Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20100809CITY COUNCIL AGENDA August 9, 2010 5:00 P.M. 3:30 Site Visit — Castle Creek Hydropower Plant I. Call to Order 11. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #59, 2010 — Construction Management Plan Amendment b) Affirming Council Appointments c) Resolution #60, 2010 — Contract Glenwood Ford —Vehicle Replacement d) Resolution #61, 2010 — Contract Snow Cat e) Resolution #62, 2010 — Wheeler Cinema Services Agreement f) Resolution #63, 2010 — Lease Harbert Lumber 38005 Highway 82 g) Minutes —July 26, 2010 VII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #20, 2010 — Charter Amendment — Elections P.H. 8123 b) Ordinance #21, 2010 — Charter Amendment — Elections P.H. 8/23 Vlll. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #15, 2010 — Castle Creek Energy Center Hydropower Plant b) Ordinance #19, 2010 — Charter Amendment Defining Publication c) Ordinance #18, 2010 - Open Space Bonds To be withdrawn IX. Action Items a) Resolution #64, 2010 — Extending Given Institute Ordinance #48 Negotiation b) Resolution #65, 2010 - Appeal —Amendment Rio Grande SPA c) Resolution #57, 2010 — Ballot Question Charter Amendment Defining Publication X. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting August 23, 2010 COUNCIL'S ADOPTED GUIDELINES ✓ Stick to top priorities ✓ Foster a safe, supportive, innovative environment that encourages creativity and acceptable risk - taking ✓ Create structure and allow adequate time & resources for citizen processes Vla MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Aaron Reed, Construction Mitigation Officer THRU: Trish Aragon PE, City Engineer Scott Miller, Capital Asset Manager DATE OF MEMO: 8/2/10 MEETING DATE: August 9, 2010 RE: Construction Hours REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Engineering Department seeks Council recommendation regarding modifications to the Construction Management Plan Requirements Manual. This change is: • Off Season Hours Change to 8am to 7pm • Interior Construction 24 Hours a Day Permitted PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved the creation and implementation of the Construction Mitigation Program in April of 2006, below is a timeline of this program. • April 2006: the City creates the Construction Mitigation Program to reduce the impact of construction on the general public, to provide a liaison between the City, contractors, and the general public. This is accomplished by requiring contractors to submit a plan detailing how they intended to meet all city codes during construction. • March 2007: the Original Plan Requirement Manual is drafted and presented at a worksession. • April 2007: edits from the March worksession are incorporated into the "Plan" these edits included an established haul route, restricting hours from 12 hours a day to 10 hours a day, creation of the Aspen Holiday list which included federal holidays and special events in Aspen like the Food and Wine Classic. • April 2007: Alteration of start and end time for work days 8am-6pm • May 2007 re -instatement of original start and end times 7am-5pm • January 2008: Expansion of the program to include inspections on all active projects regardless of impact. Additional inspections were also added these included sediment and erosion control, and parking. The table below provides a quantitative description of CMP activities. Page 1 of 3 November 2009: Council work session to discuss new noise suppression guidelines, temporary holiday construction hours relief, and smuggler superfund permitting and tracking. May 2010 worksession: City Council suggested that the Engineering Department should temporarily lift the restrictions associated with interior construction work within the CRA, allowing for such work to occur 24 hours a day 6 days a week. Additionally, council requested an alteration to the offseason hours, which allows construction to occur from Sam to 7pm Monday through Friday. DISCUSSION: Off Season Hours: City Council expressed interest in providing additional construction hours during the offseason. As a result an experiment took place during the 2010 spring offseason allowing contractors to work on interior elements 24 hours a day after gaining approval from the Engineering Department. During this experiment the Engineering Department did not receive any complaints regarding specific projects; however, the department did receive concerns regarding the concept. In order for an applicant to gain approval for 24 hour interior work the applicant must present a request to the Engineering Department that demonstrates the work will not cause an impact to the surrounding neighborhood or tenants. The Engineering Department will evaluate the request to: • Determine the level of potential impact if any. • Evaluate if the proposed activity is better suited for non-traditional hours. • Evaluate if alternate viable options exist. Likely examples of interior work that would be permitted: • Painting • Drywall texturing / taping / hanging • Minor plumbing • Minor electrical • Cabinet hanging If a complaint is received for work that is being conducted outside the traditional construction hours the project's 24 hour construction approvals will be revoked. City Council also expressed an interest in providing an extension to the offseason hours for all construction work. This would modify the construction hours from lam — 5pm to Sam — 7pm. This change increases the length of the workday by one hour and ideally will reduce the impact of early morning starts. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff does not anticipate additional costs to the City. Contractors may also realize a financial gain by allowing work outside of the CRA, and therefore increasing production Page 2 of 3 during specific holiday periods; as well as increased production during the offseason within the CRA. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Allowing construction in non -core neighborhoods on certain holidays will have noise impacts, this is also a potential during the offseason within the CRA by allowing 24 hour interior construction, these concerns have not been significant to date. RECOMMENDED ACTION: City staff recommends the permanent adoption of new policies outlined above. ALTERNATIVES: Council may select to redirect current recommendations and staff will make such alterations to the current Requirements Manual. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Construction Management Plan Attachment B: Central Resort Area Map Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION # 5 °� (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGES TO THE CITY OF ASPEN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MANUAL APPROVING 24 HOUR CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES AND OFFSEASON CONSTRUCTION HOURS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE SAID CHANGES WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a draft of proposed changes to the City of Aspen Construction Management Plan Manual a copy of which is attached. 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 City of Aspen Engineering Department executes changes to the Construction Management Plan Manual a copy of which is incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Engineer of the City of Aspen to execute said changes 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 August 9th, 2010. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: July 28, 2010 RE: Mayor Pro Tern and Council Appointments At the work session July 27, Council nominated Dwayne Romero to be Mayor Pro Tem and Tone to be the representative to Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. By adopting the consent calendar, Council is approving these appointments valid until June 2011. MEMORANDUM Vt C, TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jerry Nye, Superintendent of Streets THRU: Randy,Ready, Asst. City Manager DATE: July 29 2010 RE: Vehicle Replacement Contract Approval 2010-1 FM -A, B, C, D&E REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends approval of the contract 2010-1FM- A,B,C,D&E for the fleet replacement purchase of three (3) '/4 ton small 4x4 pickup's, one (1) full size 4x4 pickup, one (1) 12 passenger van, two (2) small hybrid SUVs and one (1) 7 passenger mid -sized SUV. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The 2010Asset Management Plan contains the funds for these fleet replacement purchases. City Council approved the 2010 Asset Management Plan as part of the 2010 Budget. BACKGROUND: This purchase is the result of a competive bid process in which Glenwood Springs Ford was the low bidder for all the vehicles listed above. All of the vehicles scheduled for replacement have far exceeded the minimum criteria for replacement of being at least five years old with at least 60,000 miles. The new vehicles will be put on a 5-year 60,000 mile replacement cycle and will be reassessed for replacement at that trade in time. DISCUSSION: This year's fleet replacement plan includes the following: • Water Department --two 2000 Ford Ranger pickups, one 2000 full-size Ford F250 pickup, and one 2003 Ford explorer. The two Ranger pickups will be replaced with Ford Ranger pickups. These vehicles need to remain as small 4x4 pickups that can carry small loads and testing equipment, yet stay economical. The full-size pickup will remain the same and will be replaced with the like F250. This vehicle will need to remain equipped with auxiliary fuel tank and have the hauling capacity for the department's large equipment trailer for hauling equipment to remote locations. The Ford Explorer will be replaced with a smaller Ford Escape Hybrid that will still be able to perform staff needs. Recreation Department --one 2002 12 passenger van and one 2001 4x4 small 7 passenger Chevy Astro van. The 12 passenger van will be replaced with another 12 passenger van Page 1 of 2 for basic people hauling related to recreation and day camp needs. The small 7 passenger 4x4 van will be down -sized to a mid -size Ford Explorer 7-passenger small utility vehicle. The small 4x4 vans have been discontinued by the manufacture and the mid size small utility type vehicle will still allow the departments to haul up to seven people when needed and still have the ability for them to fold down all the seats to haul small loads such as boxes, tables and chairs. Street Department --One Ford Escape Hybrid SUV will be replaced with another Ford Escape Hybrid. This vehicle will remain as both an in -town staff and commuter carpool vehicle. The Street Department will also replace a commuter vanpool van that has more than 190,000 miles. We will be using the Street Department's older high -mileage van for the trade in vehicle, instead of using the Recreation Department's trade in van. The Recreation Departments trade in van was valued at $3,200.00 and has 60,000 miles on it. The Street Department Staff will keep the lower mileage van from the Recreation Department and use it as a commuter van to replace the older high -mileage van. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The Fleet Replacement budget in the 2010 Asset Management plan contained $213,500.00 for the Fleet Replacement Purchase of these vehicles and an estimated trade-in total of $37,500.00. The actual trade-in total amount was $32,100.00 and the actual total amount before trade is $191,345.60, leaving a total contract amount of $159,245.60 net due to the vendor after trade. Therefore, the 2010 Asset Management plan has sufficient funds to purchase these vehicles and this procurement will come in under budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The proposed purchase is basically trading "apples for apples" for the pickups and passenger van. We will be downsizing 2 vehicles and one of those will be going to a hybrid. Auto manufacturers are currently cutting down more and more on emissions and continuing to improve gas mileage. Staff is relying on the new technology in these pickups to help deliver lower emissions and improved fuel consumption ratings. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends council approval of the contract for 2010- 1 FM A,13, C, D&E for the purchase of the three '/< ton Ford Rangers, one '/o ton Ford pickup, one 12 passenger Ford van, two Ford Escape Hybrids and one 7 passenger Ford Explorer for the City of Aspen. ALTERNATIVES: PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # (pU of 2010 on the consent calendar of Monday, August 9, 2010 CITY MANAGER ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION # to (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND GLENWOOD SPRINGS FORD SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF FLEET VEHICLES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Glenwood Springs Ford, a copy of which agreement 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 agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Glenwood Springs Ford regarding purchasing Fleet vehicles for the city of Aspen, 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, August 9, 2010.' Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ASPEN BID NO. 2010 -1 FM-A.B.C.D and E THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into, this 9t' day of July of 2010, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and Glenwood Springs Ford. hereinafter referred to as the "Vendor." WITNESSETH, that whereas the City wishes to purchase. Three (3) new year model small ford ranger 4x4 pickups with shells One (1) new year model Ford F250 4x4 pickup One (1) new year model 12 passenger van Two (2) new year model Ford Escape Hybrid's One (1) new year model 7 passenger 4x4 ford explorer. Hereinafter called the UNIT(S), in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the Contract Documents and any associated Specifications, and Vendor wishes to sell said UNIT to the City as specified in its Bid. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Vendor, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the UNIT(S) as described in the Contract Documents and more specifically in Vendor's Bid for the sum of One Hundred Fifty Eight Thousand, Nine Hundred Forty Five and sixty cents dollars ($158.945.60 ). 2. Delivery. (FOB 1080 POWER PLANT RD. ASPEN, CO.) 3. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Contract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. 4. Warranties. A full description of all warranties associated with this purchase shall accompany this contract document. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 6. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any rights to claim damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Vendor because of any 7-PURCH.DOC breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 7. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 8. Agreement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 9. Attorney's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement. 11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 12. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities. Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. Vendor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of securing business. Vendor 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 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 Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. 7-PURCH.DOC In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a vendor, contractor or sub -contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 13. Termination for Default or for Convenience of City. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be cancelled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 14. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 15. City Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $10,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 16. Non -Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, section 13-98, pertaining to non- discrimination in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination ACt of 1957, as amended, and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment practices. 17. Integration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, vendor understands that no City official or employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the parties hereto. 7-PURCH.DOC 18. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of Vendor for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein written in three (3) copies, all of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. City Clerk FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: By: City Manager VENDOR: By:_ Title. 7-PURCH.DOC BID NO.2010-1 FM-B BIDDER'S: NAME: ADDRESS: G/Fnc�oao�S�e, ff era Flea PHONE: '7-70 3 FY 7 as ITEM BID: IA-�05-0 YEAR MODEL 2Z0 MAKE TOTAL BID AMOUNT AS SPECIFIED ABOVE: (1) ($ (1A) 00 ($ 4600 " ) (AMOUNT OFFERED FOR TRADE-IN(s)S) (B) $/594t6, ) (NET DOLLAR AMOUNT DUE VENDOR) BID PRICE PER UNIT: VEH. NUM. AMOUNT 430163 2000 F250 4/zlc'?° DELIVERY: NOT LATER THAN GO �r3r NOTE: Bidder must bid on all items and will be paid only item 1 B plus any associated costs for purchased extended warranties which are not included in Item (1). Failure to bid on all items shall disqualify bid. I (we) acknowledge receipt of the following addenda, (if any): Location of Bidder's nearest Service Facility �/�2 ne�oc,C, Location of Bidder's nearest mobile service truck (base). 6/1e--J'e 0 0 d Maximum travel cost (mi. & labor) per service call. S0 pA The undersigned agree(s) that this bid shall not be withdrawn for a period of 60 days from the opening thereof. In submitting this proposal, it is acknowledged that the City reserves the right to waive any informality in or to reject all bids. It is further understood that award of this bid is contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Mayor and City Council. STANDARD CLAUSE FOR SOLICITATIONS, CONTRACTS, AND SUBCONTRACTS REQUIRED: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion: The bidder/offerer certifies, by submission of this proposal or acceptance of this contract, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. bidder/offerer/Vendor or any lower tier participant is unable to shall attach an ex lanation to this solicitation/proposal ATTES SIGNATURE:_ (S L) NAME:_ S /U� t-fy�-J Se.—c TITLE:_ NAME TITLE DATE: 6APR-GEN.DOC T Where the to this statement, it BID NO. 2010-1 FM-C BIDDER'S: NAME: G�Gn �rOa�C S v •� �o.� ADDRESS: PHONE: ITEM BID: YEAR MODEL,& YI-0 MAKE /�•t. TOTAL BID AMOUNT AS SPECIFIED ABOVE: ) .23 g�9 � � ($) (AMOUNT OFFERED FOR TRADE-IN(s)S) (IsB)' ) (NET DOLLAR AMOUNT DUE VENDOR) BID PRICE PER UNIT: VEH. NUM. AMOUNT, 412001 1998 Ford 15 passenoer Van .zoo DELIVERY: NOT LATER THAN Sid mays NOTE: Bidder must bid on all items and will be paid only item 1B plus any associated costs for purchased extended warranties which are not included in Item (1). Failure to bid on all items shall disqualify bid. I (we) acknowledge receipt of the following addenda, (if any): Location of Bidder's nearest Service Facility �l."eeoo o/ Location of Bidder's nearest mobile service truck (base). 