ N.\tr 16 1(~~9 i.l ~ ~ ..,r r,>'ciV COMMUNITY pEVE~OPMENi Re: Lot 1, Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision, Vested Rights Exemption Dear Jennifer: Please consider this letter an application for City Council approval of an exemption from expiration of vested rights for Lot i of the Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision (see Exhibit i, Pre-Application Conference Summary, attached hereto). The application is submitted pursuant to Section 26.308.O10.B. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (the "Regulations") by 501 W. Hopkins, LLC (hereinafter "Appli- cant"), the owner of the property (see Exhibit 2, Title Insurance Policy). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit 3. Aland use application form, an application fee agreement, and list of property owners located within 300 feet of Lot 1 are attached as Exhibits 4, 5 and 6, respectively. Background On April 10, 2006, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 6 which rezoned a parcel of land consisting of portions of Lots A through F, Block 32, City and Township of Aspen, from R-15, Moderate-Density Residential to R-6, Medium- Density Residential (see Exhibit 7). Ordinance No. 6 also granted subdivision exemption approval to subdivide the property into two lots, which are depicted as Lots 1 and 2 on the Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision Exemption Plat (see Exhibit 8). A Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision memorializing the conditions of the rezoning and subdivision exemption approval was recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk in June of 2006 (see Exhibit 9). 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, Colorado 81611 970(925-6958 Fax 9701920-9310 Ms. Jennifer Phelan March 16, 2009 Page 2 Ordinance No. 6 and the Subdivision Exemption Agreement permitted the construction of one single-family residence on Lot 1 and two single-family residences and a duplex on Lot 2. The duplex consisted of two attached accessory dwelling units which were required as affordable housing mitigation for the subdivision's three, free market single-family residences. An administrative growth management quota system approval was granted by the Community Development Department for the develop- - ment of the three single-family residences as provided for in Section 26.470.060.2. of the Regulations. The duplex on Lot 2 containing the required accessory dwelling units was completed in July of 2008. The two units have been deed restricted and sold in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's guidelines and are both presently occupied by their owners. The two single-family residences on Lot 2 are currently under construction and are expected to be completed this summer. A building permit has been issued for the single-family residence on Lot 1. Micropiles have been installed for soil stabilization purposes, and excavation of the basement was nearly completion prior to the Applicant's decision to delay construction on the subdivision's remaining single-family residence. The Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision's vested rights status expires on April 28, 2009, or three years from the Community Develop- ment Department's issuance of the Development Order for the project (see Exhibit 10). Vested Rights Exemption Pursuant to Section 26.308.O10.B. of the Regulations, The City Council may by resolution at a public hearing approve an exemption of the expiration of vested rights for subdivisions composed of detached residential or duplex units. To obtain an exemption, an application for exemption must be submitted prior to the third anniver- sary of the effective date of the Development Order. In addition, the application must demonstrate compliance with the following criteria. i. Those conditions applied to a project at the time of final approval that were to have been met as of the date of application for exemption have been complied with; and The applicable requirements of City Council Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 that were to have been met prior to the date of this application have been met. The required subdivision exemption plat and agreement were recorded in 2006. The requirements of the ordinance that were a prerequisite to issuance of building permits Ms. Jennifer Phelan March 16, 2009 Page 3 (e.g., payment of applicable impact, park development and school land dedication fees, etc.) for the two single-family residences and affordable housing duplex on Lot 2 were met as required. A determination of compliance with the City's residential design standards was made for these units prior to building permit issuance, and the units have been constructed consistent with their conditions of approval. A building permit has also been issued for the remaining single-family residence on Lot 1 and all requirements of the ordinance with respect thereto have also been met. The required public trail easement on Lot 2 is depicted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. 2. Any public, or private improvements that were required to be installed by the applicant prior to construction of any dwelling unit have been installed. The only public improvement that was required to be installed by the Applicant is curb and gutter along the property's West Hopkins Avenue frontage. Based on my conversation with Brian Flynn of the City's Pazks Department, the decision has apparently been made to forego installation of curb and gutter in this location. A similar decision was also apparently made in connection with the development of the adjacent Little Ajax affordable housing complex. Instead, a landscaped buffer with street trees and a shallow drainage Swale has been installed by the City between the West Hopkins Avenue Trail and the edge of the existing street pavement. The Applicant, however, will install curb and gutter prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for the two single-family residences on Lot 2 in the event required. As discussed above, a building permit has been issued for the single-family residence on Lot 1. All associated fees have been paid and development of the lot commenced prior to the Applicant's decision to delay constmction in light of the current economic climate. Given the substantial costs involved in obtaining the building permit for Lot 1 (e.g., architectural fees, building pernrit fees, impact fees, etc.), and the fact that the Applicant commenced construction in reliance thereon, a reasonable argument can be made that the development rights for Lot 1 are common law vested subject to the conditions of the prior subdivision approval and the recorded Subdivision Exemption Agreement. Such vesting is further substantiated by the fact that all applicable conditions which were required to be met prior to building permit issuance have been met including the construction of the required affordable housing units. As a result, there would appear to be no reasonable basis for not exempting Lot 1 from the expiration. of the statutory vested rights granted pursuant to Ordinance No. 6. Ms. Jennifer Phelan March 16, 2009 Page 4 Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, cc: Leonard M. Oates, Esq. John Provine d:\oldc\bus\city.app\app54109.exe Attachments CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATIVE: Errin Evans, 429-2745 501 West Hopkins -Vested Rights Exemption Sunny Vann Tel: 925-6958 vannassociates@comcast.net DATE: 03.11.2009 DESCRIPTION The Applicant would like to request an exemption of expiration of vested rights for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split. The project consists of mixed affordable housing and free madcet residential structures. Lot 2 has already been developed with iwo free market units and two affordable housing units. Lot 1 has yet to be developed. The conditions of approval for the project have been recorded on the Boomerang Lot Split Exemption Plat as per Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006. The dimensional requirements, growth management mitigation requirements, and residential design standards are outlined in the land use code. The only items pertinent to Lot 1 that are not included in the code requirements pertain to landscaping, the driveway and curb and gutter requirements. To request an exemption from the expiration of vested rights, the applicant must submit an application to the City Council at a publ'~c hearing. Land Use Code Section(s) 28.304.030 Common Development Review Procedures 26.308.010 Vested Property Rights http:l/www.aspenaitkin.comldeats1381citvcode.cfm Review by: -Staff for complete application - Referral agencies for technical considerations -City Council Planning Fees: $1470 Deposit for 6 hours of Staff time + $212 Engineering Minor Review (additional planning hours over deposit amount are billed at a rate of $2351tiour). Total Deposit: 51882 To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total deposit for review of the application. 2. Proof of ownership. 3. Completed Land Use Application Form. 4. A letter signed by the applicant, with the applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant, which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre-application conference summary. 7. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a can-ent certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 8. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. 9. An 8 1/2" by 11"vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. 10. Additional application material as required for each specific review. (See application packet and land use code) 11. Approved development plans on which vested rights are to be extended. 12. Copies of prior approvals. 13. 11 Copies of the complete application packet and maps. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Ame Land Title Association Owner's Policy (10-77-92) - C~ io Z Issued By Attorneys ?itle Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC (Members Name) 715 West Main Street, Suite 305 (Atltlress) Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 925-7328 (Telephone) Attorneys Title Guaranty I=und, Inc. The Colorado Lawyers' Organization /or Title Insurance OWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS, Aaorneys Title Guaranty Fund, Inc., a Cobrado corpo- ration, herein called the Comparry, insures, as Date of Poliq shown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, no[ exceed- ing the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A, sustained or incurred by the insured by reason ot: 1. Title to the estate or interest described.ih Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein: 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title; 3. Unmarketatriliry of the title; 4. Ladc o1 a right of access to and from the land. The Company will also pay the costs, attorneys' fees and expense incurred in defense of the title, as insured, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions and Stipulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Company has caused this Policy to be signed and sealed, to be valid when Schedule A is wuntersigned by an authorized officer or agem of the Company all in acwrdance with its By-Laws. ATTEST: J ~ ~. `~~o,` ATTORNEYSTITLE GUARANTY FUND, INC. Judith A. Hart, Assistant Secretary Christopher J. Condie, President This or B and be duly validated by this signature: -- ~-..OP 581332 _ OWNER'S POLICY 5CHEDULEA Order No: PC070025d2 Amount of Insurance: $9,250,000.00 Uate of Policy: October 31, 2007, 3:22pm I. Name of Insured: 501 W. Hopkins, LLC,-a Colorado limited liability rnmpany 2. The estate or interest in dte land which is covered by this policy is: Fee Simple 3. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: SOI W. Hopkins, LLC, a Colorado limited liability tympany d. 'fhe land referred to in this policy is described as follows: Pulicy No.: OP581332 Issued with Pulicy No.: MI'1 IU9231 Prcmiunt: $7,178.75 Lots 1 and 2 Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision Exemption Plat accordng to the Plat thereof recorded June 16, 2006 in Plat Book 79 at Page 70 as Reception No. 525370, Pitkio County, Colorado. Attorneys Title In/surance Agency of Aspen, LLC gy A orized Officer or Agent ember Number 2622 Attorneys Title Guaranty Fund, Inc. This policy is invalid unless [Ite cover sltee[, Page I Schedule A and Schedule B are attacheJ. OWNER'S POLICY SCHEDULE B Date of Policy: October 31, 20U7 Policy No. OP581332 Order No: PCU7UU2542 'T'his policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attonteys' fi:cs or expe~ucs) which arise by reason of: I. Rights or claims of parties itt possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which arc not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hercaf[er furnisbcd, imposed by law and not shown by [be public records. 5. Taxes for the year ZUU7 and subsequent years. Taxes no[ yet due or payable. 6. Deed of Trust Jated October 30, 2007 from 501 W Hopkins, LLC, a Colorado Limited Lirbility Company [o the Pubtic Trustee of Pitkin County for [he use of Alpine Baok, A Colorado Banking Company to secure the sum of 57,400,000.OU recorded October 31, 20U7 as Reception Nu. 5437U5. 7. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in Deeds recorded June 28, 1886 in Book 41 at Page I8, July 26, 1888 in Book 59 at Page 476, July 26, 1888 in Book 59 at Page 586, and April 4, 1892 in Book 79 at Page 43. 8. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in Deed Restriction recorded September 7, 1999 as Reception No. 435272. 9. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in Easement recorded April 18, 2UU3 as Reception No. 481651. 10. Any rights, easements, interests or claims which may exist by reason of or rc0ected by the following facts shown on the survey dated July lU, 1998, by Aspen Survey Engineers recorded in fiat Book SI at Page 28. I1. Any rights, casements, interests or claims which may exist by reason of or reflected by the following facts shown on the survey dated December t8, 20(10, by Aspen Survey Engineers recorded itt flat Book 65 at Page 45. 12. Easements, rights of way and outer matters as set forth on [he Plat of Boottterattg I'.U.D., Block 32, Ciq~ of Aspen, Colorado recorded Plat Book 65 at Page 37. 13. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in PUD Agreement for the Buuntcrnng Lodge Extension Project recorded May 14, 2003 as Reception No. 482688. Attorneys Title Guaranty Fund, lnc. pace I Policy No.: OP581332 IS. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in Ordinance Nu. b, Series of 20(16 recorded June 16,2005 as Reception No.52S368. I5. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions as contained in Subdivision Exemption Agreement fur Boomerang Lot Split recorded June 16, 2006 as Reception No. 525369. 16. Easements, rights of way and other matters as set forth oo the Plat of Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision Exemption Plat recorded Pla[ Book 79 at Page 70. Attorneys Title Guaranty Fund, Inc. pn~ ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. OP581332 Issued by ATTORNEYS TITLE GUARANTY FUND, INC. COLORADO FORM 130 Provided there is situated on the land described under Schedule A of the Policy a single family residence, the Policy is hereby amended as folbws: Notwithstanding anything therein to the contrary, the Policy insures against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1. Any unfilled lien for labor or material furnished for improvements on the land (except for any such lien arising out of construction contract for or assumed by the Insured), provided construction of all improvements are wmpleted at Date of Policy. 2. Rights or claims of parties in possession of the principal dwelling. 3. The enforced removal of the principal dwelling on account of: (a) any encroachment of said principal dwelling onto adjoining lands or onto any easement shown as an exception in Schedule B or onto any unrecorded subsurtace easement, (b) any violation of building setback lines or covenants, conditions or restrictions referred to in Schedule B of the Policy. (c) any violation of any zoning ordinance if the land is used only for a single (amity residence. The term 'principal dwelling" means any single family residential structure on the land whether detached or not If the principal dwelling is a condominium unit it refers to the space within the boundaries of the unit Additional improvements and areas such as outbuildings, detached garages, fences, driveways, retaining walls, plants and common areas are not included within this definition. The term 'zoning ordinance' does not inGUde building codes, occupancy regulations and subdivision laws. This endorsement is made a part of said policy and is subject to atl [he terms and provisions thereof and of any prior Endorsements thereto. Except to the extent expressly stated, it neither modifies any of the terms and provisions of this Policy and any prior Endorsements, nor does it extend the effective Date of Policy and any prior Endorsements, nor does i[ increase the face amount thereof. ATTORNEYS TITLE GUARANTY FUND, INC. Dated: October 31, 2007 By EXHIBIT March 11, 2009 Ms. Jennifer Phelan Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Deat Ms. Phelan: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent us in the processing of our application for an exemp- tion from vested rights expiration for Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split Subdivision. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on our behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, 501 W. HOPKINS, LLC John Provine, Managing Member P.O. Box 8769 Aspen, Co 81612 (970) 948-0813 d: \oldc\bus\ciry.ltr\Itr54109.jp 1 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: EXHIBIT Name: ~.~Y bt/. ~~~Y'~!''S/s~~~ Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, le al descri lion where a ro riate) ParcellD # (REQUIRED) - Z -GG-~/ REPRESENTATIVE: Name: ~,~~'Sli~,~ ~~~/Y/~f T~ Address: 8 ~~~r /~ ~ CO ~/~,/~ Phone #: + S' ~J`'s~ PROJECT: Name: ~~ ~~''~~~ir~~_7r t~IT~SL~~/\//5/b~ Address: Phone #: OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ^ Conditional Use ^ Conceptual PUD ^ Conceptual Historic Devt. ^ Special Review ^ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ^ Final Historic Development ^ Design Review Appeal ^ Conceptual SPA ^ Minor Historic Devt. ^ GMQS Allotment ^ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ^ Historic Demolition ^ GMQS Exemption ^ Subdivision ^ Historic Designation ^ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ^ Subdivision Exemption (includes ^ Small Lodge Conversion/ Mazgin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ^ Lot Split ^ Temporary Use Cther.1/~i~E~7 ^ Lot Line Adjustment ^ TexUMap Amendment ~` ~,~,~ /~~7ri .~ ~,~(~<//°r/~~ EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: L.~~ ,gjq~~,/c¢T~e7c/ Hau~e'you attached the following? FEES DUE: S may" e-Application Conference Summary attachment #1, Sigaed Fee Agreement /V~} ^ response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form ~" Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standazds EXHIBIT CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aareeroent for Payment of City of Aspen Deve/lo'ame~nt Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and ~',~~ ~~/ ~'9f/.t~~. ~~ (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Y APPLI ANT~u mitt d to CIT~a lic i~I~ (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee sWctwe for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agee that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agee that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agees he will be benefited by retaining Beater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs aze incurred. CITY agees it will be benefited through the Beater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agee that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required fmdings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for _ hows of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner how over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agees that failwe to pay such accrued costs shall be Bounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN Chris Bendon Comrounity Development Director g:\supportlforms\agrpayas.doc 11/30/04 APPLICANT Dates a Billing Address and Telephone Number: R~b.