4:57/e.. 06�1 Maximum travel cost (mi. & labor) per service call. 5e a' The undersigned agree(s) that this bid shall not be withdrawn for a period of 60 days from the opening thereof. In submitting this proposal, it is acknowledged that the City reserves the right to waive any informality in or to reject all bids. It is further understood that award of this bid is contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Mayor and City Council. STANDARD CLAUSE FOR SOLICITATIONS, CONTRACTS, AND SUBCONTRACTS REQUIRED: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion: The bidder/offerer certifies, by submission of this proposal or acceptance of this contract, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. Where the bidder/offerer/Vendor or any lower tier participant is unable to certify to this statement, it shall attach an explanation to this solicitation/proposal. AT T ES� SIGNATURE: zo 6` (S L) NAME: uec ef'e SAJ,�ssw., Sc`�i TITLE: tleT� NAME TITLE DATE:w- 6APR-GEN.DOC BID NO. 2010-1 FM-D BIDDER'S: NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: ITEM BID: a®// YEAR MODEL TOTAL BID AMOUNT AS SPECIFIED ABOVE: (1A) (AMOUNT OFFERED FOR TRADE-IN(s)S) (1 B) ($ (NET DOLLAR AMOUNT DUE VENDOR) BID PRICE PER UNIT: VEH.NUM. AMOUNT DELIVERY: NOT LATER THAN NOTE: Bidder must bid on all items and will be paid only item 1B plus any associated costs for purchased extended warranties which are not included in Item (1). Failure to bid on all items shall disqualify bid. 1 (we) acknowledge receipt of the following addenda, (if any): Location of Bidder's nearest Service Facility /tea GJO O �•l . Location of Bidder's nearest mobile service truck (base). t!51e w66o'I®. Maximum travel cost (mi. & labor) per service call. p� J The undersigned agree(s) that this bid shall not be withdrawn for a period of 60 days from the opening thereof. In submitting this proposal, it is acknowledged that the City reserves the right to waive any informality in or to reject all bids. It is further understood that award of this bid is contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Mayor and City Council. STANDARD CLAUSE FOR SOLICITATIONS, CONTRACTS, AND SUBCONTRACTS REQUIRED: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion: The bidder/offerer certifies, by submission of this proposal or acceptance of this contract, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. Where the bidder/offererNendor or any lower tier participant is unable to certify to this statement, it shall attach an explanation to this solicitation/proposal. ATTES SIGNATURE: ' GG (S L) NAME: S��SSwJ �L'G 1 TITLE: NAME TITLE DATE: �sZ,: z4- A2- 6APR-GEN.DOC BID NO. 2010-1FM-E / BIDDER'S: NAME: ADDRESS: 55 SsTostM GOe" Cvo� SPq ••5' Co F' PHONE: 7 -70 3S4' ?51a6 ITEM BID: 01 YEAR MODEL 9010 MAKE Fo�� e- xp /0'* r- TOTAL BID AMOUNT AS SPECIFIED ABOVE: (1A) ($ /A�)o (AMOUNT OFFERED FOR TRADE-IN(s)S) 5 ($B) 2 I S// �J ) (NET DOLLAR AMOUNT DUE VENDOR) BID PRICE PER UNIT: VEH. NUM. AMOUNT 712010 2001 Astro Van fiaa°p DELIVERY: NOT LATER THAN 90 NOTE: Bidder must bid on all items and will be paid only item 1 B plus any associated costs for purchased extended warranties which are not included in Item (1). Failure to bid on all items shall disqualify bid. I (we) acknowledge receipt of the following addenda, (if any): Location of Bidder's nearest Service Facility ' G%hw o o`-� Location of Bidder's nearest mobile service truck (base). Maximum travel cost (mi. & labor) per service call. The undersigned agree(s) that this bid shall not be withdrawn for a period of 60 days from the opening thereof. In submitting this proposal, it is acknowledged that the City reserves the right to waive any informality in or to reject all bids. It is further understood that award of this bid is contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Mayor and City Council. STANDARD CLAUSE FOR SOLICITATIONS, CONTRACTS, AND SUBCONTRACTS REQUIRED: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion: The bidder/offerer certifies, by submission of this proposal or acceptance of this contract, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. Where the bidder/offerer/Vendor or any lower tier participant is unable to certify o this statement, it shall attach an explanation to this solicitation/proposal. ATTES SIGNATURE: (S AL) NAME: S/� j zo•..� 5��� TITLE: NAME TITLE DATE: /aaX0 6APR-GEN.DOC Vld MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jerry Nye, Superintendent of Streets THRU: Randy Ready, Asst. City Manager DATE: July 29, 2010 RE: Snow cat Purchase Contract Approval 2010-3 FM REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends approval of the contract 2010- 317M for the purchase of one (1) used Prinoth model BR350 snow cat for the Street Department snow dump facility. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The 2010 Asset Management Plan contains the funds for this fleet replacement purchase. City Council approved the 2010 Asset Management Plan as part of the 2010 budget. BACKGROUND: This purchase is the result of a sole source purchase for a used piece of equipment from Prinoth Snow Cat. Prinoth Snow Cat is the sole supplier for the Aspen and Vail ski areas, they supply fully reconditioned used snow cats. This machine will be used for pushing up the snow that is hauled out to the snow dump facility from the snow removal process. DISCUSSION: The Street Department currently has one older snow cat that is being used at the snow dump facility. Our current snow cat is 11 years old and is losing its reliability and this piece of equipment is a vital part in our snow removal and storage process. Prinoth Snow cat is the supplier for these grooming snow cats in the Aspen/Vail/ ski areas, with their dealerships in Grand Junction, Utah and Nevada. The machine we are purchasing was a trade in from the Vail ski resort and is a 4 year old machine. By staying with this brand of machine that we currently have and that is the same as our local ski area, we will have local support in the event that we need an emergency replacement part or need technical assistance. With the dealership in Grand Junction, we will be able to receive parts and assistance quicker as well. Staff will be keeping the older machine as a backup machine. This extra piece of equipment can be moved to another location if needed, such as the case was in the 08/09 winter season when we had to rent another snow cat from Prinoth to push up snow at the other snow dump sites we had to create around town. Having a reliable snow cat on duty during a snow haul night, is essential to keep the snow pushed up so we can keep the snow dump open and not have any delay for the snow hauling trucks. Page 1 of 2 FINANCIALIBUDGET IMPACTS: The Fleet Replacement budget in the 2010 Asset Management Plan includes $80,000 for this purchase. This machine is available for $55,200.00. This total cost will include a full in-depth service, the final drives will be rebuilt and there will be wide -load hauling delivery to Aspen. The 2010 Asset Management plan has sufficient funds to purchase this machine and this procurement will come in under budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This newer Prinoth model BR350 snow cat will have the Caterpillar model C9 engine, which is a tier 3 low emission engine. It will have a computer controlled fuel delivery system which will mean lower fuel consumption than our older machine. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends council approval of the contract for 2010- 317M for the purchase of one used Prinoth model BR350 snow cat for the Streets Department. ALTERNATIVES: PROPOSED MOTION: f "I move to approve Resolution # V of 2010 on the consent calendar of Monday, August 9, 2010 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION # (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND PRINOTH SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF A USED SNOWCAT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Prinoth, a copy of which agreement 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 agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Prinoth regarding purchasing a used Snowcat for the city of Aspen, 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, August 9, 2010.' Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk PROCUREMENT CONTRACT ROUTING SLIP AND CHECK LIST Instructions: This form should be completed at each step of the procurement process and should follow each request for review or approval. Contracts under $2,000 require only Department Head approval. Contracts over $2,000 require City Manager approval. They do not require competitive bids but require documentation of source selection process. Contracts over $10,000 require City Attorney and City Manager approval. Competitive bidding process is required. Contracts over $25,000 require City Council approval. ALL CONTRACTS Procurement Description: Fleet purchase for one used snow cat for the streets department. Project#: Budget estimate: $ 60 000 Is proposed expenditure approved in the Department's budget? / X / Yes / / No D 2 Explain process for vendor selection: �y,/ This purchase will be a sole source through Prinoth Sno-Cat in Grand Junction Prinoth is the onlyv Sno-Ca[ dealer shin and covers the western United States with locations in Grand Junction Utah and Nevada All of the Ski Areas in the aspen and Vail area are all running Prinoth's This machine was a 4 year old trade in from Vail The current machine that we have is also the same machine but is l l years old and is losine its reliability. By remaining with this machine we will still have interchangeable parts from our old machine that we have in stock alone with help from our local ski area staff in the event of needing emergency parts that they will have alone with their knowledge in trouble shooting. Our old machine will be utilized as a backup machine in the event of break down or as in the case of the winter of 08/09 when we had to utilize other snow dump areas and had to rent a cat from Prinoth p / / o/ Dept. Head approval of proposal: ContractorNendor Selected: / / / Dept. Head approval: / / / City Attorney review: / / / RFP or ITB Completed: CONTRACTS OVER $2,000 AND UNDER $10,000 / / / City Manager Approval: contract documents to &.$L6 RFP or ITB Reviewed by City Attorney: 1" Advertisement Bid Opening: ContractorNendor Selected: CONTRACTS OVER $10,000 / / / Eng. Dept. Review: and to Vendor/Contractor / / / 2nd Advertisement (Attach Advertisement) / l9 Dept. Head approval: Award letter sent: 3 signed contracts returned by vendor/contractor. / / Performance and Payment Bonds received % / Certificate of insurance received / / / Finance Departmerit Review: If Over $25,000, //1/ %Q Prepare cover memo and resolution for City Council Approval. Review. SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ASPEN BID NO. 2010 — 3FM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into, this 27th day of July of 2010, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and Prinoth . . hereinafter referred to as the "Vendor." WITNESSETH, that whereas the City wishes to purchase. One (1) 2006 Prinoth BR350 with removal of tiller puma and associated plumbing and rear lift frame With dealer full service Bonfiglioli final drive service special and wide load delivery to Aspen. Hereinafter called the UNIT(S), in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the Contract Documents and any associated Specifications, and Vendor wishes to sell said UNIT to the City as specified in its Bid. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Vendor, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the UNIT(S) as described in the Contract Documents and more specifically -in Vendors Bid for the sum of Fifty Five Thousand, Two Hundred and no cents dollars ($55.200.00 ). 2. Delive . (FOB 1080 POWER PLANT RD. ASPEN, CO.) 3. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Contract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. 4. Warranties. A full description of all warranties associated with this purchase shall accompany this contract document. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 6. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any rights to claim damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Vendor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 7-PURCH.DOC 7. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 8. Agreement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 9. Attoney's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement. 11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension. Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 12. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities. Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. Vendor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of securing business. Vendor 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 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 Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. 7-PURCH.DOC In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a vendor, contractor or sub -contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 13. Termination for Default or for Convenience of Cit The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be cancelled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 14. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 15. City Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $10,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 16. Non -Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, section 13-98, pertaining to non- discrimination in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination ACt of 1957, as amended, and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment practices. 17. Integration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, vendor understands that no City official or employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the parties hereto. 18. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized 7-PURCH.DOC representative of Vendor for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein written in three (3) copies, all of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. ATTEST: City Clerk FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: City Manager VENDOR: i;f6 By. _�ZA 'Oe��' Title. I�� ,��Z! f � 7-PURCH.DOC SALES AGREEMENT No 0451 DATE July 15, 2010 X Rocky Mountain Branch Office ❑ Far West Branch Office ❑ Intermountain Branch Office 2746 Seeber Drive BLDG B 2620 East 5th Street 2565 Decker Lake Lane, Suite 3 Grand Junction CO USA 81506 Reno NV USA 89512 West Valley City UT USA 84119 Tel.: (970) 242-7150 Tel.: (775) 359-7517 Tel.:(801) 364-8266 Fax: (970) 241-6722 Fax: (775) 359-7725 Fax: (801) 364-8275 ❑ Eastern USA Branch Office 264 NH Route 106 Gilmanton, NH USA 03237 TeL (603) 267-7840 Fax: (603) 267-7843 Purchaser Legal Name: City of Aspen Tel (970) 920-5131 Fax, I 1 ContactWilly McFarlin Customer#. Complete address: 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 E-Mail addren:willy.mcfarlin@ci.aspen.co.us EQUIPMENT AND ACCESSORIES DESCRIPTION (if more space needed, continue on Attachment A) QTY NEW USED MODEL SERIALNO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 U BR350 908910392 Over the Snow Vehicle $43,700.00 $43,700.00 1 U Terrain Master Allway Blade Inc. 11. U 66' Steel Semi Closed Profile Steel Tracks Inc. Service of Vehicle $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Bonfi lioli Final Drives, Service Special $2,000.00 $2,000.00 TOTAL PRICE: $ 53,700.00 DESCRIPTION OF TRADE-IN EQUIPMENT AND OPTION(S) (if more space needed, continue on Attachment A) OTY NEW USED MODEL SERIAL NO. HOURS DESCRIPTION TRADE-IN VALUE $ The trade value will become final only after a thorough evaluation or the dove train and engine are done TOTAL TRADE-IN VALUE: $ TOTAL PRICE Discount/ Other FREIGHT Wide Load SALES and USE TAXES NET SELLING PRICE TRADE-IN VALUE SALES and USE TAXES $ 53,700.00 $ N/A $ 1,500.00 $ Exempt $ 55,200.00 $ ( N/A ) S I N/A 1 ADDRESS WHERE EQUIPMENT WILL BE DELIVERED: ADDRESS FROM WHICH EQUIPMENT WILL BE SHIPPED: 1080 Power Plant Road Aspen, CO 81611 July 8, 2010 City of Aspen Willy McFarlin Willy, Here is the total breakout on the two vail trades that we talked about. Either one of these vehicles will be a good addition to your fleet. Below reflects both "As Is" or Serviced. 2006 BR350 equipped as follows: sln 908910392, 8302 approximate hours 66" Semi Closed Profile Steel Tracks, Allway Blade, Heated Wipers, Heated Front, Side and Mirror Glass, Mid Height Front Lights, Yellow Paint, Caterpillar C9 355 HP TIER III engine Remove the following items; Tiller Pump and Associated Plumbing, Rear Lift Frame Price: $43,700.00 Wide Load Freight: $1,500.00 Balance Due: 2005 BR350 equipped as follows: sln 908910393, 7813 approximate hours 66" Semi Closed Profile Master Climber Steel Tracks, Allway Blade, Heated Wipers, Heated Front, Side and Mirror Glass, Mid Height Front Lights, Yellow Paint, Caterpillar C9 355 HP TIER III engine Remove the following items; Tiller Pump and Associated Plumbing, Rear Lift Frame Price: $44,700.00 Wide Load Freight: $1,500.00 Balance Due: $46,200.00 Service of Vehicle: Full Vehicle Check Up, All Fluids and Filters Changed, Full Grease Job, Full Hydrostatic System Set Up, Full Hydraulic System Set Up, Micro Processor Set Up & Calibration, Misc. Torques Adjusted Throughout the Vehicle, New Lacing Pins for Tracks, Full Re - Torque of Tracks, Adjust All Wheel & Suspension Bearings, Torque all Wheel & Sprocket Lugs, Engine Valves Adjusted, Tires as Required, Full Interior & Exterior Detail, Full Set of Books, etc... 58,000.00 i. Bonfiglioli Final Drive Service Special; New Seals, New C-Rings, New Bearings, Labor, etc... $2,000.00 6 PRINOTH LLC 2746 Seeber Ddve Bldg B, GRAND JUNCTION, Colorado, USA 81506 LErTNERGRO P• T:970-242-7150 F:970-241-6722 pdnoth.us@pdnoth.com ww .pdnothxom s r � 1195 F•e PI ' 1c.. ,_ 1 r 195 � %4( MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Gram Slaton, Wheeler Executive Director THRU: ACM Randy Ready; Wheeler Board of Directors DATE OF MEMO: 18 June 2010 MEETING DATE: 9 August 2010 RE: Wheeler Cinema Services Contract SUMMARY: Contract approval is sought for a cinema services agreement between the Wheeler Opera House and Jon Busch and Don Swales, collectively doing business as Wheeler Film Society. Wheeler staff and the Wheeler Board of Directors recommend approval of the request. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION AND BACKGROUND: A number of cinema services agreements between the Wheeler and the Wheeler Film Society has existed since 1990. The Wheeler Film Society has been exhibiting art -house and foreign movies at the Wheeler through a formal agreement since August 1990. In the intervening twenty years, there have been periodic reviews of the cinema services needs at the Wheeler, and subsequent formal requests for proposals that resulted in new agreements with the Wheeler Film Society. In the spring of 2007, the Cinema Services contract was put out for bid after an extended period without review, and the contract was again awarded to the Wheeler Film Society. DISCUSSION: While artistically viable and important to creating a broad palette of arts selections for Aspen residents and guests, a cinema program is not without its drawbacks. In fact, the 2005 organizational audit conducted by Genovese Vanderhoof & Associates concluded that the Wheeler is "an expensive facility for the presentation of film, especially when compared to modem purpose-built multi-plex cinemas that spread employee activity over multiple screens." The report also noted, "However, the decision of management or stakeholders to present film, for historic reasons, the special ambiance, the desire to have visible activity in the theater, and perhaps the lack of alternate screening venues should be made with the acknowledgement that this [the Wheeler] is not an efficient place to exhibit films." Despite the challenges, the staff and Board of the Wheeler Opera House have periodically discussed and continue to support including a non -mainstream and regular cinema presence as part of its programming mix. In response to the request for proposal process, the Wheeler received two proposals from outside entities, plus a letter from Aspen Film declining to submit a proposal due to short-term internal issues that prevent it from responsibly responding. Staff and the Wheeler Board of Directors weighed the merits of the two outside proposals, as well as how to proceed with a contract that would grant maximum leeway to the contract awardee, while also protecting the Wheeler's possible near -term goals as regards changes to the physical plant. Based on the board's concerns and the merits of the Wheeler Film Society's proposal, it is our request to award a one-year contract that may be renewed for up to three years. The terms of the agreement require the contractor to provide a regular cinema program that would be offered on available open nights from September through early June. In exchange for these services, the Wheeler would provide utilities, staffing and other administrative support, and would receive a surcharge of $0.50 for each ticket sold, credit card surcharges to recoup expenses, and a per -screening fee of $25. There are no substantial differences between this agreement and the 2007-2010 one with Wheeler Film Society. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The cinema program at the Wheeler has always relied on in - kind support that has been approximated at $90,000 per year, primarily for building usage, house and box office management, housekeeping and administrative overhead (financial accounting, webpage, in-house publicity, etc). A breakdown of revenues and expenses for a "typical" year with about 160 days of screenings is as follows: EXPENSES • Building usage (including utilities) @ $300/day = $48,000 • House and box office management @ $100/day = $16,000 • Housekeeping @ $50/day = $8,000 • Administrative overhead @ $100/day = $16,000 • Miscellaneous materials and services = $2, 000 TOTAL: $90, 000 REVENUES • Screening Fees @ $25= $4,000 • Ticket Surcharges @ $0.50 (assuming 60 patrons/screening)=$4,800 TOTAL: $8, 800 Wheeler staff and board expect no further financial impact under the new Agreement. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and Board recommend approval of the attached Agreement. ALTERNATIVES: The Wheeler received an additional proposal (from Metropolitan Theatres Corporation) that would, if accepted as proposed, radically redefine how the Wheeler conducts its cinema services business, including outside management of all film bookings at the Wheeler, adjustment of its concessions mix to maximize revenue, and a $4,000 payment to the awardee for film services management. Neither Wheeler board nor staff found this approach supportable at the present time. Alternatively, the Wheeler could take the cinema program in-house, but in doing so would be taking on significantly more programming responsibility without further additions to staff. Finally, the Wheeler could abandon a regular cinema program as it has existed and recognize only rental cinema events as its cinema program. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #6d., to contract with Wheeler Film Society, for the purposes of securing cinema programming at the Wheeler Opera House. CITY MANAGER RESOLUTION #IOoZ (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND WHEELER FILM SOCIETY, SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING A CINEMA SERVICES AGREEMENT 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 Wheeler Film Society, 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 Wheeler Film Society regarding cinema services for the 2010-2011 year (renewable for two additional years), 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 August 9, 2010 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk SERVICES AGREEMENT WHEELER FILM SOCIETY THIS AGREEMENT made this _ day of August, 2010, by and between the City of Aspen ("City") and Jon Busch and Don Swales d/b/a the Wheeler Film Society ("Contractor"), provides as follows: WHEREAS the City wishes to make available to the public a broad range of community entertainment, artistic and cultural programs and events; and WHEREAS the Contractor possesses knowledge, skill, and experience in the arts related to the exhibition of commercially -available cinema product; and WHEREAS the City desires to make available to the public with the cooperation and assistance of the Contractor a specialty film program to be presented at the Wheeler Opera House; and WHEREAS the parties entered into a Service Agreement dated June 19, 2007, and the parties desire to make a successor Agreement with the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the following covenants, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City does hereby retain Contractor and Contractor does hereby agree to deliver, implement, and manage a cinema exhibition program to be presented through the Wheeler Opera House. Pursuant thereto, Contractor shall select, secure, and exhibit films using available open calendar dates in the Wheeler schedule. 2. Contractor has the exclusive rights to self -promote and partnered film exhibition at the Wheeler; however, Contractor acknowledges and accepts that the Wheeler Opera House may choose to present film in partnership with other entities or as rental engagements, either as individual bookings or as a formal series or festival. 3. Neither the City nor the Wheeler board of directors ('Board") warrant or guarantee to Contractor the availability of the Wheeler Opera House to Contractor on any given date or dates, nor is Contractor guaranteed any minimum number of dates upon which to exhibit film. Exhibition dates selected and entered on any calendar may be canceled by the City and/or Board in order to accommodate live or alternative income -generating bookings, as selected by the City or Board. Dates that have been given as available for film booking but then withdrawn prior to commitment to a published calendar will incur no penalty fee. Dates that are withdrawn after commitment to such calendar will incur a penalty fee of $100 per affected date. Penalty fee will be paid to Contractor. 4. Contractor shall bear all costs associated with the film program, including but not limited to film rental or payment percentage, incoming and outgoing freight expense, advertising, press materials, projectionists, program management, and accounting services. The City shall provide liability insurance coverage, as well as provide house management, box office management, and cleanup of the theatre's public spaces. S. Contractor shall be solely responsible to maintain in good working order all projection equipment and supplies utilized in Contractor's film exhibition. Should Contractor require use of the Wheeler's digital projector(s) or other digital media, Contractor will be wholly responsible for the equipment's proper setup and teardown before and after the scheduled screenings(s), as well as responsibility for any damage that the equipment may incur during the exhibition period. 6. Contractor shall be expected to fully promote all bookings committed under this Agreement, using all appropriate media and advertising resources. Contractor shall aggressively promote and advertise the film offerings during the film's running period through media other than those available from the Wheeler Opera House. The Wheeler will include for Contractor's publicity purposes an appropriate presence on its website and any timely passive hard -copy materials. 7. The City, through Wheeler management, shall have the right to approve or reject any image or verbiage used for the promotion of any individual film offering or for any other matter associated with the Contractor's presence within the Wheeler Opera House. 8. Contractor agrees to work cooperatively and non -competitively with all other Aspen -based not -for -profits, particularly as regards the booking of film product. 9. Contractor will not enter into any third -party venture with past or potential rental clients as regards film exhibition at the Wheeler Opera House, and will refer all such inquiries for same to Wheeler management. 10. Admission prices for all film exhibitions shall be wholly at the discretion of the Contractor. As an addition to the ticket price, Contractor shall assess, collect, and pay to the City a surcharge of fifty cents ($.50) for each ticket sold. The City shall assess a surcharge of 3% for Mastercard and Visa charges, and 4% for American Express charges, for all such credit card purchases associated with Contractor's tickets. Further, the City reserves the right to adjust these surcharge amounts either up or down at any time, based on increases or reductions in its direct cost for such charges. Finally, Contractor shall pay to the City a per -screening fee of $25.00 for box office services. The City shall be the sole supplier of box office and ticketing services for the Contractor. 11. All fees associated with Paragraph 10 above shall be deducted from gross ticket revenue and remaining monies will be paid out to Contractor within ten business days by the City. 12. The City, through Wheeler Opera House management, will receive detailed performance reports from Contractor upon the completion of each film booking within five business days of the final screening of the booking. This report will be supplied through a template created by the Wheeler Opera House and Contractor. The payout process detailed in Paragraph 10 (above) cannot be started until such documentation is received. 13. The City, through the Board, may at any time seek and obtain access to all accounts, records, or books maintained by or on behalf of the Contractor in the administration and operation of the cinema services program. 14. The Wheeler Opera House concessions bar may be opened and staffed prior to screenings, at the sole discretion of the City. All concessions revenue shall be and remain the property of the City. 15. The term of the Agreement shall be from September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2011, unless terminated earlier at the option of either party by giving sixty (60) days written notice of such intent to terminate. Upon the termination of the Agreement, Contractor shall promptly prepare and submit a full accounting of all sums advanced to it by the City and all costs and receipts as generated by the cinema program. Contractor shall additionally be expected to remove any and all property owned by the Contractor from the Wheeler Opera House premises within ten (10) business days. Upon satisfactory annual review, and approval by the Wheeler board of directors, the term of the Agreement may be extended for up to two additional one-year terms, for a maximum of three years total. 16. Contractor expressly agrees to refrain from and prohibit any fundraising and/or solicitation of memberships or contributions, whether for itself or an outside party, during the term of this contract, or until such time as Contractor can provide evidence of recognition as a bona fide 501 (c)(3) not -for -profit organization as defined by the Internal Revenue Service. 17. Contractor, its agents and employees, shall be bonded through a surety licensed to do business in the State of Colorado. A copy of such fidelity bond shall be presented to the City upon execution of this Agreement, and such bond shall remain in full force throughout the term hereof. 18. Contractor shall maintain, and provide annual evidence thereof, a valid license for the purpose of conducting business with the City of Aspen. Failure to maintain such license will result in immediate suspension of payments to the Contractor, and may result in termination of the Agreement. 19. The parties intend that the relationship created by this document is that of employer/independent contractor. No agent, employee, or servant of Contractor shall be or shall be deemed to be the employee, agent, or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Contractor. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees, including but not limited to compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents, or servants of Contractor. Contractor will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Contractor's agents, employees, servants, and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. 20. Contractor shall indemnify City and Board against all liability or loss, and against all claims or actions based upon or arising out of damage or injury (including death) to persons or property caused by or sustained in connection with the Contractor's negligent performance of the contract or by conditions created thereby, or based upon any violation of any statute, ordinance, building code or regulation, and the defense of any such claims or actions. Contractor shall also indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for, payment of all Federal, state, and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Contractor and/or Contractor's employees engaged in performance of this Agreement. 21. In any event, the appropriate utilization and timely payment of all funds provided by the city shall be and is hereby personally warranted and guaranteed by Jon Busch and Don Swales, jointly and severally. Jon Busch and Don Swales further agree and covenant to hold the City and Board harmless for any financial claims or losses arising from the administration and operation of the film program. 22. It is expressly agreed that this Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the subject matter hereof next expressly incorporated in writing. 23. It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its terms, provision, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the City and Contractor. 24. If any of the provisions of the Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality, or enforceability of any other provision. 25. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand -delivered or sent electronically by email to the respective persons and/or addresses listed below, or mailed by classified mail, return receipt requested should circumstances warrant, to: City of Aspen c/o City Manager 130 South Galena Street Aspen CO 81611 Wheeler Film Society PO Box 1884 Aspen CO 81612 Don Swales PO Box 1884 Aspen CO 81612 Board of Directors Wheeler Opera House 320 East Hyman Avenue Aspen CO 81611 Jon Busch 548 Race Street Aspen CO 81611 26. Contractor and City acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change, or modification shall be made except by a document signed by Contractor and City. 27. Failure to comply with the individual or collective terms of this Agreement will result in the immediate termination of this Agreement. Having agreed to the above and foregoing, the parties hereto do affix their signatures. ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk CITY OF ASPEN 0 Steve Barwick, City Manager WHEELER FILM SOCIETY MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Steve Barwick, City Manager FROM: Scott Miller, City Capital Asset Director DATE: August 2. 2010 MEETING DATE: August 9, 2010 RE: Lease for 38005 Highway 82 THE CnT OF ASPEN V1+ft Background: Western Building Solutions Inc., the parent company of Harbert Lumber, has requested several changes to the lease agreement with the city for the property used as a lumber yard at 38005 Highway 82. For several months city staff has negotiated with the management of Western Building Solutions, Inc. to draft a lease agreement that is fair to both sides. The drop in sales revenue for the lumber yard from the peak in 2007 and the possible annexation and rezoning of the property for affordable housing were the major factors in the renegotiation. Discussion: Changes to the lease agreement are as follows: • Change from current term of year-to-year extension of existing lease to a tern starting August 1, 2010 and ending July 31, 2013. • Change termination notification from six months to twelve months for Lessor and from sixty days to twelve months for Lessee. • The monthly rent shall change from $53,045 to $35,000 or one twelfth (1/12) of 4.61% of the prior year's annual gross sales. • After the first year of the lease, both parties agree to renegotiate the minimum monthly rent for the remaining term of the lease. Request of Council: Staff requests that Council approve the lease agreement for 38005 Highway 82. Attachment: • Lease Agreement RESOLUTION # �3 (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND WESTERN BUILDING SOLUTIONS INC. SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING A LEASE FOR 38005 HIGHWAY 82 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a lease agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Western Building Solutions Inc., a copy of which lease agreement is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section I That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that lease agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Western Building Solutions Inc. regarding a lease for property at 38005 Highway 82, 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 lease 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 August 9, 2010 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT (the "Lease") is made and entered into as of by and between Western Building Solutions Inc. (the "Lessee"), and the City of Aspen (the "Lessor"). ". 311[ypoll Demise and Description of Premises 1.1 Lessor is the owner of certain real property located at 38005 Highway 82, Aspen Colorado (the "Premises"). 1.2 Lessor hereby leases to Lessee and Lessee hereby leases from Lessor the Premises. 1.2 The Lessee shall take and accept the Premises in their present condition, subject to the obligations of the Lessor and the Lessee as set forth herein. ARTICLE II Initial Term of Lease 2.1 The initial term of this Lease shall be for a period of three (3) years, commencing on August 1, 2010 (the "Commencement Date") and ending on July 31, 2013 (the "Initial Term"), provided that, unless either Lessor or Lessee provides the other parry written notice that such Initial Term or any extension term will not be further renewed within the time frames set forth in Section 2.2 of this Lease, such Initial Term or the then applicable extension term shall automatically renew for an additional one-year term under the same terms, agreements, covenants, conditions, and provisions. Such automatic extensions shall continue until one of the parties gives a notice of termination in accordance with Section 2.2 of this Lease. 2.2 Lessor may terminate this Lease at the end of the Initial Term or any time thereafter by written notice to the Lessee not later than twelve (12) months prior to the desired termination date. So long as the Lessee is current with all of its obligations to the Lessor and is not in default of any of the terms, agreements, covenants, conditions or provisions of the Lease at the time of election, Lessee is herein granted the option to terminate this Lease at any time during the term of this Lease, provided that, if Lessee should elect to exercise the foregoing early termination option, Lessee shall notify Lessor in writing of Lessee's election to do so by not later than twelve (12) months prior to the desired termination date. ARTICLE III Minimum Monthly Rent 3.1 The obligation to pay rent under the terms of this Lease shall begin on the Commencement Date. The minimum monthly rent for the first year of the three-year Lease term shall be the greater of thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000) or one -twelfth (1/12) of 4.61% of the prior year's annual gross sales. Near the end of each year of the Lease term, all parties agree to renegotiate the minimum monthly rent for the upcoming year. If such renegotiation of minimum monthly rent is not recorded as an addendum to this Lease agreement prior to each anniversary of the Commencement Date during the three-year Lease term then the minimum monthly rent shall revert to fifty-one thousand five hundred dollars ($51,500) per month and shall be increased by three percent (3%) per year thereafter. Annual gross sales shall include income (not including sales tax) from sales by Lessee at the Aspen location and the sales of any associated facility shipping into the city of Aspen. The term "annual" shall refer to the fiscal year of Western Building Solutions which ends annually on July 31. Rental adjustments shall take effect as described in paragraph 3.2. Rent will be prorated for any partial month. 3.2 The monthly rent for each month shall be due on or before the Commencement Date, and on or before the first day of each month thereafter, without any demand therefore and without set-off whatsoever. Rent shall be paid to the Lessor at the City of Aspen, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611, or at such other address as Lessor may designate. 3.3 In addition to minimum rent, all other amounts to be paid by Lessee to Lessor pursuant to this Lease, if any, shall be deemed to be additional rent, irrespective of whether designated as such, and shall be due and payable within ten (10) business days after receipt by Lessee of Lessor's statement or together with the next succeeding installment of minimum monthly rent, whichever shall first occur. Lessor shall have the same remedies for the failure to pay additional rent as for the nonpayment of minimum rent. ARTICLE IV Lessee's Additional Costs And Lessor Costs 4.1 In addition to the minimum monthly rent provided for in Article III above, the Lessee shall pay all costs, charges, and expenses incurred for the following purposes: (a) All charges for all utilities serving the Premises, including, without limitation, electricity and natural gas, telephone, trash removal, water, and sewer serving the Premises. (b) All taxes levied and assessed against the personal property, supplies, fixtures, inventory, and improvements of Lessee. (c) All charges for non-structural repairs and maintenance within the Premises, which are not expressly covered by warranties, or insurance provided for herein, as follows: the maintenance and repair of doors, glass, fixtures, electrical fixtures and systems, plumbing fixtures and systems, mechanical systems, air conditioning systems, heating systems, ventilation systems, interior walls and wall systems, floor coverings, doors, interior painting, ordinary course roof repairs and maintenance, any improvements made to the Premises by the Lessee, and all interior janitorial services. (d) All general and special real property taxes levied and assessed against the land and improvements of the Premises. 4.2 Lessee shall promptly pay when due, directly to the persons or parties entitled to payment, for all services and other matters described in paragraphs 4.1(a), (b), (c), and (d) above. Lessee shall furnish proof of such payment to Lessor upon request. 4.3 It is the intent of the Lessor and the Lessee that the minimum monthly rent specified in Article III above shall be absolutely net to the Lessor throughout the terms of this Lease, and that, except as otherwise expressly provided for herein, all costs, expenses, and obligations directly relating to the Premises shall be the responsibility of the Lessee; provided, however, that Lessor will make all structural repairs to the Premises and will keep in good order and repair the roof, foundations, and subsurface conditions of the Premises, upon knowledge or notification of the necessity for such repairs, and further provided that if the need for the repair shall be attributable to any act or omission of Lessee, its officers, employees, licensees, invitees or contractors, Lessee shall be responsible therefore. Lessor shall be under no liability for repair, maintenance or alteration with respect to the Premises or any part thereof, or any plumbing, electrical, or other mechanical installations therein, or any cleaning or painting thereof, except as may be expressly set out in this Lease or unless due to negligence of Lessor, its officers, employees, licensees, invitees, concessionaires or contractors. ARTICLE V Use 5.1 The Premises are to be used for warehousing, sale and distribution of all types of lumber and other building materials, light manufacturing and/or assembly and warehousing of building products and components for residential construction, and other reasonably related business activities and necessary administrative and office functions. 