~~7~ ~~/ ~-d p/G/~ ~8 c~'i3 Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160® 430 WEST HOPKINS CONDO ASSOC COMMON AREA 432 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ALEXANDER JOAN P 739 25 RD GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 AMAYA JOSE ANTONIO ARGUETA BLANCA EDITH 605 W HOPKINS AVE #103 ASPEN, CO 81611 BARYON META PACKARD 4475 N OCEAN BLVD APT 43A DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483 CARROLL MEREDITH COHEN CARROLL ARTHUR RICHARD 605 W HOPKINS AVE #210 ASPEN, CO 81611 ~ send abng Iine to Feed Paper expose PopUp Edge"' 501 W HOPKINS LLC PO BOX 8769 ASPEN, CO 81612 ALPINE BANK ATTN ERIC GARDEY PO BOX 10000 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO EXHIBIT 501 WEST MAIN LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 0 ALPINE BANK ATTN JEAN MOORE 600 E HOPKINS AVE 81602 ASPEN, CO 81611 ANGELOV DIMTAR S & DANIEL D 605 W HOPKINS AVE #209 ASPEN, CO 81611 BRIDGE WILLIAM & JOSEFINA 2075 SHERWOOD DR CAMBRIA, CA 93428 CARTER RICHARD P 400E 3RD AVE #804 DENVER, CO 80202 ASPEN FSP ABR LLC 11921 FREEDOM DR #950 RESTON, VA 20190 BROOKS NORMAN A & LESLEE S 16311 VENTURA BLVD #690 ENCINO, CA 91436 CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC GO FRANKLIN ST PARTNERS LLC 215ZOEWY `~' MIAMI, FL 33140 CHUCHMAN GEORGE S PO BOX 2800-355 CAREFREE, AZ 85377 EMERICK SHELLEY W 2449 5TH ST BOULDER, CO 80304 FINE FREDRIC N & SONDRA 412 MARINER DR JUPITER, FL 33477 GOLDMAN DIANNE L PO BOX 518 FAIRFIELD, CT 8824 JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER CHABAD OF ASPEN PO BOX 12099 ASPEN, CO 81612 CITY OF ASPEN ATTN FINANCE DEPT 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ERICKSON A RONALD 605 W HOPKINS AVE #211 ASPEN, CO 81611 FRANSEN ERIN M 8 GREGORY H PO BOX 5082 GILLETTE, WY 0 H 8 H PROPERTIES LLLP 807 W MORSE BLVD STE 101 WINTER PARK, FL 0 JOHNSTON FAMILY TRUST 2018 PHALAROPE COSTA MESA, CA 92626 CORTALE ITA 205 S MILL ST #112 ASPEN, CO 81611 FARR CHARLOTTE 306 MCCORMICK AVE CAPITOLA, CA 95010 GOLDENBERG STEPHEN R 8 CHERYL J 430 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 HAYMAN JULES ALAN 9238 POTOMAC SCHOOL DR POTOMAC, MD 20854 KELLY KIM 605 W HOPKINS AVE #202 ASPEN, CO 81611 Easy Peel® Labels • ~ Bend along line to a A~/E(YY® 5160® ~ Use A+ery® Template 5160® Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTM KONIG DEBORAH KURKULIS PATSY & PAUL R LAMB JENNIFER C 8 TIMOTHY E HANSON KIM 605 W HOPKINS AVE #201 ' 605 W HOPKINS AVE #204 605 W HOPKINS AVE #203 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 LOT 2 BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT LESTER JAMES LITTLE AJAX CONDOMINIUM ASSOC PLANNED COM OWNERS ASSOC 229 CHRYSTIE ST #1417 605 W HOPKINS #006 533 E HOPKINS AVE 3RD FL NEW YORK, NY 10002 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MADSEN MARTHA W MARSHALL ALISON J 8 JOSHUA W MOLLER DIANE T 608 W HOPKINS AVE APT 9 605 W HOPKINS AVE #212 4032 CRYSTAL BRIDGE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NELSON TREVOR T & ROSE MARIE NIX ROBERT F OHARROW SIOBHAN P 605 W HOPKINS #207 323 VINE ST 605 W HOPKINS AVE #208 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PERRY EMILY V ROLAND DANIEL P 8 LEAH S SCHALL FAMILY TRUST 8/31/1998 PO BOX 11071 605 W HOPKINS AVE #102 18518 ST MORITZ DR ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 TARZANA, CA 91356 SCOTT BUILDING CONDO ASSOC 'SCOTT MARY HUGH SHADOW MTN CORP COMMON AREA RUSSELL SCOTT III 8 CO LLC C!O FINSER CORP 400 W HOPKINS AVE 5420 S QUEBEC ST #200 7321 N.W. 75TH STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 MEDLEY, FL 33166 SHERW IN ENTERPRISES LLC SMITH ANDREW C & DONNA G STASPEN LLP C/O JENNIFER SHERW IN 3622 SPRINGBROOK ST C/O JOHN STATON 1714 VISTA ST DALLAS TX 75205 1180 PEACHTREE ST NE DURHAM, NC 27701 , ATLANTA, GA 0 SUBOTKY JULIE E TODD SHANE TOMS CONDO LLC C/O BRANDY FEIGENBAUM PC 55 WEST 14TH ST #15L PO BOX 2654 132 MIDLAND AVE #4 NEW YORK, NY 10011 ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 VANDERSCHUIT FAM TRUST 5836 WAVERLY AVE LA JOLLA, CA 92037 VERNER DANIEL A & MERYLE 2577 NW 59TH ST BOCA RAYON, FL 33496 WASHBURN LYNN S iERRELL SERENE-MARIE 605 W HOPKINS AVE #205 ASPEN, CO 0 WENDT ROBERT E II 350 MT HOLYOKE AVE PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 ~tlquettes faciles ~ pelef 1 Nilier~ la naharh AVFRII.51 WERLIN LAURA B TRUST WHITNEY KURT A & JACQUELINE 2279 PINE ST PO BOX 5950 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115 SNOW MASS VILLAGE, CO 0 ~ BePOez ~ la hadaae affil de www~a~Y•~ i .~~ d° . rEvEler k rehold Poo-uoTM ' 1-800~GGLAVERY i Easy Peel® Labels A ~ Beml along line to o A~~(® 5160® i Use AJery® Template 5160® Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edge^~ j YLP WEST LLC YOUNG PAUL III FAMILY TRUST 7 SOUTH MAIN ST 413 W HOPKINS AVE YARDLEY, PA 19067 ASPEN,CO 0 -I~ ..._.. _. ~Iel1;@5 fadleS>r prier ~ ReP~ ~ 18 hadmre afM de VrYrW.aVerKCOliI ~..noM ~....~r.s.t~ evemr® Rtp1® ~~ ~~ r€vEler le rehord Poo-UO~ 1-800-GO-AVERY i IpIpII WNW'WIIII HH ~~Ipnp'' ~I ~$1 EX7HIBIT III ~~il III f„I ~~~ 11 U,~ I~ ~ (~I I,01 06~/ 6/20086 03 ~ 5'S 8 f JPNIC£ K VOS Ci7UDlll PITKIN COUNTY GO R 36.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE N0. 6 (SERIES OF 200 A:Y ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING THE "BOOMERANG VACANT PARCEL" TO THE R-6 (MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE DISTRICT AND APPROVING A LOT SPLIT, CREATING LOTS I AND 2 OF THE BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-I14-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC, requesting to rezone the "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" located on the south side of W. Hopkins Avenue, containing portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen from the R-15 (Moderato-lhnsity Residential) Zone District with a PUD and Lodge Preservation Overlay to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District and requesting approval of a Lot Split to divide the 19,737 square foot property into a parcel of approximately 12,237 square feet and a parcel of approximately 7,500 square feet; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable code standazds, the Community Development Department recommended approval with condition of the proposed rezoning and lot split application; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal during a duty noticed public hearing opened on January 17, 2006, and continued to January 24, 2006. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 3, Series of 2006, by a five to one (5-1) vote, recommending that City Council rezone the subject property to the R-6 Zone District, and recommending that City Council approve the requested lot split with conditions, under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds al] applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Land Use Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and OfJ'cial Zone District Map, the City Council hereby rezones the "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" containing portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen, from the R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) Zone District with PUD and Lodge Preservation Overlays to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone DislricL Ordinance No. 6. Series of 2006 °Boomerang Vacant Parcel" Lot Split and Retuning, Page ~~IIIII~~II~I~~IIIIINiI ~953~ e3.s~ Section Z' J/1nICE K V05 CialDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 30.00 D 0.00 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Land Use Section 26.480.030(Ax2), Subdivision E.rempdons: Lot Split, the City Council approves a lot split to divide the "Boomerang Vacant Patrxl" into Lot 1 of approximately 7,500 squaze fcet and Lot 2 of approximately 12,237 square feet for the construction of a total of three (3) detached dwelling units, with the conditions contained herein. Lot 1 is limited to one (i) single family residence and Lot 2 is limited to two (2) detached free mazket residences, plus two ADU/CH units attached to one-another. All dimensions including allowable floor area and the master in which ADU/Carriage Houses are calculated, shall be as specified in the Aspen Land Use Code, as maybe amended from time to time. Section 3: Subdivision Ezemntioo Plat The Applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Land Use Code Section 26.480 in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than i80 days after finai approval is obtained. The Lot Split Plat shall cleazly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot 1 from Lot 2, housing type and density per lot, and show all easements of record. The plat may also include a note indicating that the land azea contained within the trail easement shall not be excluded from the calculation of Lot Area. Section 4: Subdivision Exemption Agreement The Applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption agreement that meets the terms of Land Use Code Section 26.480.030, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after finai approval is obtained Section 5: Building Permit Aonlication The building permit application for each of the residential units shall include the following: i. A copy ofthe 5nal Crcdinance and P&Z Resolution. 2. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. 3. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 4. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Duector for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees aze to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. Additionally, aright-of--way landscaping plan shall be provided as part of the building permit application identifying that any trees removed from theright-of--way will have to be relocated. Any disruption or damage to the right-of--way irrigation system during construction shall also be repaired to the satisfaction of the Patios Department. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang V scant Parcel" Lot Split and Retuning, Page 2 I (t'IN III ~~ ~~ ~ 11„11 I~~ ~ ~I IIII IOI 6632006 B3 : S_ ,7{a11CE K vos CAUptLL GIiKIN CWNTr CO R 38.00 D 0.00 5. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground rechazge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5-yeaz storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 6. A construction management plan pursuant to the requirements of the Community Development Department. The construction management plan shall include a plan for protecting the Midland and W. Hopkins Avenue Trails during construction. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Pazks Department prior to building permit issuance. 7. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. Section 6: Growth Management Allotments The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Growth Management approval and provide affordable housing mitigation by developing one (1) "for sale" accessory dwelling unit or carriage house per lot, as contained within the Applicant's proposal. The ADU/Carriage House unit mitigating the Lot 1 development shall contain between 750 and 1200 squaze feet of net livable azea and be located on Lot 2; the ADU/Carriage House mitigating the Lot 2 development shall contain betwcen 750 and 1200 square feet of net livable area and be located on Lot 2. This mitigation will be acceptable mitigation for each oC the residential dwelling units to be constructed on Lots 1 and 2 of the lot split pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(B)(1), Administrative Growth Management Review: Detached single family or duplex dwelling units, as amended from time to time. Section 7: Use and Dimensional Reanirements The lots created by the lot split shalt be subject to the use and dimensional requirements of the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District and as specified in Section 2 of this ordinance. The free market residential dwelling units to be developed on Lot 2 shall be constructed as two (2) detached dwelling units rather than in a duplex configuration; the "for sale" ADU/Carriage House units shall be developed in a duplex configuration. Section 8: Design Standards All residential dwelling units (free mazket and affordable) to be constructed on Lou I and 2 shall meet the residential. design standards in place at the time of building permit, unless any variance(s) is duly obtained. in addition, the ADU/Carriage House units on Lot 2 shall also meet the ADU Design Standazds contained in Section 26.520.050 of the Code, unless any variance(s) is duly obtained or where a stricter standard is specified within this ordinance. Section 9: Vehicular Access Vehicular access to Lot 1 shall be taken from the South Fourth Street stub located directly to the east of the property. There shall not be any vegetation taller than 30 inches Ordinance No. 6, Sena of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" Lot SPlit and Retuning, Page 3 il~lll „91 ~~~ I~ ~~ I~~I 11~ IR „111 ~ ~ 060/ 6/20086 03 : SF JHNIGE K VOS C{KMILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 36.80 D 0.00 from existing grade planted within. the area fifteen (15) feet south or north of the driveway to be accessed from 4u' Street, at the property line or in the public right-of--way to maintain a sufficient view corridor for trail users to see vehicles crossing the trail. The Applicant shall also relocate the existing Midland Trail sign to the south side of the driveway and attach a new sign on the backside of the Midland Trait sign indicating the presence of the driveways crossing the trail to trail users. Vehiculaz access to Lot 2 shall be taken from West Hopkins Avenue via a single curb cut. The residential units on Lot 2 shall share a single driveway and the curb cut shad be designed and constructed such that it will not provide a net loss in on-street parking in the W. Hopkins Avenue Right-of--Way (it may be necessary to reconstruct and realign a portion of the existing sidewalk/trail to ensure no net loss of on-street parking). The driveway access shall meet the City Engineering Department's standards for drive ramps. The driveway entrance points shall be in substantially the same location as they arc shown in the addendum to the application. Section 10: Curb and Gaffer The Applicant shall construct curb, and gutter along the West Hopkins Avenue frontage of the property being divided prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the units in the project. The timing of this installation may be changed if approved by the City Engineer. If the W. Hopkins Pedestrian Trail is altered during construction, the Applicant shall repair the trait to the condition it was in prior to construction while allowing for the potential for modest realignment. The radii of the curb cut shall be the minimal that fimctions for the pulpose of a driveway. The applicants shall gain approval from the Community Development Engineer to determine an appropriate sizing. Section 11: Trait E:semen[ The Applicant shall grant a four (4) foot wide public trail easement to the City of Aspen along the western side property line of Lot 2 and on the westernmost 90 feet of Lot 2, running directly adjacent to the southern property line. A slightly wider easement shall be glanted at the southwest comer of Lot 2 to allow for a moderate turning radius on the trail. The exact location of this easement shall be approved by the Pazks Department prior to recordation of the final subdivision exemption plat. This easement shall be shown on the subdivision exemption plat and shall be described in the subdivision exemption agreement The easement shall not affect allowable FAR, density, setback requirements, or other dimensional requirements. Section 12: LandscaoinQ The Applicant shall install a tree root barrier on the trees that aze to be planted within ten (10) feet of the W. Hopkins trail to prevent future root damage and trail upheaval. The Applicant shall also install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any trees to be saved subject to the following provisions: Ordinance No. 6, Series of 21106 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" Lot Split and Rezoning, page 4 I Iln~d~i INIB ~'I III ~N/III II/,1111~~ ~~ III 06938/2 8 03:5: JRN3CE K VOS CWOILL PinttN COIMTY CO R 36.00 D 0.00 a. The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any construction activities commence. b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehicular traf&c shall be allowed within the drip line. Section 13: Soil Subsidence and Rock Fall Aazards The Applicant shall submit geotechnical and soil stability reports performed by a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development. The Applicant shall also submit a report from a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating that rock fall from the slope above the proposed development will be sufficiently mitigated to prevent rock fall hazards. This report shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of full structural building permits. Section 14: Flre Mitigation The Applicant shall instal! a fire sprinkler system that meets the requirements of the Aspen Fue Marshal in any residential unit that is 5,000 square feet or more. Use of charcoal grills shall be prohibited in this development because of fire danger concerns. This prohibition shall be included in the Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the development. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. Section 16: Impact. Park Development, and School Land Dedication Fees Park Deve%pntent Impact Fees shall be assessed on each residential unit constructed on Lots 1 and 2 at the time of building permit issuance. The park development impact fees shall be calculated by the City Zoning Officer at the time of building permit issuance using the fee schedule in place at said time. Schoo! Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, and a proportionate amount of all applicable impact fees shall be due at the time of building permit issuance for each residence within the lot split. Other Impact Fees, as applicable, shall be due at the time of building permit application submittal. Section 17: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, DutdoorLighting. Section 18: Previous Aonrovais Upon recordation of the subdivision exemption plat, the previous approvals including PUD, Subdivision and any others associated with the subject property will become Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" Lot Split and Remniag, Page 5 I I,\III III ~ IIII III ~II~II II,OI III IIII, 01fI III) 066 6200fi 03:5: JPNICE K VOS CiiUDIlI PITKIN COUNTY ffb R 36.00 D 0.00 vacated, null and void for good cause found, and the provisions of this approval will be in place. Sectlon 19: Vested Procertv Riehts The development approvals granted herein shall constitute asite-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the daft of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, pursuant to the band Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Asprn, by Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 20• All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 21• This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same- shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 22: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independem provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 23• A public heating on the ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of March, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen days prior to which hearing a pub&c notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" t,ot Split and Rezoning, Page 6 II~~ VIII N~ 1111 I~IR I~~ ~II~ ~ ~ Q~ u~I 52536 03: se JaNICE K VOS CRUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 38.09 0 9.00 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLLSHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13"' day of February 2 6. en Kalia a Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S.1 c ,City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this IOth day of April, 2006. en de d, Mayor ATTEST: ~~ i Kathryn S. ,City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: . Worces er, City Attorney Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel^ Lot Split and Retuning, Page 7 C C ~: ~'3m: :~~~i_ !`~~ SI •- R :~ 1 ~ •y e ~oNo ,m 1 ~i ~~,~~i e ~" i. ili~~~6 5 A yy a[. t ~ i= ia.a ~i.~ _ ~ - a= w ~~ ~ !;~ gI '~. a I.a e; s a .; L g ~~ Ia = ~~ ~o F { i i t .~ . i9 § t6 ~ a 3 ?~, InE~ v_ _ ;rR ~._*.'r-;!!j jai- ~• za - 7~ :~fll R~ S[ ~ ~ ~ i ~~ k F r 4t~1~ c: .. ~ [!,li'_~~ ~.. ? a ~_ai~ Pfi'i r3r[i {~? errs'! 3Ia- H~!!!i i ~'gS r!i ~-;~r i~ is f e'3tl1e e Fi ~.~ fir= [_:_ - :L ~,1/.• S~ ~!! i~ P ~f ~frai i~dl;~ ~ ~ BO r '! ~r:~ Via- a = s:t~ ~et:!~~ e itE~•~=R1 4~ . ` ~ I -. •,,, ~ / "•a,r .f~! . !"'~`^~ ..e/lam f~I~' n e rs F tl.~m ~' H. ~ -~a. ~-~ - ' ~~. `a: ~, 1 ~~ ~ ~ - fy i E G• / e^ a ~xdi. `i ~ ar -a ~6 i..7 eg R 8£~~~ 0 ]~~~ Y~{x8•E~ R~ A&7., /~ 8a ~ ~1 r ~-1b ~ ~ s `~- ~ ~~ O ~ '` y ~~~ ' i~~ t• ~@ ~"® _~ ?i E ~ , i h~ fi t! ~~ ~ ~ ~ ...a _ • 4 ° l i ::a e :'.6 ~ y A W , °°'~ sour Y Iit lla u Y ~~ ~. t ~ y~ li~~~ !. Jun 19 06 10:21a w~-'ace 197"270819 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AGREEMENT FOR THE BOOMERANG LOT SYLTT EXHIBIT THIS SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made this ~ day of [.,...~ , 2006, between ASPEN FSP-ABR, LLC, a Delawaze Limited Liability Company (the "Owner's and THE CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation (the "City'. RECITALS: WHEREAS, Owner owns that certain real property (the "Property") located on the south side of West Hopkins Avenue between South Fourth Street acid South Fifth Street (Pazcel Identification Number 2735-124-49-002) in the City of Aspen, County of Fitkin, State of Colorado, described as: That part of Lots A, B, and C lying northerly of Line 7-8 of the City and Townsite of Aspen (According to the 1978 Resurvey by the Bureau of Land Management), except the southerly 20 feet thereof and the north 80 feet of Lots'D, E, and H the north 80 feet of Lot F, the north 75 feet of Lot G, the north 50 feet of Lat I. Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen, and as modified by the addition of the north 85 feet of Lots D and E, and the nortl3-80-€eet-of-bet-6;-Blo6ky'3r-Gityand-Tawnsit~of Aspen-through-quit_ __ _ claim deed executed oa August 14, 2000, and recorded with the office of _ the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder as Reception Number 446337; and, WHEREAS, Owner applied to the City of Aspen for approval of a retuning from R-15/LP/PUD (Moderate Density Residential with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlays) to R-6 (Meditmi-Density Residential); a subdivision exemption for a lot split to create Lot 1 of the Boomerang Lot Split with an area of approximately 7,500 square feet and Lot 2 of the Boomerang Lot Split with an area of approximately 12,237 squaze feet; and, associated growth management approvals (collectively, the "Project'; and, ' WHEREAS, on January 24, 2006, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission ("PBtZ") approved Resolution Number 3, Series of 2006 (the "Resolution' recommending that City Council rezone the vacant "Boomerang Parcel" to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) zone district and'apprbve a lbt split, creating Lots 1 and 2 of the Boomerang Lot Split, City of Aspen, Fitkin County, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, on Apri] 10, 2006, the City Council of the City of Aspen granted approval of a rezoning to R-6 and subdivision exemption for a lot split on the Property pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, IIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIII~~~IIIIIII~~~II 0 95369 ea.z. JNN]CE K VOS CMIDILL PITKIN COUNfY CO R 56.00 ~ 0.00 Jun 18 0610:22a wa?lace 197D°270619 p. 19 Subdivision Fsemprton Agreement Boomerang Lot S}ilit Page 2 of 11 WHEREAS, the approval of the Project was conditioned upon Owner complying with certain requirements outlined in Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2006 (the "Ordinance', including entering into a Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the Property; and, WHEREAS, Owner has submitted to the City, for approval, excention and recordation, a plat for. the Property (the `P1aY~ and the City agrees to approve, execute and record the Plat (Owner shall pay all applicable recordation fees) on the agreement of the Owner to the matters described herein; and, WHEREAS, the City has imposed conditions and requirements in connection with its approval, execution, and acceptance of the Plat, which matters are necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public health, safety and welfare, and the Owner is' prepared to enter into a Subdivision Exemption Agreement incorporating such conditions and requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and the approval, execution, and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the City, it is agreed as follows: I. Acceptance of Plat Upon execution of this Agreement by all parties and anon aooroval of the final olat by the City Engineer and the Communiri llevelopment lhiectoi, the City agrees to approve and execute the 1ine1 plat for lot split subdivision exemption submitted herewith, which conforms.to the requirements of Chapter 26.480 and all other applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Code. Said Plat and this Agreement shall be recorded (Owner pays all applicable recordation fees) in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within 180 days of Apri110, 2006 (the day the Ordinance was approved). a. b. c. d. 2. Plat Rea nirements. At a *r++*+~*num, the Plat shall: Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code; Clearly label the lot line separating Lot 1 from Lot 2, the housing type and density per lot, and show all easements. of record. Provide a four (4) foot wide public trail easement to the City of Aspen along the west and southwest property line of Ldt 2. ~ A slightly wider easement shall be granted at the southwest comer of Lot 2 to allow for a moderate turning radius on the trail The exact.location of this easement shall be approved by the Pazks Department prior to rewrdation of the Plat. The Plat may also include a note indicating that the area contained vrithin the trail easement shall got be excluded from the land area used in calcubuion of Lot Area and, as such, shall not affect allowable FAR, density, setback requirements, or other dimensional requirements. Contain a plat note stating that, no further subdivision of the subject properties maybe granted nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable . approvals pursuant to the provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application. Illl~i~llllllllllhllllllll~llllllllll~lllll~Il ~263~~ 04:2. z Jun 18 06 10:22a ma "ace Subdivirton Exemption Agreeanpu Boomerang Lot Split Page 3 of II 197t'^270819 I III~I VIII I~IIO ~II (~II IIII'll II,II 1111~I~1 IIII III 69 6 206 04:2: JaNICE K VOS CWIDILL vIMIN COUNTY CB R 56.00 D 0.00 e. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the subject lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, as maybe amended from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an applicant for new development on the subject lots has the rights afforded under the Land Use Code to request variances from the dimensional requirements of the zone district from an entity with the authority to heaz and decide upon such requests. 3. Lot 1. Owns hereby agrees and acknowledges that development of Lot 1 remains subject to the terms, provisions, and conditions of approval enumerated in the Ordmance, to wit: a: Lot 1 shall have an azea of approximately 7,500 square feet and its development is limited to one (1) single-family residence; b. Development on Lot 1 shall be subject to the use and dimensional requirements of the Medium-Density Residential (R-~ Zone District, as maybe amended from time to time. Notwithstandmg the foregoing, an applicant far new development on Lot 1 has the rights afforded under the Land Use Code to request variances from the dimensional requirements of the zone district from an entity with the authority to heaz and decide upon such requests; c. The residential dwelling unit to be constructed on Lot 1 shall comply with the City of Aspen Residential Design Standazds in place at the time of building oermit, unless anv variance(s) is duly obtained; n. V ehLCnlaz access t0 J.ot 1 Shall be taa:en Irom me JOnth !`~OUrth Jtree[ Stub lOCatetl directly to the east of the property. There shall not be any vegetation taller than thirty (30) inches from existing grade planted within the azea fifteen (15) feet south or north of the driveway, at the property line or in the public right-of--way, in order to maintain a sufficient view corridor for trail users to see vehicles crossing the trail. Owner shall also relocate the existing Midland Trail sign to the south side of the driveway and attach a new sign on the backside of the relocated Midland Trail sign to indicate to trail users the presence of the driveway's crossing of the trail; and, e. Administrative growth management approval for development of Lot 1 shall require provision of affordable housing mitigation by development on Lot 2 of one (1) "for sale" Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) or Carriage House (CH) unit containing betweeh seven-hundred fifty (750) and one-thousand two-hlmdred (1,200) squaze feet of net livable azea_ Pursuant to Section 26.470.040(B)(1), Administrative (iron7l2 Management Ro~iew: Detached single family or duplex dwelling ItniLT, of the Aspen Land Use Code, 85 maybe amended from time to time, the mitigation descnbed herein shall be acceptable for the single-family residence to be constructed on Lot 1 of the lot split. 4. Lot 2. Owner hereby agrees and acknowledges that development of Lot 2 rrmainc subject t0 the terms, provisions, and conditions of approval enumerated in the Ordinance, to wit: a. Lot 2 shall have an area of approximately 12,237 square feet and its development is limited to two (2) detached free-mazket residences (these units sha21 not be p. 20 Jun 18 06 10:23a w; "ace 197'270819 p. 21 Sysbdivrsion Exemption Agreement Boomerong Lot ,Split Page 4 oJll b. c. d. e. developed in duplex configuration), plus two (2) ADU/CH units attached to one- another (these units shall be developed is a duplex configuration); Development on Lot 2 shall be subject.to the use and dimensional requirements of the Medium-Deasity Residential (R-6) Zone District, az may be amended from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an applicant for new development on Lot 2 has the rights afforded under the I.and Use Code to request variances from the dimensional requirements of the zone district from an entity with the . authority to hear and decide upon such requests; The residential dwelling units to be constructed on Lot 2 shall comply with the City of Aspen. Residential Design Standards in place at the time of blrilding pem~it, unless any variance(s) is duly obtained. In addition, the ADU/CH units on Lot 2 shall each contain between seven-hundred fifty (750} and ono-thousand two-hundred (1,200) square feet of net livable area The ADU/CH units on I.ot 2 shall comply with the ADU Design Standards contained in Section 26.520:050 of the Code, unless any variance(s) is duly obtained; Vehicular access to Lot 2 shall be taken from West Hopkins Avenue via a single curb cut. The residential units on Lot 2 shall shaze a single driveway and the curb cut shall be designed and constmcted such that it will not result in any net loss of on-street parking in the W. Hopkins Avenue Rightof--Way (it may lie necessary to reconstruct and realign a portion of the existing sidewalk/trail to ensure ao net loss of on-street parlgng). The driveway access shall meet the City Engineering Department's standards for dnve ratgps. The redo o the curb cut returns shall be the minimum that functions far the purpose of a driveway; Owner shall gain approval from the Community Development Engineer to determine the appropriate radii sizing; and One of the two ADU/CH units on I.ot 2 provides mitigation for the development of Lot 1, as descnbed in paragraph 3.e., above. With regard to mitigation for the development of. Lot 2; administiativc growth management approval shall reglrire development on Lot 2 of one (1) additional °for sale" ADU/CH umt containing between seven-hundred fifty (750) and ono-thonsand two-hundred (1,200) square feet ofnet livable area. Pmsuaat to Section 26.470.040(8)(1), ~Idminisirative Growth Management Review: Detached single family or duplex dwelling units, of the Aspen Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time, the mitigation described herein shall be acceptable for the two (2) detached, free market sin~le- family residences to be constructed on Lot 2 of the lot split. 