5.2 Lessee covenants and agrees that it: (i) will comply with all governmental laws, ordinances, regulations, and requirements, now in force or which hereafter may be in force, of any governmental body or authorities having jurisdiction over the Premises; and (ii) shall not suffer, permit, or commit any waste or nuisance on the Premises. Lessee shall not do or permit anything to be done in or about the Premises which will cause the cancellation of any insurance policy covering the Premises. 5.3 Lessee shall be entitled to install in the Premises all trade fixtures, operational equipment, and furnishings necessary for the operation of Lessee's business and may remove the same at Lessee's sole cost upon the termination of this Lease and shall repair any damage caused to the Premises as a result of any such removal. ARTICLE VI Insurance 6.1 Lessee shall maintain fire and extended coverage, vandalism, malicious mischief and special causes of loss (risks of direct physical loss) insurance covering one hundred percent (100%) of the full replacement cost of all improvements, fixtures and personal property, with a minimum coverage of $2,100,000 on a blanket basis. 6.2 Lessee, at its own expense, shall keep its trade fixtures, floor coverings, improvements, operational equipment, furnishings, tools, machinery, and inventory insured to one hundred percent (100%) of its replacement cost. 6.3 Lessee, at its own expense, shall, during the entire term hereof, keep in full force and effect a broad form commercial general liability policy covering the acts and negligence of Lessee's employees, agents, and servants occurring on and off the Premises and naming the Lessor as an additionally insured party, with a combined single limit, per incident, of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00). 6.4 All such policies of insurance shall name Lessee as the insured and Lessor, and any person, firms or corporations designated by Lessor, and lender(s), if any, shall be named as additional insureds and loss payees on a primary and noncontributory basis, as their interests may exist. Such insurance shall be evidenced by a certificate of insurance issued to Lessor and shall contain language stating that the policy cannot be canceled for any reason without first giving the Lessor and the Lessee thirty (30) days prior written notice, provided that, in the case of non-payment of premiums, the policy may be canceled upon ten (10) days prior written notice. 6.5 With respect to any insurance required by the terms of this Lease, both the Lessor and Lessee waive any rights of subrogation against each other, and any insurance policy maintained by either shall contain an express waiver of the insurer's right of subrogation against the other. ARTICLE VII Damage or Destruction 7.1 If the Premises shall be partially damaged by any casualty (an "Event") insured against, the Lessor shall, upon receipt of and to the extent of the insurance proceeds, and as soon as reasonably permitted by the circumstances, repair the Premises in a manner and to the extent necessary and desirable in Lessee's sole discretion to carry on Lessee's business operations for the remainder of the term of the Lease and, until such repair is complete, the monthly rent shall be abated proportionately as to that portion of the Premises rendered untenantable. Lessee shall be responsible for the payment of any deductible under the insurance to be carried pursuant to paragraph 6.1 above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if: (i) the Premises by reason of such occurrence are rendered wholly untenantable; or (ii) the Premises should be damaged as a result of a risk which is not covered by said insurance; or (iii) the Premises are damaged to the extent of fifty percent (50%) or more of the then monetary value thereof, or (iv) any or all of the buildings or common areas of the Premises are damaged to such an extent that the Premises reasonably cannot be operated as an integral unit, then and in any of such events, the Lessee may cancel this Lease by notice of cancellation given within ninety (90) days after such event and thereupon this Lease shall expire, and Lessee shall vacate and surrender the Premises to Lessor and no rent or other charges will be due from Lessee to Lessor after the date of the event. In the event Lessee elects to repair any damage, any abatement of rent or other charges shall end five (5) days after notice by Lessee to Lessor that the Premises have been repaired. If this lease is not terminated by Lessee, Lessee may repair and restore its property and fixtures as described in paragraph 6.2 above in a manner and to the extent necessary and desirable in Lessee's sole discretion to carry on Lessee's business operations for the remainder of the term of the Lease, and the proceeds of all insurance carried by Lessee on its property and fixtures shall be held in trust by Lessee for the purpose of said repair and replacement. ARTICLE VIII Signs, Alterations, Maintenance, Repairs and Access 8.1 Lessee shall not make or cause to be made any material alterations, additions or improvements or install or cause to be installed any trade fixtures, exterior signs, floor coverings, interior or exterior lighting, plumbing fixtures, canopies or awnings, or make any changes, to the interior or exterior of the Premises, without first obtaining written approval from the Lessor, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Lessee shall present to the Lessor plans and specifications for such work at the time approval is sought. In the event Lessor consents to the making of any alterations, additions, or improvements to the Premises by Lessee, the same shall be made by Lessee at Lessee's sole cost and expense. All such work with respect to any alterations, additions, and changes shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner and diligently prosecuted to completion. Any such alterations, additions, or improvements (but not including trade fixtures or signs) shall at once become a part of the realty and shall be surrendered with the Premises unless Lessee otherwise elects at the end of term hereof, in which case Lessee would be responsible for the timely removal of same and the timely restoration of the Premises to its condition as of the Commencement Date. For the purpose of this paragraph, "material" shall mean an item, the cost of which installed is in excess of $10,000.00. 8.2 All work performed by Lessee during the term of this Lease shall be constructed by Lessee in a good and workmanlike manner, using licensed contractors with appropriate permits, and Lessee forever warrants that the same shall be free of any liens for labor and materials and in strict accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Lessor. During the term of this Lease, Lessee agrees to indemnify, save, and hold harmless the Lessor, its successors and assigns, against any loss, liability or damage resulting from such work performed during the term of this Lease. 8.3 Lessee, at its sole cost and expense, shall at all times keep the Premises, including but not limited to, the interior of the building, all glass and window moldings, exterior entrances, signs, docks, sidewalks, partitions, doors, fixtures, and appurtenances thereof, including lighting, electrical fixtures and systems, plumbing fixtures and systems, sewage facilities, heating equipment and systems, air conditioning equipment and systems, electric motors, floor coverings, and Lessee's improvements in good clean order, condition, and repair. 8.4 Should any mechanic's or other lien be filed against the Premises or any part thereof by reason of Lessee's acts or omissions or because of a claim against Lessee, Lessee shall cause the same to be canceled and discharged of record by bond or otherwise within thirty (30) days after written notice by Lessor, subject to Article IX below. 8.5 Failure of the Lessee to perform or cause to have performed the work to be accomplished by Lessee in a good and workmanlike manner using licensed contractors with appropriate permits, shall constitute a default under the provisions of this Lease by Lessee and Lessor shall have all the rights and remedies available under the terms of this Lease or at law or in equity with respect to such default. 8.6 Lessor shall have the right to place, maintain, and repair all utility equipment of any kind in, upon and under the Premises as may be necessary for the servicing of the Premises and to enter upon and inspect the Premises as set forth in Section 19.1 of this Lease. ARTICLE IX Indemnification 9.1 Lessee shall forever keep the Premises and all improvements placed thereon free from all claims, liens, claims of lien, demands, charges, encumbrances, or litigation arising directly or indirectly out of or by reason of any work or activity of Lessee on the Premises, or any part thereof, and shall forthwith and within thirty (30) days after the filing of any lien for record, unless in active litigation (at Lessee's expense), fully pay and satisfy the same, and shall reimburse Lessor for all loss, damage, and expense, including reasonable attorneys' fees, which it may suffer to be put to by reason of any such claims of lien, demands, charges, encumbrances or litigation. 9.2 In the event Lessee should fail to obtain the release, discharge or a bonding of any lien as provided by paragraph 8.4 above, Lessor shall have the right, at its option, at any time after the expiration of such thirty (30) day period, to pay the same or discharge the same with or without the costs and expenses claimed by such claimant. All amounts so paid by Lessor shall be repaid by Lessee to Lessor upon receipt of written demand, together with supporting documentation. 9.3 Lessee shall forever indemnify Lessor and save and hold it harmless from and against any and all costs, losses, expenses, suits, actions, damages, claims and liability in connection with loss of life, bodily or personal injury, or property damage arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon, at or from the Premises, or the occupancy or use by Lessee of the Premises or any part thereof, or occasioned wholly or in part by any act or omission of Lessee, its agents, contractors, employees, servants, invitees, customers, licensees, and concessionaires, or Lessee's breach, default, or nonperformance of this Lease Agreement, in each case during the term of this Lease. Lessor shall likewise indemnify Lessee against acts or omissions of Lessor, its agents, contractors, employees, servants, invitees, customers, licensees, and concessionaires, or Lessor's breach, default, or nonperformance of this Lease Agreement. 9.4 Lessor shall not be responsible or liable at any time for any loss or damage to Lessee's merchandise, equipment, fixtures, or other personal property or to Lessee's business, including any loss or damage to either the person or property of Lessee, that may be occasioned by or through the acts or omissions of persons occupying adjacent, connecting, or adjoining space including but not limited to that property described in Exhibit "A" unless such acts or omissions were at the request of, or required by the Lessor. Lessee shall store its property in and shall use and enjoy the Premises at its own risk, and hereby releases Lessor to the full extent permitted by law, from all claims of every kind resulting in loss of life, personal or bodily injury, or property damage, except as a result of Lessor's negligent or wrongful act or omission. 9.5 Lessee shall give prompt notice to Lessor in case of fire or accidents at the Premises. 9.6 In case either party shall without fault on its part be made a party to any litigation commenced by or against the other party, then the party at fault shall protect and hold the other harmless and shall pay all costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the other. It is expressly agreed that all of the foregoing provisions of this Article IX shall apply and become effective from and after the Commencement Date. ARTICLE X Subordination 10.1 Lessee shall upon request of Lessor execute all reasonable and normal instruments necessary to permit a mortgage, deed of trust or other encumbrances to be placed on the Premises or any part thereof as security for any indebtedness of the Lessor, and to subordinate this Lease and Lessee's leasehold interest to all of such encumbrances and security interests, provided that so long as no "Default" has occurred under paragraph 14.1 of this Lease,, this Lease and Lessee's possession of the Premises shall not be terminated. 10.2 Upon the sale or refinancing by the Lessor of the Premises and improvements described in this Lease and its exhibits, the Lessee shall cooperate with the Lessor by furnishing to the Lessor requested estoppel certificates, by executing such instruments as are necessary to subordinate the Lessee's leasehold interest to necessary parties, by executing required affidavits of occupancy and by doing such other things and furnishing such other documents as may reasonably be required by the Lessor or a purchaser of the Premises, or any part thereof, or from the Lessor or a lender or a financial institution taking a security interest in the property. Lessee's failure to deliver an estoppel certificate within ten (10) business days following receipt of a written request by Lessor shall be conclusive upon Lessee that: (a) this Lease is in full force and effect without modification; and (b) there are no uncured defaults in Lessor's performance. 4"R1[yaS.141 Late Charge and Interest 11.1 Any payment due under this Lease by the Lessee to the Lessor and not paid within ten (10) days from the date it becomes due and payable shall bear a late charge of five percent (5%) thereof intended to defray any cost to Lessor resulting from late payments, and the Lessee agrees to pay said late charge to the Lessor. The payment, together with the late charge, shall bear interest at the rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month from the date the payment initially became due until the date it is paid. ARTICLE XII Condemnation 12.1 As used in this Article XII, the term "condemnation proceeding" shall mean any action or proceeding in which any interest in the Premises is taken for any public or quasi -public purpose by any lawful authority through exercise of the power of eminent domain or right of condemnation or by purchase or otherwise in lieu thereof. 12.2 If the whole of the Premises shall be acquired or taken by condemnation proceeding, then this Lease shall cease and terminate as of the date of title vesting in such proceeding. 12.3 If any part of the Premises, including necessary drives, loading, and parking areas, shall be taken as aforesaid, and such partial taking shall render that portion not so taken unsuitable for the business of Lessee, then Lessee may, by written notice to Lessor, terminate this Lease. Despite the foregoing, this Lease shall not cease and terminate if Lessee reconfigures drives, loading, and parking areas so as to render the Premises suitable for the business of Lessee in a manner reasonably consistent with the occupancy as existed prior to the taking. If such partial taking is not extensive enough to render the Premises unsuitable for the business of Lessee, then this Lease shall continue in effect. Rent shall be equitably adjusted to account for such a partial taking. 12.4 If more than fifty percent (50%) of the floor area of said Premises shall be taken as aforesaid, Lessee may, by written notice to Lessor, terminate this Lease. If this Lease is terminated as provided in this subsection, rent shall be paid up to the day that possession is so taken by public authority and Lessor shall make an equitable refund of any rent paid by Lessee in advance. 12.5 Lessee shall not be entitled to, and hereby expressly waives all claim to, any condemnation award for any taking, whether whole or partial, and whether for diminution in value of the leasehold or to the fee estate; provided, however, that Lessee shall have the right, to the extent that the same shall not reduce Lessor's award, to claim from the condemnor, but not from the Lessor, such compensation as may be recoverable by Lessee in its own right, for damages to Lessee's business, fixtures, improvements and signs. Lessee shall be required to make its own claim, if any, to the condemnor, and will bear all costs and expenses in connection with any such claims. ARTICLE XIII Bankruptcy 13.1 If at any time during the term of this Lease there shall be filed by or against Lessee in any court, pursuant to any statute of the United States or any State, a petition of bankruptcy or of insolvency or for reorganization or for the appointment of a receiver or trustee of all or a portion of Lessee's property, or if Lessee makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, Lessee shall have breached this Lease, and this Lease, at the option of the Lessor, exercised after the expiration of the period provided below, may be canceled and terminated, provided such petition of bankruptcy or of insolvency or for reorganization or for the appointment of a receiver or trustee shall continue for a period of sixty (60) days and pursuant to applicable bankruptcy law. In such event, neither Lessee nor any person claiming through or under Lessee by virtue of any statute or of an order of any court shall be entitled to possession or to remain in possession of the Premises, but shall forthwith quit and surrender the Premises. ARTICLE XIV Default and Remedies 14.1 Upon the occurrence of any of the following events (each, a "Default"), Lessor shall have the remedies set forth in paragraph 14.2 below: (a) Lessee fails to pay the minimum monthly rent or any other sum due hereunder within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice to Lessee from Lessor. (b) Lessee fails to perform any other term, condition, or covenant to be performed by it pursuant to this Lease within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice to Lessee from Lessor (or such longer period of time as may be reasonably required to cure a matter which, due to its nature, cannot reasonably be rectified within thirty (30) days). (c) Subject to Article XIII above, Lessee or any guarantor of this Lease shall become bankrupt or insolvent or file any debtor proceedings or have taken against such party in any court pursuant to State or Federal statutes, a petition of bankruptcy or for insolvency; reorganization, or the appointment of a receiver or trustee; or Lessee petitions for or enters into a creditors' arrangement; or suffers this Lease to be taken under a writ of execution; and in each of the foregoing cases, Lessee fails, within ninety (90) days after commencement of such action to have such action vacated or dismissed. 14.2 Upon the occurrence of any event set forth in paragraph 14.1 above, Lessor shall have the option to take any or all of the following actions pursuant, to Colorado law, without further notice or demand of any kind to Lessee or other person(s): (a) Immediately reenter and remove all persons or property from the Premises, storing said property in a public place, warehouse, or elsewhere at the cost of, and for the account of Lessee, all without service of notice or resort to legal process and without being deemed guilty of or liable in trespass. No such reentry or taking possession of the Premises by Lessor shall be construed as an election on its part to terminate this Lease unless a written notice of such intention is given by Lessor to Lessee. No such action by Lessor shall be considered or construed to be a forcible entry. (b) Collect by suit or otherwise each installment of rent or other sum as it becomes due hereunder, or enforce, by suit or otherwise, any other term or provision hereof on the part of Lessee required to be kept or performed. (c) Terminate this Lease by written notice to Lessee. In the event of such termination, Lessee agrees to immediately surrender possession of the Premises. Should Lessor terminate this Lease, Lessee shall have no further interest in this Lease or in the Premises, and the Lessor may recover from Lessee all damages it may incur by reason of Lessee's breach, including (i) the cost of recovering the Premises, (ii) reasonable attorneys' fees, and (iii) the worth at the time of such termination of the excess, if any, of the amount of rent and charges equivalent to rent reserved in this Lease for the remainder of the stated term over the then reasonable rental value of the Premises for the remainder of the stated term, all of which amounts shall be immediately due and payable at Lessor's election from Lessee to Lessor. (d) Should Lessor reenter, as provided above, or should it take possession pursuant to legal proceedings or pursuant to any notice provided by law, and whether or not it terminates this Lease, Lessor may relet the Premises, or any part thereof, for such term or terms (which may be for a term extending beyond the term of this Lease) and at such rental or rentals and upon such other terms and conditions as Lessor in its sole discretion may deem advisable. In all respects, Lessor shall act in a commercially responsible manner. Upon each such reletting, all rentals and/or deposits received by the Lessor from such reletting shall be applied, at Lessor's election, first, to the payment of any indebtedness due hereunder, and the residue, if any, shall be held by Lessor and applied in payment of future rent as the same may become due and payable hereunder. If such rentals received from such reletting during any month be less than that to be paid during such month by Lessee hereunder, Lessee shall pay any such deficiency to Lessor. Such deficiency shall be calculated and paid monthly. No such reentry and reletting of the Premises by Lessor shall be construed as an election on its part to terminate this Lease unless a written notice of such intention be given to Lessee pursuant to subsection (c) of this paragraph 14.2, or unless the termination thereof be decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any such reletting without termination, Lessor may at any time hereafter elect to terminate this Lease for such previous breach. The remedies given to the Lessor in this paragraph 14.2 shall be in addition to and supplemental to all other rights or remedies which Lessor may have under law or equity, but in all respects shall be exercised in accordance with applicable Colorado law. ARTICLE XV Ouiet Enioyment 15.1 Subject to Section 15.2 below, Lessor hereby covenants and warrants that, subject to any trust deeds or mortgages now of record or hereafter placed on record, it is the owner of the Premises and that Lessee, on payment of rents herein provided for and performance of the provisions hereof on its part to be performed, shall and may peacefully possess and enjoy the Premises during the term hereof without any interruption or disturbance by anyone claiming through Lessor. 