5. Unit Confieurations. I.ot 1 shall be developedwith adetached-singke- family dwelling unit, with or without permitted accessory structures. The free market residences on Lot 2 shall be developed as two (2) detachedsingle-family residences, with or vrtthout permitted accessory structures. The two (2) ADU/CH units on Lot 2 shall be developed in a duplex configuration, attached either side-by-side, over-under, or a combination of these. II~Im~I~~~IIII~~~III~~II~II'1II11 595369 a .z. JiWIGE IC VOS LRIIDILL PITXIN COUHiY W R 56.00 D 0.00 Ju~ 16 06 10:23a urr'_'ace 197~~270819 P, 22 P ge5 fg~=~ItronAgreonerst IIII~~Iulli~lu~I~II III~I II~I'IIII~~~IIII ~III~II Berg 6/D20060e4:22 JWIICE K VOS CRUD _ 6. Floor Area Calculation. Allowable Floor Area in the Project is dictated - by the R-6 zone district regulations and Section 26.575.020(A), Calculations and Measurements, of the Code, both as. may be amended from time to time. a. Asa 7,500 square foot lot in the R-6 Zone District, development of a detached single-family residence on Lot 1 is permitted up to 3,450 squaze feet of Floor Area, as such is calculated and measured pursuant to Section 26.575.020(A) of the Code, as may be amended from time to time. Since the "for sale" ADU/CH unit mitigating the Lot 1 development will not be located on the same parcel, Lot 1 is not entitled to a floor area bonus pursuant to Section 26.575.020(A)('i) of the Code. By contrast, since the "for sale" ADU/CH unit mitigating the Lot 1 development will be detached from the primary residence but located on Lot 2, it shall be excluded from the calculation of Floor Area, up to a maximum of 1,200 squaze feet. b. Asa 12,237 square foot lot in the R-6 Zone District, development of two (2) detached, freo-market residences on Lot 2 is permitted up to 4,274 square feet of Floor Area, as each is calculated and measured pursuant to Section 26.575.020(A) of the Code, as maybe amended from time to time. Since dIe "for sale" ADU/CH unit mitigating the Lot 2 development~will be detached from the primary residence and located on the same pazcel as the units it is mitgatmg•. i) it shall be excluded from the calculation of Floor Area, up to a maximum of 1,200 square . feet, aad 2) the free-market residential dcvclopment on Lot 2 shall be entitled to an "Affordable Housing Floor Area Bonus" pursuant to Section 26.575.020(A)(7) of the Code. Accordingly, the 4,274 square feet of allowable Floor Area on Lot 2 shall be increased by an amount equal to fifty (50) percent of the Floor Area of the ADU/CH unit mitigating the I.ot 2 development, up to a ma~umum bonus of ' six-hundred (600) square feet. 7. Affordable HOnsinQ. Deed reshictions for the ADU/CFi units developed on Lot 2 shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 26.520.070, Deed Restrictions and Enforcement, of the Code, at the time of building permit issuance. 8. Bnildina Permit Application. In addition to such requirements enumerated elsewhere herein and otherwise regpired by the City of Aspen Building Department, the building permit application fbr each of the residential units shall include - the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z,,~tesolution; . b. The conditions of approval, as contained in the Ordinance, printed on the cover page of the building permit set; c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspem Consolidated Sanitation District; d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by. a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. Additionally, aright-of--way landscaping plan Ju 16 06 10:24a ma "ace Subdivtrion Exemption Agreement Boomerang Zot Split Page 6 of Il 197~~270919 p. 23 IIIIIO I~III~~~f~I ~~II IIII'~II~II I~~llll III IB~I 0 9 6/2006 04:2: JgNICE K VOS CpIAILL PITKIN COUNTY f:0 R 56.00 D 0.00- shall be provided as part of the building permit application identifying that any trees removed from the right-of--way will have to be relocated. Any disruption or damage to the right-of--way irrigation system during construction shall also be repaired to the satisfaction of the Pazks Department; e. A drainage plan, including as erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground rechazge system is required, a soil percolation report will be requited to correctly size the facility. A 5-yeaz storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements; f. A construction management plan pursuant to the requirements of the Community Development Deparment. The construction management plan shall include a plan for protecting the Midland and W. Hopkins Avemle Trails during construction. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Pazks Department prior to building permit issuance; and g. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. 9. Curb and Gutter. Owner shall constmct curb and gutter along the West Hopkins Avenue frontage of the Propertyprior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the units in the project. The timing of this installation may be' changed if approved by the City Engineer. If the W. Hopkins Pedestrian Trail is altered dulin¢ construction, the Applicant shall repair the t construction. See also paragraph 4.d:; above. 10. Subdivision. No further subdivision of the Property may occur without receipt of applicable and 7equired approvals pursnarrt to Chapter 26.480 of the Aspen Land Use Code (hereinafter "Code's and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470 of the Code, unless the Code is amended in a manner that otherwise allows for further subdivision. 11. Landscaoine. Owner shall install a tree root barrier on the trees that are to be planted within ten (10) feet of the W. Hopkins trail to prevent future root damage and trail upheaval. The Applicant shaIl also install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any trees to be paved subj ect to the following provisions: a. The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any construction activities wmmence. _ b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, consttnction backfill, foot or vehiculaz traffic shall be allowed within the drip line. 12. Environmental Hazards. Owner shall submit geotechnical and soil stability reports performed by a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development. Owner shall also submit a report from a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating that.rock fall from the slope above the development will be sufficiently mitigated to prevent rock fall hazards. This report shall Jum 18 06 10:25a wz"ace i j Subdivision Eumprion ,Sgrepnent i BoomerangLofSptif Page7of]I 197°270819 p. 24 IIIIIII VIII III~II~II II'~IIIII,IIII'~Ili~~ll"II~I~.00 9 by 09 4:2; be submitted for review by the Community Development Depattment prior to the - issuance of full shvctural building permits. 13. Fire Protection. Owner shall install a fire sprinkler system that meets the requirements of the Aspen Fire Marshal in any residential unit that is 5,000 square feet or more. Use of charcoal grills shall be proln'bited in this dcvelopment because of firm danger concerns. 14. Sewer Service. Owner shall comply with the Aspm Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No cleaz water connections (rood foundation, perimeter drains) td' ACSD lines shall be allowed. I5. Imnact Fees. Park Development Impact Fees shall be assessed on each residential unit constructed on hots 1 and 2 at the time of building permit issuance. The park development impact fees shall be calculated by the City Zoning Officer at the time of building permit issuance using the fee schedule in place at said time. In addition, School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal pursuant to ,Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, and a proportionate amount of all applicable impact feershall be due at the time-of-building pe~mlit issuance-for eac)r- - --- - residence. Code Requirements pursuant to LandZ.Ise CodE Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. 17. Dom. There shall be no prohibition against any property owner, including owners of the affordable housing units, from owninglkeeping a dog. 18. Colorado Common Interest Ownershio Act (CCIOA). As soon as construction on Lot 2 practically allows, Owner anticipates submitting the Lot 2 development to a plan far condominiumization created p,,.r„ar,t to the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) in order to facilitate the separate conveyance of ownership in the two free market units and the two employee housing units. The City agrees to process for approval and for recordation a condominium map prepared in accordance with the Code and CCIOA. As the Owner will have provided affordable housing pursuant to the Code, the Project is exempt from paying an Affordable Housing Impact fee. This. provision is not in conflict withthose provisions of. the Ordinance or of this Agreement restricting the property from further subdivision. . 19. Previous A~nrovals Null and Void. Upon recordation of the Plat and this Agreement, the previous approvals including PUD, Subdivision and any others associated with the Property become vacated, null and void for good cause found, and the provisions of Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 2006) will be in place. Jun 18 06 10:25a u+a"ace 197f"~270819 p. 25 P gei8 fg ~temp~ nAgYe°ment IIIIIB ~~~II~IIIiIN~IIIII~III~III VIIIIINIIII 069 6/209 04:2: JRNICE K V°b CPUDILL PiT%IN LOUNir W R 56.00 D O. BB 20. Vested Property Riehts. The approved Ordinance, Plat and this Agreement, - collectively, constitute a sito-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of developaent order issuance. Zl. Financial Securitv'for Pnblic Imurovements. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of improvements in the public right-of- way, including landscaping, the Owner shall provide the City with a financial security for the proposed improvements. The financial security shall take the form of a letter of credit, cash or other guarantees in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney and shall be submitted to the City prior to the initiation of wnstruction or the issuance of any building permits. Pursuant to this Agreement, the Owner shall provide a detailed cost estimate of the improvements for approval by the City. The amount of the required financial security shall be 110% of the estimated cost of the improvements. The guarantee doctnnents shall give the City the' unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owner uI its obligations to complete the public improvements, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements, or to withdraw fends against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements. If the improvements have not been completed to the satisfaction of the City withia'one yeaz of the cost estimate, the'City may require the Owner to adjust the amount of the financial security for local increases in construction As portions of the improvements are completed, the City shall inspect them, and upon approval and acceptance, shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated vests fot that portion of the improvements, except that ten perc~t (10%) of the estimated costs of the improvements shall be withheld for the benefit of the City until (} all of the improvements have been inspected and accepted by the City, (ii) a two-yeaz maintenance bond has been provided by the Contractor, and (iii) as-bunts have been provided (if required). Separate financial securities and maintenance bonds are required for civil RO.W. improvements (i.e. pipelines, sidewalks, and curbs) and landscaping RO.W. improvements. , 22. Material Reuresentations. All material representations made by the Owner on record, whether in public hearings orin documentation presented before City Council or the P&Z, shall be binding upon the Owner. 