15.2 Lessor acknowledges and agrees that (i) certain portions of the Premises comprising residential apartments are currently leased by the Lessor to employees of the business operated on the Premises on the effective date of this Lease, which leases are described on Exhibit A to this Lease (the "Employee Leases"), (ii) copies of the Employees Leases have been provided to Lessee for its review, and (iii) contemporaneously with the execution of this Lease, Lessee has entered into an assignment and assumption agreement pursuant to which Lessor assigns and Lessee assumes all rights and obligations of Lessor under those Employee Leases; provided that Lessee's rights acquired pursuant to such assignment and assumption shall be limited to those of a sublessor to each of the employees under the Employee Leases and in all cases shall be subject to the Lessee's rights and obligations under this Lease. ARTICLE XVI Surrender of Premises 16.1 At the expiration of this Lease, Lessee shall surrender the Premises in the same "broom clean" condition as they were in upon delivery of possession thereto under this Lease (free from debris), reasonable wear and tear excepted, and shall deliver all keys to Lessor. Before surrendering the Premises, Lessee shall remove all of its personal property and trade fixtures and such alterations and/or additions to the demised premises made by Lessee, as may be specified for removal by the Lessor, and Lessee shall repair any damage caused by such property or the removal thereof If Lessee fails to remove its personal property and fixtures upon the expiration of this Lease, the same, at the option of the Lessor, shall be deemed abandoned and shall become the property of the Lessor. ARTICLE XVII Holding Over 17.1 No holding over and continuation of any business by Lessee after the expiration of the term hereof shall be considered to be a renewal or extension of this Lease unless written approval of such holding over and a definite agreement to such effect is signed by Lessor defining the length of such additional term. Any holding over without the consent of Lessor shall be considered to be a day-to-day tenancy at a rental amount equal to three times the daily rate of the then scheduled minimum monthly rental provided herein, computed on the basis of a thirty (30) day month. ARTICLE XVIII Transfer or Pledge of Leasehold Interest 18.1 Lessee shall not assign this Lease or any interest therein, or sublet the Premises or any part thereof, or license the use of all or any portion of the Premises or business conducted thereon or therein, or encumber or hypothecate this Lease, without first obtaining the written consent of Lessor, which consent may be withheld by Lessor for any reason in Lessor's sole discretion, and any assignment, subletting, licensing, encumbering, or hypothecating of this Lease without such prior written consent shall, at the option of the Lessor, be void or terminate this Lease. ARTICLE XIX Lessor's Access to Premises 19.1 With the exception of emergencies, Lessor shall have access to the Premises, and each part thereof, at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the same, making such repairs as Lessor may deem desirable, and posting notices which Lessor deems necessary for the protection of Lessor or any portion of the Premises. Lessee acknowledges that Lessor intends to market the Premises for sale and agrees that Lessor shall also have the right to enter the Premises (after giving notice three (3) business days in advance) at all reasonable times during Lessee's business hours to inspect or to exhibit the same to prospective purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, and Lessees. Lessor agrees to use all reasonable efforts to minimize disruption to Lessee's business operations in connection with Lessor's entry on the Premises. ARTICLE XX Notices 20.1 All notices or demands of any kind which Lessor may be required or may desire to serve on Lessee under the terms of this Lease shall be served on Lessee (as an alternative to personal service) by mailing a copy thereof by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to Lessee at c/o Richard Goodman, PO Box 2607, Grand Junction, Colorado 81502, or at such other address or addresses as may from time to time be designated by Lessee in writing to Lessor. Service shall be deemed complete at the time of the leaving of such notice as aforesaid or within three (3) days after mailing of same. All notices and demands from Lessee to Lessor may be similarly served on Lessee at the following address or at such other address as Lessor may in writing designate to Lessee: City Manager, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. 1:1.7ItLCy11 AXI Attornment 21.1 In the event of the sale or assignment of Lessor's interest in the Premises, or in the event of any proceedings brought for the foreclosure of, or in the event of exercise of the power of sale under, any mortgage or other security instrument made by Lessor covering the Premises, Lessee shall attorn to the assignee or purchaser and recognize such purchaser as Lessor under this Lease. ARTICLE XXII Lessor's Rieht to Cure 22.1 In the event of breach, default, or noncompliance hereunder by Lessor, Lessee shall, before exercising any right or remedy available to it, give Lessor written notice of the claimed breach, default, or noncompliance. For the thirty (30) days following the giving of said notice (or such longer period of time as may be reasonably required to cure a matter which, due to its nature, cannot reasonably be rectified within thirty (30) days, Lessor shall have the right to cure the breach, default, or noncompliance involved. ARTICLE XXIII Attorney's Fees and Costs 23.1 In the event that a party to this Lease is required to bring suit in order to enforce this Lease, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs including "out-of-pocket" costs, the cost of expert witnesses and reasonable administrative expenses from the non -prevailing party including those incurred in any appeal or in connection with any bankruptcy case involving the Lessor or the Lessee or the Premises. ARTICLE XXIV Force Majeure 24.1 Neither the Lessor nor the Lessee shall be responsible or liable to the other for any delay in the observance or performance of any term or condition of this Lease to be observed or performed, to the extent that such delay is proximately caused by causes beyond that party's reasonable control and occurring without its fault or negligence, including, without limitation, (i) "Acts of God" (including fire, flood, earthquake, storm, hurricane or other natural disaster), (ii) war, invasion, act of foreign enemies, hostilities (whether war is declared or not), civil war, rebellion, revolution, insurrection, military or usurped power or confiscation, terrorist activities, riots, and other civil commotion, (iii) labor dispute, strike, or lockout, and (iv) failure of any suppliers, subcontractors, and carriers to substantially meet its performance obligations under any agreement entered into for the purpose of satisfying any obligation under this Agreement, in each case whether or not similar to the matters herein specifically enumerated, and any such delay shall extend by like time any period of performance by such party and shall not be deemed a breach of, or failure to, perform under this Lease or any provision thereof. The payment of rent or other sums due hereunder, however, shall not be deemed to be events excusable by Force Majeure. ARTICLE XXV Hazardous Materials 25.1 For purposes hereof, "Environmental Laws" shall mean all existing or hereafter enacted or amended federal, state, or local laws, statutes, rules, regulations and ordinances, relating to the protection of human health or the environment or prevention of pollution, including, without limitation, all requirements pertaining to the protection of the health and safety of employees or the public and all requirements pertaining to the reporting, licensing, permitting, investigation, and remediation of emissions, discharges, releases, or threatened releases of Hazardous Materials. For purposes hereof, "Hazardous Materials" shall mean (i) any substance, the presence of which requires investigation or remediation under Environmental Laws, or (ii) any substance which is or hereafter becomes defined as a hazardous waste, hazardous substance, hazardous material, hazardous chemical, toxic substance, toxic chemical, or pollutant or contaminant in or pursuant to Environmental Laws, or (iii) asbestos or asbestos containing material, chlorinated biphenyls or equipment or articles containing same. For purposes of this Article XXV, the term "Premises" shall refer to the entire Premises. 25.2 Lessee agrees and covenants that during the term of the Lease, there shall be no use, presence, disposal, storage, generation, release, or threatened release of any Hazardous Materials on, from, or under the Premises, in any manner which is inconsistent with the uses for which this Lease is authorized or in violation of any Environmental Laws, without the prior written consent of Lessor. Lessor shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay consent as long as Lessee demonstrates to Lessor's reasonable satisfaction that such Hazardous Material is necessary or useful to Lessee's business and will be used, kept and stored in a manner that complies with all laws regulating any such Hazardous Material, in which case, Lessor may require additional Hazardous Material insurance from Lessee. Lessee shall comply with all Environmental Laws and obtain and maintain in full force and effect any and all permits, licenses, approvals or authorizations required under Environmental Laws during the term of this Lease. 25.3 Lessee shall and does hereby agree to forever indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Lessor, its employees and its officers and directors from and against any and all losses, claims, demands, actions, damages (whether direct or consequential), penalties, liabilities, costs, and expenses, including without limitation all reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses, and cleanup or other environmental response costs arising out of any violation or alleged violation by Lessee or its agents or employees of any Environmental Laws, any breach of the provisions of this Article XXV, or any environmental condition of the Premises caused by or resulting from, in whole or in part, the Lessee or its employees or agents, in each case occurring during the term of this Lease. 25.4 Lessor shall and does hereby agree to forever indemnify, defend, and hold the Lessee, its employees and its agents, officers and directors harmless from and against any and all losses, claims, demands, actions, damages (whether direct of consequential), penalties, liabilities, costs, and expenses, including without limitation all attorney's fees and legal expenses, and cleanup or other environmental response costs arising out of any violation or alleged violation by Lessor or its agents or employees of the any Environmental Laws, any breach of the provisions of this Article XXV, or any environmental condition of the Premises caused by or resulting from, in whole or in part, the Lessor or its employees or agents. ARTICLE XXVI Miscellaneous Provisions 26.1 Neither the provisions herein nor any one or more covenants and/or agreements herein contained is intended, nor shall the same be deemed or construed, to create a partnership between Lessor and Lessee, to make them joint venturers, nor to make Lessor in any way responsible for the debts or losses of the Lessee. 26.2 The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision hereof shall not effect or impair any other provision hereof. 26.3 No waiver of any breach or breaches of any provision of this Lease shall be construed to be a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of such provision or of any other provision hereof. No provision of this Lease shall be deemed to have been waived unless such waiver be in writing and signed by the party against whom the waiver will be enforced. 26.4 Except as otherwise provided, all provisions herein shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their legal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns. Each provision to be performed by Lessee shall be construed to be both a covenant and a condition, and if there shall be more than one Lessee and a guarantor(s) they shall all be bound, jointly and severally by such provisions. In the event of any sale or assignment (except for purposes of security or collateral) by Lessor of the Premises or this Lease, Lessor shall, from and after the Commencement Date (irrespective of when such sale or assignment occurs), be entirely relieved of all of its obligations as of the time of such sale or assignment or on the Commencement Date, whichever is later, except for any obligations under paragraph 25.4. 26.5 This Lease, exhibits, riders, and/or addenda, if any, attached hereto, set forth the entire agreement between the parties. All exhibits, riders, or addenda mentioned in this Lease are incorporated herein by reference. If any provision contained in a rider or addendum is inconsistent with a provision in the body of this Lease, the provision contained in the rider or addendum shall control. It is agreed that this Lease contains no restrictive covenants or exclusive use permits in favor of Lessee. 26.6 This Lease shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, Colorado law. 26.7 Time is of the essence of each and every provision hereof. 26.8 Indemnifications contained in paragraphs 9.1, 9.3, 9.6, 25.3 and 25.4 of this Lease shall survive the termination of this lease. 26.9 The headings used herein are for convenience and shall not be considered for purposes of interpretation or construction hereof. 26.10 Feminine or neuter pronouns shall be substituted for those of masculine form or vice versa, and the plural shall be substituted for the singular number or vice versa in any place or places in which the context may require such substitution or substitutions. 26.11 Lessee shall not record this Lease or a memorandum thereof without the prior written consent of Lessor, which consent may be withheld in Lessor's sole and absolute discretion. ARTICLE XXVII Authority of Sitrnatories 27.1 Each person executing this Lease individually and personally represents and warrants that he is duly authorized to execute and deliver the same on behalf of the entity for which he is signing (whether it be a corporation, general or limited partnership, or otherwise) and that this Lease is binding upon said entity in accordance with its terms. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Lessor and Lessee have executed this Lease as of the date fast above written LESSOR: City of Aspen, By: _ Name: Title: LESSEE: Western Building Solutions Inc. a ColoradZco7r7ai By: Name'. Richard R Goodman Title: Senior Vice President Memorandum TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: August 9, 2010 V(1&40 The oft of Aspen City firomney7 office RE: Ordinances proposing amendments to City Charter relating to election procedures At the last municipal election City Council asked the voters if they wished to terminate the use of instant run-off voting procedures for the election of council members and mayor. By a small margin the voters voted to terminate the use of IRV. Following that non -binding election, council told the public that it would refer to the ballot one or more questions seeking authority to amend the City Charter to terminate the use of IRV and in its place, adopt an alternative method for the selection of Council members and Mayor. At a recent work session, Council directed staff to prepare two ordinances seeking to amend the City Charter to replace IRV with one of two alternative methods: (1) a `winner -take -all" procedure which ended the requirement for run-off elections (instant or otherwise) if candidates did not receive a certain threshold of votes; and (2) replacing IRV with a June run-off if the candidates for City Council or Mayor failed to receive 40% of the vote. The first alternative is the voting method that was used by the City for many years until the June run-off system was adopted. The second alternative replaces IRV, but retains the June run-off if candidates fail to receive 40%, or more, of the votes. This alternative is a sort of compromise that retains the run-off process, but does not require a run-off unless candidates receive a lower threshold of votes than previously required (40% vs 50%.) The thought is that run-off elections would be required less frequently if the threshold is lowered to 40%. The issue in considering this alternative is whether the public would be comfortable with the election of a candidate that received 40% of the votes cast as opposed to a majority or higher threshold. Should Council adopt one or both of these ordinances, I will prepare a resolution for your meeting on the 2r . If you adopt both ordinances, I would suggest that the language of the ballot questions include the following additional language (or something like it): There are two ballot questions seeking to amend the City Charter to replace instant run- off voting procedures with alternative voting procedures. You may vote in favor of one or both questions. If more than one ballot question receives a majority of the votes cast, the question receiving the highest affirmative votes shall be deemed approved. cc: City Manager vitaw (June Run-off — 40%) ORDINANCE NO. JD (SERIES OF 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY REPEALING SECTION 2.7 TO ELIMINATE INSTANT RUN-OFF VOTING PROCEDURES FOR THE ELECTION OF MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL; AND, TO RE -INSTATE THE NNE RUN-OFF ELECTION PROCEDURES IF CANDIDATES FOR THE OFFICES OF CITY COUNCIL OR MAYOR FAIL TO RECEIVE FORTY PERCENT (40%), OR MORE, OF THE VOTES CAST. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to eliminate instant run off voting procedures and re -instate previously used run-off elections for the election of the offices of Mayor and members of Council, and; WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to amend the requisite votes needed to be elected to the office of Mayor and member of Council; "I WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution authorizes home rule municipalities to amend their home rule charters through such procedures as may be enacted by the state general assembly; and WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted Section 31-2-210, C.R.S., which section sets forth the procedures for amending a city's home rule charter requiring the adoption of an ordinance, including a ballot title for the proposed amendment, and submission of the proposed amendments to the electorate; and, WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the City Charter of the City of Aspen authorizes amendments to the City Charter in the manner prescribed by the state constitution. Page 1 of 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: Section 1• Section 2.7 of Article II of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is repealed in its entirety and readopted to read as follows: Section 2.7. Run-off elections hi the event a run-off election is necessitated for the offices of mayor or member of Council, said election shall be held the first Tuesday in June following the municipal election. The run-off election shall be held in the same manner as the municipal election, except: (a) Certificate of candidates and publication of election notice shall be on or before the tenth (10"') day before the run-off election. (b) If a run-off for mayor is required, the two (2) persons with the highest number of votes for mayor in the municipal election shall appear on the ballot for mayor. (c) If a run-off election is required for two vacancies for City Council, then the four (4) persons with the highest number of votes for the office of member of Council in the municipal election shall appear on the ballot for members of Council. The two persons receiving the highest number of votes in the run-off election shall be elected for a four year tern. In this event, each voter shall be allowed to cast two votes for the office of member of Council. (d) If a run-off election is required for one vacancy for the office of member of Council then the two (2) persons with the highest number of votes for that office in the municipal election shall appear on the ballot for member of Council. The person receiving the highest number of votes in the run-off election shall be elected for a four year term. In this event, each voter shall be allowed to cast one vote for the office of member of Council. (e) The names of candidates shall be arranged in the same order as they appeared in the municipal election. As soon as the polls are closed after every run-off election, the judges shall determine the number of votes cast for each candidate and make return thereof to the city clerk and the candidates receiving the greatest number of votes cast at said election shall be declared elected. Page 2 of 5 As soon as the polls are closed after every run-off election, the judges of election shall immediately lock and seal each voting machine or ballot box against further voting and each such machine or ballot box shall remain so locked as provided by law. Section 2: Section 3.2 of Article III of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 3.2 Terms of office for members of Council. The terms of office for members of Council shall be for four (4) years. Each voter shall be allowed to vote for two candidates for the office of member of Council. At all municipal elections, the two (2) candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected for a four year term, provided that the candidate receives forty percent (40%), or more, of the votes cast for the office ("votes cast for the office" shall be calculate by dividing the sum of all votes cast for all city council candidates by two (2).) In the event that the number of elected candidates shall be less than the number of vacancies following the municipal election, the run- off election shall be held in accordance with Section 2.7. Section 3: Section 3.3 of Article III of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 3.3 Mayor. The mayor shall be elected at large for the entire city for a term of two (2) years. The candidate receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected mayor, provided that the candidate receives forty percent (40%), or more, of the votes cast for the office of mayor. In the event that no candidate shall have received forty percent, or more, of the votes cast for the office of mayor, then a run-off election shall be held in accordance with Section 2.7. Section 4. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Page 3 of 5 Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6• This ordinance shall become effective only upon approval of the electorate of the City of Aspen at the special municipal election to be held on November 2, 2010, of a ballot question in substantially the form that follows: CITY OF ASPEN REFERENDUM NO. AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER - RUN OFF VOTING PROCEDURES. Shall Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2010, be approved? Ordinance No.,, Series of 2010, if approved, amends sections 2.7, 3.2 and 3.3 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to eliminate instant run-off voting procedures and re -instate previously used run-off procedures in June for the election of mayor and members of Council if candidates for city council or the office of mayor do not receive forty -percent (401/6), or more, of the total votes cast for the office? Yes [ ] No [] A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the_, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado Section 6: The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to publish a copy of this ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation within ten (1) days, or as soon as possible thereafter as possible. Page 4 of 5 INTRODUCED, READ AND SCHEDULED FOR SECOND READING as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk charter-amd-20IOi n-0ff--a.dm Michael C. Ireland, Mayor day of Michael C. Ireland, Mayor 2010. 2010. Page 5 of 5 (No run-off procedure) ORDINANCE NO. o A (SERIES OF 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY OF ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2.7, 3.2, AND 3.3, TO ELIMINATE ALL RUN-OFF PROCEDURES FOR THE OFFICES OF COUNCILMEMBER AND MAYOR WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to eliminate all types of run-off elections for the offices of Mayor and members of Council, and; WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen City Charter to amend the requisite votes needed to be elected to the office of Mayor and members of Council; and WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution authorizes home rule municipalities to amend their home rule charters through such procedures as may be enacted by the state general assembly; and WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted Section 31-2-210, C.R.S., which section sets forth the procedures for amending a city's home rule charter requiring the adoption of an ordinance, including a ballot title for the proposed amendment, and submission of the proposed amendments to the electorate; and, WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter authorizes amendments to the City Charter in the manner prescribed by the state constitution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: Page I of 4 Section 1: Section 2.7 of Article II of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 2: Section 3.2 of the Home Rule Charter shall be amended to read as follows: Section 3.2 Terms of office for council members. The term of office for council members shall be for four (4) years. At all municipal elections, the two (2) candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected for a four year term. Each voter shall be allowed to vote for two candidates for the office of Councilmember. Section 3• Section 3.3 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter shall be amended to read as follows: Section 3.3 Mayor The mayor shall be elected at large from the entire city for a term of two (2) years. The candidate receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected mayor. The mayor shall preside at meetings of the council and shall exercise such powers and perform such other duties as are or may be conferred and imposed upon him or her by this Charter or the ordinances of the City. He or she shall have all of the powers, rights, privileges and obligations of a council member. He or she shall be recognized as the head of the government for all ceremonial and legal purposes and he or she shall execute and authenticate legal instruments requiring his or her signature as such official. Section 3: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Page 2 of 4 Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: This ordinance shall become effective only upon approval of the electorate of the City of Aspen at the special municipal election to be held on November 3, 2009, of a ballot question that reads substantially as follows:: CITY OF ASPEN REFERENDUM NO. _ AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER - VOTING PROCEDURES. Shall Ordinance No. c P- t , Series of 2010, be approved? Ordinance No. � Series of 2010, if approved, would repeal Section 2.7 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to eliminate all run-off voting procedures (including instant run-off voting procedures) for the election of mayor and members of Council; and to amend Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to declare the candidates receiving the highest number of votes to be the winners of their respective election races. Yes [ ] No [] A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the , at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. 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 2010. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Page 3 of 4 FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of 2010. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor charter-amd-201O-f ff--b.dm Page 4 of 4 MEMORANDUM V11 I TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road: Subdivision, Rezoning, Consolidated PUD Review, Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010. MEETING IJATE: August 9, 2UIU APPLICANT /OWNER: City of Aspen. REPRESENTATIVE: Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC and Alan Richman of Richman Land Planning, LLC. LOCATION: Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space, along Power Plant Road beneath the Castle Creek bridge. CURRENT ZONING: R-30, Low Density Residential. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests approval to construct a hydroelectric plant, aka the Aspen Energy Center, on Power Plant Road adjacent to the City Shop building. The application includes the following reviews: subdivision to create a new lot and to remove the area from the open space inventory, rezoning from R-30 to the Public Zone, consolidated PUD review to determine dimensional requirements, Growth Management Review for an Essential Public. The project is exempt from Stream Margin Review because it is a utility and is essential for public health and Aerial view of proposed site. Arrow indicates proposed location of the new building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council grant approval for Subdivision, Rezoning, PUD and Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility for the Aspen Energy Center with conditions. 1 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 COMMENTS FROM FIRST READING: The attached supplemental information, Exhibit M, addresses the majority of the questions raised by City Council during first reading including noise mitigation, definitions for healthy stream, history of the project and the relationship of the proposed hydroplant to community energy use. Staff included the review criteria for Stream Margin Review as Exhibit L. The draft stream health monitoring plan and a draft Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Colorado Department of Wildlife are included in Exhibit M. BACKGROUND: In 1887, Aspen became the first city west of the Mississippi to use hydroelectric power for all of its municipal electricity. The hydroelectric plant was taken off line in the 1950s and was replaced by cheaper non -local electricity options. In 1993, City Council adopted a policy regarding the use of the City's water rights and related assets and to "promote recreational and environmental interests such as maintaining clean streams, water conservation, maintaining minimum stream flows and aquatic habitat, and developing hydroelectric power" (Resolution No. 5 Series of 1993.) Five years later the City entered into an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) to implement the stream flow portion of the 1993 policy, part of which included investing in stream measurement improvements to ensure adequate flow levels in Castle Creek that protect stream flows and aquatic habitat. In 2007 the electorate of the City of Aspen voted in favor of two questions regarding the proposed Aspen Energy Center: 1.) "seeking authority for the issuance of...bonds for the purpose of constructing and equipping a new hydroelectric facility on Castle Creek" was passed by a vote of 582 to 230 or 72% (Resolution No. 69 Series of 2007); and 2.) "seeking authority to change the use of city owned property acquired for open space purposes for the construction of hydroelectric plant on Castle Creek" was passed by a vote of 622 to 183 or 77 %. (Resolution 70 of 2007.) About sixty years after the hydroelectric plant was taken off line, Aspen is proposing a new hydroelectric plant that, if approved by Federal agencies, will generate about 8.5 percent of the annual energy requirements of Aspen's electric customers. The Aspen Energy Center (AEC), also called the Castle Creek Energy Center, is proposed to be located along Power Plant Road by the existing City Shop building adjacent to Castle Creek. Currently there are intake pipes upstream for Castle Creek and Maroon Creek, one intake each. These pipes divert water into the Thomas Reservoir located at the Water Department headquarters on Doolittle Drive. The water will travel through a penstock (pipe) down a 325' drop to the proposed AEC where it will power the hydroelectric plant and be discharged back into Castle Creek. 2 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 Fieure 1: Pineline and Diversion Points M.roon treek pv«+iRn ,use TFonas Reze Et. 8175 Aspen Mar R w Voter UI Mydort7 FERC 111Wz1-CO OI Trwtmmt Plcn< �/ caFs IS Approve. MAOU IWar it. Ipel Vater 92a Pt. tlrop 3/e Me Xyd o/E^srOY Et. M5 ,vr m vrt a a.v Hoar uty ei Aspen orv-IYr o-n.�, homstd OY GGeztl =k NYd'p/E^zrn There are specific state and federal regulations that dictate the amount of water or cfs (cubic feet per square inch) required to remain in each Creek; therefore only a specific amount of water may be diverted during certain seasons. The state and federal regulations take natural wildlife habitat and natural vegetative niches into consideration. In addition to a stream flow analysis conducted by Grand River Consulting Corporation included in the application, the Colorado Department of Wildlife (CDOW) requested supplementary studies on flow levels necessary to support healthy aquatic environment. Miller Ecological Consultants were hired by the City to conduct extensive stream, fish and boreal toad studies. The Miller Study recommends a minimum of 13.3 cfs in the upper section of Castle Creek, 17.2 cfs in the lower section of Castle Creek and 14 cfs in Maroon Creek below the diversion point to maintain healthy streams. As part of their longtime commitment to maintaining healthy streams, the City commits to undertaking a stream health assessment after the hydroplant begins operations. There is no criterion requiring this type of follow up, so the City is working with CDOW, United States Forest Service and City Engineering to formulate a memorandum of understanding between the City and the CDOW and to create a stream health monitoring plan, both are included in Exhibit M. Details of the plan include: type of data gathered, monitoring schedule, sample locations, etc. The Ordinance and the Memorandum of Understanding both specify that City Council is the review body to resolve any inconsistencies that may arise between a possible future increase in stream flow and Aspen's commitments and objectives for the hydroplant, understanding and acknowledging that only the CWCB is legally authorized to appropriate and hold instream flow water rights. A noise assessment analysis was conducted to determine sound impacts generated by the AEC. The building has been designed specifically to absorb and mitigate sound levels. The project goal is to attain a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 60 decibels at the building. Sound readings are measured from the property line. The required adopted maximum decibel level for this neighborhood is 50 decibels at night and 55 decibels during the day, as stated in Title 18 of the Aspen Municipal Code. The City commits to compliance with local, state and federal sound guidelines and agrees to measure sound levels at the time of project completion to confirm that 3 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 the facility is in conformity. Sound readings will be taken periodically after the Certificate of Occupancy by the Environmental Health Department to confirm that the facility meet sound requirements. PREVIOUS APPROVALS: The proposed site is located within 100 feet of Castle Creek and requires Stream Margin Review to ensure that the development is sensitive to existing watercourses and natural vegetation. The hydroelectric plant proposal is exempt from Stream Margin Review pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2 of the Land Use Code which exempts the following types of development: "construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the no development area prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, utilities, provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards." Adopted City standards require a decibel level of 50 dB at night and 55 dB during the day for this project. The project proposes to meet these requirements and conduct a sound test once the project has received the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license to measure the decibel of the facility and confirm compliance with City standards, which is included in the Ordinance as a condition of approval. The City commits to meeting the adopted standards if the project is found out of compliance. Staff finds that the criteria for Stream Margin Review, attached as Exhibit L, are met to the extent practical with the condition that the applicant meet the requirements of the Colorado Department of Wildlife and comply with the minimum stream flow recommendations provided by the Miller Consulting Group to protect aquatic life and vegetative habitat in Castle Creek. The applicant is voluntarily committing to a stream health monitoring plan to ensure that the streams are healthy after the hydroplant begins operations. A draft stream health monitoring plan is included in Exhibit M. On April 20, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved, by a 3 — 2 vote, an employee generation rate of 0 employees with the condition that an employee audit be conducted by the Housing Authority 2 years after the Certificate of Occupancy is granted. The Planning and Zoning Commission expressed concern regarding minimum stream flows and recommended that Council carefully review the report generated by Miller Ecological Consultants. The resolution and meeting minutes were provided as Exhibits F and G during First Reading. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council to construct the hydroelectric plant: • Subdivision approval to remove part of Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the March Subdivision and create the Castle Creek Energy Center lot, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.480, Subdivision (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); • Rezonine to the Public Zone District pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map (City Council is the 4 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission); • Consolidated PUD approval for the construction of the hydroelectric plant pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445, Planned Unit Development. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). • Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility (Chapter 26.470.090.4) to approve employee mitigation requirements for the Essential Public Facility. CQUY Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission.) PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed hydroelectric plant is a one story 1,928 gross square foot Essential Public Facility that includes four rooms: Turbine Room (approx. 1,046 sq. ft.), Shop and Staging Room (approx. 355 sq. ft.), Visitor Room (approx. 178 sq. ft.) and Control Room (approx. 301 sq. ft.) A covered carport that facilitates 5 parking spaces is proposed to be located on CDOT property directly adjacent to the subject lot. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS: The Public Zone District requires adoption of a PUD to establish dimensional requirements. The applicant requests a rezoning from the R-30 Zone District, which does not permit a hydroelectric plant, to the Public Zone District. Staff provided the approved PUD requirements for the adjacent City Shop building that has a similar public utility use for reference. Proposed Approved PUD Dimensional Dimensional Staff Notes requirements for Requirement Requirements adjacent City Shop building Minimum Lot Size 23,000 sq. ft. Proposed AEC parcel 1 acre or 43,560 is 23,689 sq. ft. sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per °/a No residential °/a dwellingunit component. Maximum Allowable No residential Density n/a component. n/a Minimum Lot Width 220 ft. 160 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback measured from 69 ft. 55 ft. property line Minimum Side Yard 2 ft. north side yard; 0 ft. Setback, measured from and 185 ft. on south property line side yard Staff proposes that Minimum Rear Yard retaining walls located Setback, measured from 30 ft. in the setbacks be 0 ft. property line approved as part of the PUD plat. 5 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 Proposed Approved PUD Dimensional Dimensional Staff Notes requirements for Requirement adjacent CityRequirements Shop buildin Measured pursuant to Maximum Height 27 ft. Land Use Code 33 ft. Section 26.575.020.13 Minimum Distance n/a Only one building 0 ft' Between Buildings proposed. Applicant proposes no open space requirement due to the Minimum % Open 3:1 open space Space No requirement exchange and the u 14 /o surrounding open space.