23. Enforcement In the event the City dete.ffiines that the Owner is not in substantial compliance with the terms of this Agreement or of the Final Plat, the City may serve a notice of noncompliance and request that the deficiencies be con-ected within a period of forty-five (45) days. In the event the Owner believes that s/he is in compliance or that the noncompliance is insubstantial, the Owner may request a hearing before the City Council to dctemvnb whether the alleged noncompliance exists or where say amendment, variance, or extension of time to comply should be granted. On request, the ,~ ma 'ace 197'"270619 p.26 Subdivision Exemption Agreemerst Page 9 of l7 BoonlaangLorSplit ~ ~Illlll~~~I~~N~I~IIIIII~~I~~IIII~IIIIII~II~~II 5~5 9~'9 II dtINICE K VD$ CM1DILl PIMIN COUNIY rq 06/16/2006 04:Z - R 66.00 D 0.00 City shall conduct a hearing according to its standard procedlues and take such action as ~ - it deems appropriate. The City shall be entitled to all remedies at equity and at law to enjoin, coaect and/or receive damages for any noncompliance with this Agreement 23. Noiices. Notices to the parties shall be sent in writing by U.S. certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, Such notices shall be deemed received, if not sooner received, three (3) days after the date of the mailing of the same. To the Owner: Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC c/o Len Mongeon Fountain Squaze properties, LLC 11921 Freedom Drive, Suite 950 Reston, VA 20190 16 06 10:26a . ~- To the City: City Attorney City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, C^O 81611 24. Bindine Effect The provisions of this Agreement shall nm with and constitute a burden on the laced and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors 25. Amendment. This Agreement may be altered or amended only by written inshvment executed by all parties hereto, with the same formality as this Agreement was executed. 26. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties.hereto have executed this Subdivision Exemption Agreement the day and year first written above. [remainder of page intentidnally left blank] Jun 18 06 10:26a tua'•ace 197r~270619 p. 27 Subdivision 6zanprion ilgreemenl - Bp g ~ ~ILotSplit 52~5369r !1 - IIIII~IIINIIIINII~aIII~III~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIBO® 9,76,2906 94:2: D 8.90 _ _ OWNER: ASPEN FSP-ABR, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: BROWN REALTY MANAGER, INC., a Delawaze r oration, its uag~ By_ ' r Name: ?No+.wr S,,,cri~J Title: _ NicE ,°+~s,pa,ar By: By:, Title: Ma PROPERTIES, l.LC, qty company, its Manager STATE OF q ..,.a ) ss. _ COUNTY OF _~ ~acrrwacs) - --- -- - - -K The foregoing was sworn and subscn'bed to before me this 1'y day of TN ~ .2006, by ~,wrs .~arra.~ . in his capacity as ~ci ~c310E.JT for Brown Realty Manager, Inc. _ ~~Vitness my hand and official seal. My commission expires ~~- - T - Zaa L .Notary STATE OF V i~A~) ='~ s! /nauq ) SS. - sit :foregoing was sworn and bscribed to before me this ~ day of '~` , 2006, by UO~N~I~UV . i'Gtel~V , in his capacity as M~y ~n Square Properties, LLC. It~~:~ ~~'.: pVe~;,~`Witness my hand and official-seal. """~~ My commission expires ~ f ~ ' Notary Public ~o Jt~ 18 06 10:26a Wa? ice Su6divisionBsemptionAgreement Boomerang Lot Split Page Il of II APPROVED: 1970^070819 ~II~~~~NII~I~IIIIIILLII~II,I~IIII~AI~~11~lI~IIII eg~53~~ e.'z. . CD R 56.00 D 0.00 ~'~~n ~~f~,~~ 0 or er, Clty Attorney THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a municipal corporation ..~~ el an a Mayor STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) ATTEST: p. 28 sy: ~ """Y1 Kathryn Koch, City Clerk The foregoing was sworn andaubscrbe"d to before me this ~~day of 2006, by Helen"Ralin Klanderud an Detr; as Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Aspen, a Municipald~i~ ~'F °~ w Witness my hand and official s My commission expires ~' blic CMY~Documrnm`rSry Apptiariona~Bootm~g~B-rang Stunda~Braog SA¢da SPA '~GQE LO7H1A'; .n i 11 DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development. Department EXHIBIT l6 This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-yeaz vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on -the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments gamed pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. As FSP-ABR, LLC c/o Steve R. Stunda. 602 N. Fourth Street. Aspen, CO 81611, 925-7604 Property Owner's Name, Mat7ing Address and telephone number Referred to as the "Boomerane Vacant Parcel", the property is described as portions of Lots A-F, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen located on West Hopkins Avenue between 4'" and 5'" Avenues on the south side of Hopkins ono address assigned)_ Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property A rezonine of the vronertv from R-15 (Moderate Density Residential) with PUD and Lodge Preservation Overla~l to R-6 (Medium Densiri Residential). and a lot srolit to create two karate residential lots to be developed in accordance with the orovisions of Ordinance No. 06, Series of 2006. Written Description of the Site Specific Plaa and/or Attachment Describing Plsn Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Finsl Ordinances or Resolutions) Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of pablication of notice of approval.) Atni128.2009 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 19th day of April, 2006, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. Chris Bendon, Community Development Director m .«,~ t~ ~ € ~ . e a aYt ~~ K~ s ~ ~ ~ c' - ~~y ~~ ~ '~~ as ~ s : z$ ~_ ~< ~ ~ ~ --- . _ LL ~ ~ E 4 V rT~] _ Vi=i Q ~ ~, r~ ~ ~. ~ 40r ~ ~i • iu ~ 1 ,l ~,/E -1~ b j C `~ ~€~ ~ ~ .F ~~ ~ •~ ~~~.~ a `._ ~ ~ I_ r///~' F ~~.. y ~~.< $~ % a $~am~ ~ 4 ~ <$~ ~ l' yyp V 8 ~ G$~y ~ / ~ 111$ Q G~ ~~ . ~ $_ j .: r-, s ~r }fie /r ~ ` ~' 4°$ . ... ;~ T , ~ ; ~e ~ - %• YE ~ ~~^..`! rrtr k'rn HS r4pt -. rjgCa ' • rrr °Lnv 3 ,._O ~gg+ S g 3' R ® ~ s ~RRS --- ® ~ t. }"r` :.~~.., ~,~~" . +` v ~~ ~` a~~ ~~,: ~a p W f^t E a~ 0 :~ ' ip M r F r i a 0`i 8 W$ €~m ~`~ 4 76, ~ ~~ ~-`-t~ . ~ 3~ ~~ a t~K 9t ° -~ - J c ~ -~ eyga o a ~ .x ~~~ $ ~ Yi° w = R• SY•€ ~ ~ ~' ~ 1~ 3e : $ g w _ ~4 h~ ~ 7 ~Ee pi 6 ~ OMYd-iMlt $ q ~ ~ ~ R V tl ~~ s ~ a ~~. ~ _ ~4~i = - ~• ~,.:. _y ~. ~e ~/ M 1 • ,,: ~ ~~ B "i ` Y f %`O` ~~ • y a •?~.~ Q / o°°~ ° 2 r .gg. /~ a Z y T a ~% - h• \\ ~~~ N m o ~ > ~ o J ~ y a i, r i= T 's<' e i- :~ ~ a ~S s ~ ~ S F w ~. _ ~ Y ~ $ !i S~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ as j w 6 LZ ~ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Ixa Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Director 'vf ~~ John Worcester, City Attorney Steve Barwick, City Manager Apri115, 2009 April 27, 2009 Public Health Revitalization Act REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This resolution lets Aspen comply with the requirements of the 2008 Public Health Revitalization Act by designating existing entities as the new Board of Health and Public Health Agency for the City of Aspen. By adopting this resolution, Council would be choosing to retain oversight and prioritization of its environmental programs and declining, at this time, to put those programs under the authority of a County agency. If the Act or state regulations change in the future so that the City could retain control of its own programs and priorities, but still join with the County, that option could be pursued at any time. This preserves that option for the City. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: This resolution is the first formal action required by municipalities and counties in response to Senate Bill 194 of 2008. BACKGROUND: SB 09-194, the Public Health Reauthorization Act (the Act), passed the state legislature in 2008. It requires several things, including that every jurisdiction designate an agency or department as its public health agency, and designate a Board of Health to oversee that agency. This is typically an existing department, which in our case would be the Environmental Health Department. Currently the Aspen City Council sits as the Boazd of Health for the City of Aspen, and could continue to do so, acting as the Board of Health for the city's public health agency. That would represent no change from the existin¢ situation except for the formal designation under the Act and would not create any new departments add anv staff, or change costs. The Act specifically provides for municipalities to remain their own boazds of health and set up their own public health agency under the statute, which states, "THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF EACH INCORPORATED TOWN OR CITY, WHETHER INCORPORATED UNDER GENERAL STATUTES OR SPECIAL CHARTER IN THIS STATE, MAY ESTABLISH A Page 1 of 5 MUNICIPAL PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY AND APPOINT A MUNICIPAL BOARD OF HEALTH." The traditional public health functions have been performed throughout Pitkin County by the non-profit Community Health Services, which is funded by a countywide property tax, additional health and human service grant from the city, and other grants. The Act does not require the City to duplicate such programs that are already being performed. Specifically, if "OTHER PROVIDERS OFFER CORE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES THAT ARE SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE LOCALNEEDS" (as Community Health Services now does), that allows the jurisdiction to meet its health and environmental goals. The City of Aspen could also choose to merge its environmental and health functions under the County's also-newly-designated public health agency. The City of Aspen can also choose to merge in the future at any time, but cannot withdraw for two yeazs if it merges its environmental programs into the County. At this time, the Boazd of County Commissioners envisions that the new County Boazd of Health it appoints would also be the County's Public Health Agency. There is also consideration of having Community Health Services act as the County's Public Health Agency. Issues related to putting City environmental and health functions under the county have less to do with what the County might agree to, than with what the Act directs. The