* Applicant does not anticipate that the plant will regularly Trash Access Area No requirement generate trash. The n/a loading dock area is proposed for trash storage as needed. Please reference Allowable Gross Square 1,928 gross square Exhibit B, PUD Review Criteria, for an 0.35:1 Footage feet explanation of proposed floor area. The applicant proposes 5 covered parking spaces on the adjacent CDOT right of to be used for the Minimum Off -Street 0 spaces AEC. The Code does n/a Parking not permit off-street parking to be located on an adjacent lot that is in different ownership than the subject parcel. *Please reference Exhibit A, Subdivision for a detailed explanation about the land trade. Parkin: The applicant proposes 5 covered parking spaces to be located on CDOT Right of Way adjacent to the subject lot. The City is currently working on a Lease Agreement with CDOT to use the Right of Way for AEC parking. The Land Use Code requires that off-street parking spaces be located on the subject parcel or an adjacent parcel that is in the same ownership. As such, the 5 6 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 proposed parking spaces do not count as off-street parking; however they are proposed to be used as parking for the AEC. The parking spaces are not anticipated to be used regularly. An employee will not be permanently stationed at the AEC. The plant will be operated remotely from the Water Department headquarters and routine maintenance and readings will be performed as needed. Visitors to the AEC are by appointment only to ensure that an employee is present to open and supervise visitation. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends a requirement of 0 parking spaces to City Council as part of the PUD plan. Public Outreach: To date, the applicant has held 6 public meetings to discuss the proposal. The most recent meeting on June 16, 2010 presented the Miller Ecological Consultant's environmental report; meeting notes were provided during First Reading as Exhibit I. An informative webpage explaining the proposal and answering frequently asked questions is accessed off of the www.aspenpitkin.com homepage under "city spotlight." A technical workshop was held on May 28, 2010 to discuss the draft report with interested stakeholders to gain their feedback and expertise participants included: Aspen Wilderness Workshop, Ruedi Water & Power Authority, United States Forest Service, Colorado River District, Stream Health Initiative, and Trout Unlimited. The Colorado Department of Wildlife and Roaring Fork Conservancy provided comments directly to Dr. Miller. STAFF COMMENTS: AREA PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED FROM OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION: The proposed location of the AEC is adjacent to Castle Creek along Power Plant Road on land that is currently part of Marolt Open Space. t The voters approved removal of a small section of open space for this project in exchange for newly designated open space along lower Aspen Mountain (Millionaire Claim) and trail easements around the Water Plant that add up to about three times the size of the AEC proposed lot for a 3:1 land exchange.2 Subdivision of the proposed lot from the Marolt Open Space is required for the hydroplant project. •,4::�L COL%. SWE HIC•NW-1 ,t , o iar : City Special Counsel James True determined that the CDOT ROW is 60' in width, and therefore the proposed AEC building is located on land owned by the City of Aspen. To clarify the matter, the City submitted a quit claim to CDOT for the area in question. CDOT is surveying the area before responding to the City's request. The proposed carports are located on CDOT property. CDOT drafted a Lease Agreement that the City Attorney reviewed and submitted minor changes. The City is currently awaiting CDOT's response to the proposed changes. The Lease Agreement and any property boundary questions must be resolved prior to submitting for a building permit. a The City Charter requires a 1:1 open space land exchange. 7 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 Staff finds that the AACP is met with the proposed application and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to City Council. REZONING: Rezoning from the R-30 Low Residential Zone District to Public Zone District with a PUD overlay is required to permit the operation of a hydroelectric plant. The Public Zone District permits "essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops)," and requires a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to establish dimensional requirements. Stafffinds that the criteria to rezone the parcel to Public Zone District is met and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to City Council. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The Community Development Department determined that a consolidated PUD review for the approximately 2,025 square foot (approx. 1,895 sq. ft. of floor area) building is appropriate. The proposed building is one story and includes a large room for the turbine and generator, a shop and staging room, a small control room, and a small visitor room and bathroom. The proposed floor area accounts only for the proposed building. Staff finds that is appropriate to approve only the specific project included in the application rather than anticipate a future potential addition that will require a Land Use review to amend the PUD. There is no open space requirement provided in the application. The proposed setbacks will contain any development to the area on the north side of Power Plant Road. In addition to hydroelectric power, the City envisions this building to have an educational component with a renewable energy display and a pictorial history of electric production in the visitor room. Large internal windows will allow visitors to watch the turbine in action. The AEC design intends to be carbon neutral with a zero carbon footprint by using solar panels to power any lights on the exterior and interior of the building. Energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and water efficient landscaping contribute to the City's environmental stewardship goals. Staff finds that the review criteria are met and recommends City Council approve the consolidated PUD plan. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW — ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY: The proposed AEC qualifies as an Essential Public Facility as it is "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community," and as such requires approval for employee generation and requires employee mitigation through Growth Management Review. The Water Department plans to utilize existing employees to monitor the hydroelectric equipment remotely from the Water Department offices located on Doolittle Drive with daily visits to the actual AEC site. Currently, hydroelectric specialists conduct daily readings and maintenance of existing City facilities including the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant and the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek headgates. The AEC will be added to the scheduled monitoring of these properties on an as needed basis. Any visitors or tour groups are by appointment only to guarantee that an employee 8 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 is present. The Housing Board recommends that an audit of Water Department employees is conducted 2 years after the Certificate of Occupancy to confirm that no increase of employees resulted from the AEC. The Planning and Zoning Commission established an employee generation rate of 0 employees for the AEC. Staff finds that the criteria are met and recommends that City Council grant Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility with the condition that an employee audit specific to the hydroelectric plant is conducted, upon request by APCHA, 2 years after the Certificate of Occupancy is granted. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Building Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Housing Department, Fire Marshall, Attorney's Office, Environmental Health Department, Transportation Department, Utilities, the Parks Department and Pitkin County Community Development have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. Parks requests that the Memorandum of Agreement for the land exchange between Parks/ Open Space and the City occur at the time of recordation of the proposed project. Staff has included this as a condition of approval. The Engineering Department raised concerns about the proposed drainage plan and requests more information about the impact of the hydroelectric plant on stream life. The drainage plan shall be approved by Engineering prior to recordation of the final PUD plat. Miller Ecological Consultants completed an extensive environmental report on the impact of the Castle Creek hydroplant on Castle and Maroon Creeks. The City is working with the Engineering Department, CDOW and the United States Forest Service to compose a memorandum of understanding and a stream health monitoring plan that will assess the health of the stream after the hydroplant begins operations. This has been included as a condition of approval. APCHA recommends an employee audit of the Water Department 2 years after a certificate of occupancy is granted to ensure that no new employees are generated with the construction of the hydroelectric plant. This has been included as a condition of approval. The County Community Development Department is monitoring the proposed hydroelectric plant proceeding in Water Court regarding impacts on Maroon Creek and has no comment at this time. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is consistent with the goals of the AACP as well as the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff finds that this project will further the community goal to reduce Aspen's carbon footprint and perpetuate RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.15, Series of 2010, approving with conditions Subdivision, Rezoning to the Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD approval and Growth Management approval for an Essential Public Facility on second reading." 9 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: EXHIBIT A — Subdivision Review Criteria, Staff Findings. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] ExHIBIT B — Rezoning Review Criteria, Staff Findings. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT C — PUD Review Criteria, Staff Finding. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT D — Growth Management Review Criteria, Staff Findings. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] ExHIBIT E — DRC Comments. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT F — Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 9, Series of 2010. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT G — Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes from April 20, 2010. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] ExHIBIT H — Application (bound copy.) [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT I —Supplemental information to Application dated April 8, 2010. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT J — Supplemental information to Application dated July 2, 2010. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT K — Letter from Roaring Fork Conservancy, dated January 14, 2010. [provided in 7/12/2010 packet] EXHIBIT L — Stream Margin Review Criteria EXHIBIT M — Supplemental information to Application dated August 9, 2010 including: • answers to Council's first reading questions, • a draft Memorandum of Understanding, • draft Stream Health Monitoring Plan, and • an updated site plan 10 Aspen Energy Center, Power Plant Road Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 08.09.10 Ordinance No. 15 (SERIES OF 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS SUBDIVISION, REZONING TO PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT, CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY FOR LOT 3 AND OPEN SPACE 2A OF THE MAROLT RANCH OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION, AKA THE CASTLE CREEK ENERGY CENTER AND HYDROELECTRIC PLANT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2735-123-63-852 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval to construct the Castle Creek Energy Center and Hydroelectric Plant, which included requests for Subdivision, Amendment to the Zone District Map, Planned Unit Development plan, and Growth Management allotments for an Essential Public Facility; and, WHEREAS, the proposed Castle Creek Energy Center will serve an essential public purpose by providing clean hydroelectric power to City facilities thus serving the general public and Aspen community and complying with the voters' directive to reduce carbon emissions, and therefore is categorized as an Essential Public Facility, pursuant to Section 26.104.100; and, WHERAS, the Community Development Director determined that the proposed development is exempt from Stream Margin Review, pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2, in that the proposed facility complies to the extent practical with the Stream Margin Review Standards, and concluded that it was appropriate to discuss the stream margin review criteria with the Planning and Zoning Commission in order to identify and address issues associated with the development and Stream Margin area; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is currently zoned R-30 Low Density Residential with a PUD overlay and is part of the dedicated Marolt Ranch Open Space; and, WHEREAS, the electorate voted in 2007 to remove the subject parcel from the Marolt Open Space as stated in City Council Resolution No. 70 Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the proposed land use requests with conditions; and, WHEREAS, following a duly noticed public hearing on April 20, 2010, the City of Aspen received a recommendation of approval for Subdivision, Rezoning from R-30 to Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD plan, and Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility from the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page I of 7 Resolution No. 9, Series of 2010, for a 2,025 gross square foot hydroelectric plant located on the property at Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on July 12, 2010 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 15, Series 2010, on First Reading, approving with conditions Subdivision, Rezoning from R-30 to Public Zone District, Consolidated PUD plan, and Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility for the property located at Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with the conditions set forth herein, 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 of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Dimensional Standards Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended and the City Council hereby grants approval of Subdivision, a Consolidated Planned Unit Development, Rezoning, and Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility for the property located at Lot 3 and Open Space 2A of the March Ranch Open Space Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado the following dimensional standards for the Castle Creek Energy Center and Hydroelectric Plant: Table 1: Approved Dimensional Standards: Proposed Dimensional Dimensional Requirement Requirements Minimum Lot Size 23,000 s . ft. Minimum Lot Area per n/a dwelling unit Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 2 of 7 Proposed Dimensional Dimensional Requirement Requirements Maximum Allowable n/a Density Minimum Lot Width 220 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback measured from 69 ft. property line Minimum Side Yard 2 ft. north side yard; Setback measured from and 185 ft. on south property line side yard Minimum Rear Yard Setback measured from 30 ft. property line Maximum Height 27 ft. Minimum Distance n/a Between Buildings Minimum % Open No requirement. Space Trash Access Area No requirement. 1,928 gross sq. ft., as Allowable Gross Square indicated on the PUD Footage lat. Minimum Off -Street 0 spaces Parking Section 2: Subdivision from Marolt Ranch Open Space: Lot 3 and part of Lot 2A of the Marolt Ranch Open Space are hereby removed from the Open Space inventory. The newly created lot, named the Castle Creek Energy Center, is 23,689 square feet as depicted on the survey. A Memorandum of Agreement approving the removal of the subject lot and the approved Open Space land exchange shall be recorded simultaneously with the recordation of the Subdivision plat, and Planned Unit Development plat and agreement. Concurrent with the recordation of the Castle Creek Energy Center Subdivision and PUD plats and agreement, the Marolt Open Space PUD and SIA shall be amended and recorded to reflect the Subdivision approval. The aforementioned recordations shall be made with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder prior to submitting an application for a Building Permit. Section 3: Amendment to the Zone District Map Upon the effective date of an act by City Council approving a development application for an amendment to the Zone District map, rezoning the subject lot from R-30 Low Density Residential Zone District with a PUD overlay to the Public Zone District with a PUD overlay, the Community Development Director shall place the amendment on the City's official zone district map. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 3 of 7 Section 4: Parkin¢ Parking is not required on site; however if a Lease Agreement is entered into between the City and CDOT to use the Right of Way for 5 parking spaces, then the parking may be used for the Castle Creek Energy Center. Section 5: Environmental Assessment The City shall operate the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant in accordance with the terms of a license or exemption from licensing which is issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") and is accepted by the City. The City shall operate its hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek to divert water to the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant in a manner that will allow maintenance of a minimum stream flow in Castle Creek in the amount of 13.3 cubic feet per second (cfs) immediately downstream of the point of diversion of the Castle Creek municipal intake, and a minimum stream flow of 17.2 cfs in Castle Creek immediately downstream of the point at which return flows from the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant return to Castle Creek, in order to continue to maintain a healthy stream environment on Castle Creek. In addition, the City shall continue to operate its hydroelectric water rights on Maroon Creek to divert water to the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant in a manner that will allow maintenance of a minimum stream flow in Maroon Creek in the amount of 14 cfs immediately downstream of the point of diversion of the Maroon Creek municipal intake, in order to continue to maintain a healthy stream environment on Maroon Creek. The foregoing minimum stream flows are recommended by the findings in the June 11, 2010 Miller Ecological Consultants report to provide habitat to protect the aquatic biota during baseflow periods and refuge habitat in the winter. The City, in collaboration with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the United States Forest Service (to the extent the United States Forest Service is willing and able to participate), shall develop a stream health monitoring plan. Because the stream health monitoring plan may require revision as it is implemented, a memorandum shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder describing the plan, and stating that a full and complete copy of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Colorado Division of Wildlife, together with all exhibits, revisions and additions, as well as data collection forms and reports as required by the monitoring program, will be maintained at the office of the Aspen Water Department, and will be available for review during the Water Department's normal business hours. The foregoing memorandum shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder with the PUD agreement prior to submitting its application for building permit. The City shall conduct assessments of stream health conditions as directed by the stream health monitoring plan, and make such reports to the Colorado Division of Wildlife and other agencies as required by the stream health monitoring plan. During the course of the Monitoring Program, CDOW may determine, after review of data and consultation with the interested governmental entities, that stream flows in Castle Creek immediately downstream of the Castle Creek hydroelectric diversion, or steam flows in Castle Creek immediately downstream of the point of hydroelectric returns, should be increased in Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 4 of 7 order to protect the fisheries and stream habitat. When CDOW advises the City of this determination, the City will work with CDOW to develop an operational plan for its hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek to provide such increased stream flow at those locations, so long as such operation is also consistent with Aspen's commitments and objectives for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. If operation of the City's hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek to maintain such increased stream flows is inconsistent with the City's commitments and objectives for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant, including Ordinance 23, Series of 2608, then the City will seek resolution from City Council. The City Council recognizes that while the City may operate its hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek in order to maintain the stream flows recommended by Miller Ecological Consultants, or greater stream flows, at the specified locations described above, only the Colorado Water Conservation Board ("CWCB") is legally authorized to appropriate and hold decrees for instream flow water rights. Section 6: Noise Assessment The Castle Creek Energy Center shall comply with the City of Aspen noise ordinance, Title 18 of the Aspen Municipal Code. The City shall conduct a noise analysis upon completion of the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant to confirm compliance with City noise standards. The City shall submit a representative sample of baseline sound level reports to the Environmental Health Department before issuance of the building permit to compare with the sound impact of the hydroelectric plant after it is operating. Within 30 days of being operational, the Environmental Health Department shall take a sound reading during the daytime and the nighttime to confirm compliance with City standards. Section 7: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. d. Improvements to the right of way shall include new grass, irrigation, and possibly the replacement of street trees, and shall be approved prior to building permit submittal. e. An excavation -stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), and drainage and soils report pursuant to the Building and Engineering Department's requirements. The CMP shall include an identification of construction hauling routes, construction phasing, and construction traffic and parking plan for review and approval by the City Engineer and Streets Department Superintendent. Staging areas will be identified in the plan. No stabilization will be permitted in the City right of way. Stormwater run-off and management must meet the requirements of the Urban Runoff Management Plan. f. A complete geotechnical report and geotechnical design. g. Accessibility requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. h. An approved landscape plan. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 5 of 7 Section 8: Engineering Department Requirements The City shall comply with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, including but not limited to Title 21 Streets, Sidewalks and other Public Places, Title 8.50 Flood Damage Prevention and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A final grading and drainage plan meeting all requirements of the City Engineer shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering Department prior to Engineering Department sign -off on the Final Plat. Section 9: Water Department Requirements The City shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Section 10: Sanitation District Requirements a. Service is contingent upon compliance with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the ACSD office, and shall obtain ACSD approval of the City -approved drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. b. On -site utility plans require approval by ACSD. c. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public rights of way, ACSD easements, or easements that will be dedicated to ACSD in connection with this project. d. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. e. The glycol heating and snow melt system for the Castle Creek Energy Center project must be designed to prohibit the discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. f. Soil Nails are not allowed in the public right of way above ASCD main sewer lines. g. The City's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations. Section 11: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 12• All material representations and commitments made by the City 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. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 6 of 7 Section 13• 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 any ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 14: 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 15 A public hearing on this ordinance will be held the 9 h day of August 2010 at 5:00 p.m. in City Council chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12s' day of July, 2010. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2010. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Attachment A: site plan and elevations Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2010 Second Reading, August 9, 2010 Page 7 of 7 —TINEOFBWIX£F— CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY STATE XI..VW82 W R ON CuNE OF BFIDGE>W VE e NouY WGXT OF WAY RENO - SMITI . 1-Te n 0 PUD SITE PLAN 0 0 0 ;sue AfK- RENO SMITH A-4 --",'I-0 - - --- ------ WINSLORMERy - J ELECTRICAL VAOLT naw.n^� `- BELOW GRADE GM'ORY .L.__-0 RENO SMITk ax xill [cia EXHIBIT L STREAM MARGIN REVIEW 26.435.040.B Stream Margin Review Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: 1. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. The Community Development Director determined that the proposed hydroelectric facility meets the Stream Margin Review Standards to the extent practical, and as a public utility essential for public health and safety the proposed improvements are exempt from Stream Margin Review pursuant to Section 26.435.040.B.2 above. Staff found that, while the project is exempt from Stream Margin Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, it was important to discuss the review criteria with the Commission to bring all of the issues to the forefront and maintain a transparent public process. The review criteria are addressed below. 26.435.040.0 Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below: 1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State which shows that the base flood elevation Exhibit L- Stream Margin Review Criteria 8.9.2010 Page 1 of 5 will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base ,hood elevation increase caused by the development, and Staff Finding: The proposed development is not located in the Special Flood Hazard Area. The red line on the previous page depicts the 100 year flood plain which is located on the opposite site of Power Plant Road from the proposed building. The Castle Creek flood plain is shown on the site improvement survey, sheet number 2 of 4, in the application. 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: ParkslRecreationlOpen Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement, " and Staff Finding: The application meets the recommendations in the AACP regarding Parks and Open Space. It is unknown as to whether there already is a fisherman's easement for access to Castle Creek. The applicant intends to add an easement to the recorded plat if one does not already exist. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Subsection 26.435.040.F.1; and Staff Finding: No significant changes will be made to the existing vegetation. The slope on the western portion of the property (closest to Cemetery Lane) will be changed to accommodate sediment control with the construction of a retaining wall. As stated in Dr. Miller's report "no long-term, adverse impacts to geology, topography and soils are anticipated from the construction of the Aspen Energy Center. Construction of the tailrace will include some removal of vegetation located adjacent to the bridge near the proposed hydroplant. The Miller Consulting Group report outlines that the total loss of riparian area due to construction of the tailrace is about 80 square meters. The applicant proposes to remove the existing shed located on the south side of Power Plant Road and to re -vegetate the disturbed area. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion andlor 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, and Exhibit L- Stream Margin Review Criteria 8.9.2010 Page 2 of 5 Staff Finding: The City Code requires stream protection during construction. The stream bank will be protected during construction with approved fencing. A drainage plan is included in the application and will be required at building permit submittal. The drainage plan focuses on the project site, but it also incorporates City Shop and Power Plant Road for a comprehensive plan. Additionally, the hydroelectric plant is required to meet federal and state standards before the facility can receive a license and operate. The standards assess streamflow, natural habitats and aquatic life and vegetation before granting a license. Miller Consulting Group was hired by the City to prepare an environmental report that analyzed these aspects of the stream, the impact of the proposed Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant on Castle and Maroon Creeks, and ultimately recommended a minimum stream flow to maintain a healthy stream. The report has been submitted to the CDOW and presented to steakholders and interested public in the valley. The CDOW is working with City departments to create a stream health monitoring plan to ensure that Castle and Maroon Creeks, and the aquatic life and vegetation that they support, remain healthy. Noise pollution is being addressed largely with the construction materials of the building. A sound engineering firm has been hired to analyze a similar plant and to provide noise reading projections for the proposed hydroelectric plant. The decibel levels are required to meet city standards, which are 50 decibels at night and 55 decibels at day. According to the application, the highest decibel will be emitted from the roof: it will be equivalent to a person screaming on one side of a wall that you can barely understand on the other side of the wall. Sound readings are taken from the property line, and distance from the building will decrease the level of sound. A sound reading will be taken within 30 days after the hydroelectric plant begins operations to confirm conformance with city standards. Periodic sound readings, as requested by the Environmental Health Department, may occur after the Certificate of Occupancy. The hydroplant is required to meet city standards and will be required to take corrective measures, such as adding more interior insulation, should the building be found out of compliance. Staff finds this criterion is met to the extent practical in that the proposed hydroplant is required to meet state and federal standards that evaluate impacts on streamflow, natural habitat, aquatic life and vegetation. Furthermore, the City is voluntarily committing to a stream health monitoring plan as an added layer to streamlife protection. There are no proposed reroutes to the water course. 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency; and Staff Finding: The applicant commits to meeting this criterion. 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished, and Exhibit L- Stream Margin Review Criteria 8.9.2010 Page 3 of 5 Staff Finding: The Land Use Code defines a watercourse as "a river, stream or water irrigation ditch." The actual route and direction of Castle Creek is not proposed to be altered or relocated as part of this development. The Applicant confirms that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the 100 year food plain; and Staff Finding: No development is proposed within the 100 year flood plain with the exception of the tailrace that takes the water from the hydroplant and puts it back into the creek. The applicant is required to obtain a federal and state permit for this work. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department, and Staff Finding: The Top of Slop/ Stream Margin Map does not delinate a top of slope for Castle Creek, a tributary of the Roaring Fork River. The assumed top of slope for this project is at the edge of Power Plant Road, closest to Castle Creek, at the top of the creek bank or the high water line. The building is located outside of the 15 feet setback from the top of slope (see Exhibit M for illustration). A tailrace that puts the water back into Castle Creek after it runs through the hydroplant will be located within the setback area. Due to the nature of the facility, the pipe cannot be relocated to comply with this standard. A landscape plan is included in the application and has been reviewed by the Parks Department. Staff finds that this criterion is met to the best extent practical. 9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020 as shown in Figure "A "; and Exhibit L- Stream Margin Review Criteria 8.9.2010 Page 4 of 5 Staff Finding: The applicant represents in the section below that the proposed building will not infringe into the 45 degree progressive height limit. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with Section 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications, and Staff Finding: The proposed light fixtures and lighting plan comply with this criterion. 11. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. Staff Finding: There are no wetland zones or riparian zones located in the area of the proposed building (see Miller report page 17, Figure). Staff finds that this criterion is met. Exhibit L- Stream Margin Review Criteria 8.9.2010 Page 5 of 5 Castle Creek Energy Center Supplemental for Application Date: August 9, 2010 Response to questions from July 12, 2010, Council Meeting, 1s' Question Will the City's water rights be utilized and protected? Answer. The City's most senior water rights in Castle and Maroon Creek (1885 and 1892 priority date, respectively) will be utilized to generate hydroelectric power as a result of the proposed project. Utilization of these rights for power generation is a non -consumptive use, leaving water available in the stream while exercising these rights in a similar manner to the way they were used with the historic Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. The City's water conservation efforts has freed up a significant volume of water that was previously dedicated for consumptive municipal uses through the potable water system, that is now available for power generation to benefit Aspen electric customers. Q. Can the Aspen Electric Utility provide examples of energy uses in the community that provide a frame of reference for the amount of energy produced by the Castle Creek hydroplant? A. Aspen's commitment to voters in the 2007 election approving funding for the proposed hydroplant was to produce 5.5 million kilowatt hours (kWh) on an annual average basis. For comparison, the total annual electric use for the completed 258 unit Burlingame Village is estimated to utilize 2.5 million kWh annually. In other words, the facility would power more than two villages the size of Burlingame at full build out. A second comparison is the amount of energy required to power City facilities. The combined electric demand of the Aspen Recreation Center, together with the water plant , golf department, parks and streets facilities is approximately 2.5 million kwh, or approximately half of the output from the proposed Castle Creek plant. The plant therefore would be capable of satisfying the electric demand of the completed (258 unit) Burlingame Village together with the demands from the ARC and other City facilities listed above. Q. Can the utility provide examples that show the magnitude of the proposed plant? The proposed Castle Creek plant will have a rated power output of 1.17 MW. By comparison, the Ruedi hydroelectric plant has a capacity of 4.5 MW and the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant has a capacity of 0.5 MW. The Ruedi plant has an average annual output of 20 million kWh, while the Maroon Creek plant has an annual output of approximately 2 million kWh, compared with a net increase in production of 5.5 million kWh for the proposed Castle Creek plant (based on performance commitments made during the 2007 election). Using 1.5 MW wind turbines (similar to those in use under the City's existing power supply contract in Nebraska), it would require approximately 1-1/2 of these turbines to match the power output from the proposed Castle Creek Plant because the wind turbines operates at capacity only 30% of the time and this facility will operate at or near its rated capacity more frequently. Solar photovoltaic panels operate at capacity a smaller percentage of the time and it therefore would require a larger system to create the same amount of power. For instance the first phase of the Aspen water plant photovoltaic panels (consisting of 120-4'x4' panels) generates only about 1% of the output of the proposed hydroelectric plant. It would take approximately 100 similar installations (12,000 panels) to produce the output of the proposed Castle Creek plant. Q. Are there ways to mitigate the noise of the hvdroplant if it is found to be out of compliance? A. Yes, Howard McGregor, our acoustical engineering consultant, has conducted initial studies. The city has committed to follow up sound studies, and if after construction, noise levels do exceed city permissible levels actions will be triggered to install additional baffling in the tailrace, as well as any internal air -ductwork to further reduce any migration of sound from the site, to ensure that the energy Center meet the City permissible sound levels. Q. Clarify if the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) has the legal authority to regulate in -stream flow water rights? A. Under Colorado law the CWCB is the only entity that can appropriate water to maintain in -stream flow conditions to maintain stream health. This authority dates to the early 1970's. Streams in the Aspen area (Roaring Fork, Castle and Maroon Creeks) were amongst the earliest to gain this level of protection. However, because the appropriation dates for these rights are junior to other existing water rights, it is legally permissible to divert the more senior rights even if it means that there is less water in the stream than CWCB has appropriated for in -stream flow purposes. For instance, senior transmountain water rights on the Roaring Fork River are routinely in priority and continue to divert water to the Arkansas basin when the 32 cfs in -stream flow appropriation is not being met. The result is that during an average year, the river actually sees less than the 32 cfs in -stream flow through for a significant period of time in the fall and through the winter. The conditions on Castle Creek are different than this circumstance because of the City's existing agreement with the CWCB to use its water rights to better protect stream flow conditions, essentially giving the in -stream flow an 1885 priority date ahead of the majority of other stream users. As part of this agreement, the City operates its water rights to ensure that the in -stream flow appropriation is satisfied. However, when new users propose to divert water from the stream ,this agreement acts to reduce the water available to the City for its municipal, irrigation and hydroelectric rights. Cindy Covell, the City's water attorney, will attend the August 9`" to explain this agreement and the legal authority of CWCB in more detail. Q. Define the terms maintaining Healthy Stream and Healthy stream sustainable flows. He mentioned the Roaring fork Conservancy introducing a new term and definition. A. The term we currently have been referencing is the 1974 CWCB In -stream Flows. The RF Conservancy defines Maintaining Sustainable Stream Flows as "An important function of riparian areas is helping to sustain stream flows. Together, riparian vegetation and soil act as a sponge, soaking up flooding flows (thereby reducing flooding) and later releasing that stored water into the stream (Figure 3.3.9). Water stored in soil is discharged back into the stream during late summer and early autumn, and is essential to maintaining sustainable stream flows. Increased infiltration occurs (percolation of rain, melting snow, or out of -bank stream flow into soil) due to the physical interception and slowing of runoff, which allows more time for porous soils to soak up and store water. Plant roots increase infiltration by improving soil porosity, which enables more precipitation runoff and out -of -bank flow to soak into and be stored by soil. Soil porosity is also increased by organic matter from riparian vegetation (leaves, decaying logs, and, especially, decaying roots), which improves infiltration and water storage."- Per Rick Lofaro, Roaring Fork Conservancy." This Definition appears to apply mostly to peak flows which will not be significantly affected by Energy Center operations. Also there is an issue with stating that we will adhere to Roaring Fork Conservancy's definition of "maintaining sustainable stream flows" as these are not