following would apply if the City of Aspen did not designate its own Public Health Agency and chose to merge with the County: The Act says that "THE JURISDICTION OF" such a countywide public health agency "SHALL EXTEND OVER ALL ... MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE COUNTY" The Act states that the new County Public Health Agency/Boazd of Health would have the authority "TO ADMINISTER AND ENFORCE THE LAWS PERTAINING TO PUBLIC HEALTH, AIR POLLUTION, SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE, AND WATERQUALITY" in the City of Aspen. This authority would no longer lie with the City Council. How these laws would be "carried out" would be "AS DETERMINED BY THE COUNTYOR DISTRICT BOARD OF HEALTH OR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS" The Act states that for all of these programs, "ALL... PERSONNEL REQUIRED ... SHALL BE SELECTED BY THE [NEW COUNTYWIDE] PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR" instead of by the City of Aspen. The Act says that "ALL PERSONNEL SHALL PERFORM DUTIES AS PRESCRIBED BY THE [NEW COUNTY] PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR", instead of by the City Manager, as is now the case. The Act states that the new county public health director has the power to "DIRECT THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO CARRY OUT THE ... HEALTH PLAN" in both the City and County, including staff and funds. Page 2 of 5 The Act says the county Board of Health/Public Health Agency has the authority "TO ISSUE ORDERS AND TO ADOPT RULES" related to public health or the environment, throughout its jurisdiction, including in the City of Aspen. The county Public Health Agency/Board of Health could impose fees in the city, would disburse any state or federal money to the city for environmental or health purposes, and any monies received "FROM STATE OR FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS OR ANY OTHER GIFTS, GRANTS, DONATIONS, OR FEES FOR LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH PURPOSES" would be given to the County Treasurer and the county Public Health Agency/Board of Health would determine how those monies are allocated. The Act sets out additional requirements that must be met whether the City acts as its own Public Health Agency, or gives that authority to the County. Monies received for environmental programs, as fees, grants or otherwise, would go into a dedicated fund - either a city fund if the city kept its Board of Health, or a county fund if the city merged its environmental programs. In the latter case, the County Board of Health would allocated funds among city, county, and community health programs, as it saw fit. The Act does not require spending whatever is desirable to meet optimum public and environmental health needs. It states that if there are not sufficient funds to meet all the goals, that priorities be set. DISCUSSION: Some County officials desire consolidation of City environmental and environmental health programs under County authority with an ultimate goal of having all city and county environmental and public health programs in one county agency under the BOCC via a Boazd of Health. Two significant issues arise for the City if city programs were placed under the County at this time. First, past efforts to operate joint departments in Environmental Health, Planning, Building, and City Manager roles, have failed due to differing jurisdictional needs and priorities. It is my experience in thirty yeazs of working in County, City, and joint departments that much more is accomplished by having sepazate entities directed by separate elected officials, and that closer financial control and accountability also occurs. Second, the Act clearly puts prioritization, administration, resource allocation, hiring and supervision of all environmental and public health programs under the County, if Aspen does not form its own Public Health Agency. The City has a number of programs in air quality, water quality, stormwater, global warming, recycling, hazardous waste, and others that the City wants to continue to prioritize and oversee. Present County elected officials and or staff might indicate they have no desire to take over these programs. However, staff, elected officials, financial conditions and priorities change with time, and the Act still says that the County is where the authority would lie. We aze not aware of any mechanisms that would give the City authority for its programs, when the Act is clear that the City would NOT have this authority if merger occurred. If that were not the case, it might be possible to resolve other issues. But with the current language in the Act, until this is resolved, the City can designate its own agency, and allow the possibility of these issues being worked out, at which time the City could consider all options. Page 3 of 5 Money and control aze often central issues. Combining city and county resources under a county entity would obviously provide more resources that the county could allocate. Having sepazat8 Public Health Agencies should not reduce money available to the County, since the City's costs will not go up, but that may be a fear. One azea of concern may be funding of Community Health Services, and the demands for its services. 45% of the tax money raised for the Healthy Community Fund comes from City property taxes, and the city donates an additional $60,000 as a health and human services grant. The City has always strongly supported public and environmental health. This Act would create no lessening of City support for these programs, nor would it create additional demands for city funds, so whether Aspen designates its own agency should have no impact on resources available for CHS. Under the County's new organization, and working collaboratively with the City, there is no reason to assume that the County will have less money for these important programs if the City continues with a "status quo" approach. Another azea of concern relates to control of programs. One concern that has been expressed is that the City might try to demand that Community Health Service provide more pregnancy screening and less immunizations, while the County provided the opposite direction. This has not been an issue in the past, and there is no reason that it would become an issue now. It would be our staff recommendation that the City clarify that it has no intention of dictating to Community Health Service in its prioritization of community health programs. Another concern is that the City might apply for grants in competition with the County. Again, this has never been an issue, and there is no reason it should now become an issue as a result of this Act. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: There should be no change in revenues or expenses as a result of this resolution or the Act. The City is obligated to provide only those services it can fund, and is not required to perform services being provided by others (CHS). The Act does create additional workload initially, whether the City is its own Public Health Agency or merges with the County. The workload increase will be less under this "status quo" option than if we combine with the County, but the difference may be small. In either case, we will accomplish any additional work without additional staff, and minimize the amount as much as possible, so we can focus on environmental programs rather than systems and processes. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This resolution has no direct environmental impact. It does maintain the City's ability to determine which environmental programs it wants to perform and fund. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution designating the City's public health agency, to preserve the city's ability to determine its environmental programs and priorities. Staff recommends that the City continue to evaluate future changes in the Act and its regulations and consider future options if these issues aze resolved. Page 4 of 5 ALTERNATIVES: Council could decide to join the County and let the County determine overall environmental priorities for the county and city. The City could also join the County and request that the County not implement the Act as written, but still allow the City to operate its own environmental programs and priorities and hire its own staff. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # ~~ Series of 2009 designating existing entities as the City of Aspen's Public Health Agency, Board of Health, and Public Health Agency Director." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION No. (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF ASPEN PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY, APPOINTING A BOARD OF HEALTH TO OVERSEE THE ASPEN PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY, AND APPOINTING A DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY WHEREAS, Senate Bill 194 passed in 2008 by the Colorado General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor of the State of Colorado, has revised the public health statutes of the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. §25-1-506, et seq., requires each incorporated municipality to establish and maintain a municipal public health agency if it does not choose to merge with and fall under the jurisdiction of a countywide public health agency; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen desires to continue its collaboration with Pitkin County and Community Health Services with regazd to matters of public and environmental health, and to work cooperatively with local health and environmental entities to develop a collaborative local health plan, and can best achieve this without merging; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO that: Section 1. The Aspen City Council hereby designates the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department as its municipal Public Health Agency. Section 2. The Aspen City Council is re-appointed as the board of health for Aspen's Public Health Agency, the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department; Section 3. The Aspen City Council, acting as the Boazd of Health for the City of Aspen's Public Health Agency, hereby appoints the City of Aspen Environmental Health Director as the Director of the City of Aspen's Public Health Agency. Section 4. The Aspen City Council, acting as the Board of Health for the Aspen Public Health Agency, hereby appoints the Mayor of the City of Aspen as the President of the Board of Health, and agrees to hold meetings of the boazd of health every three months. Dated: Michael Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held November 22, 2004. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk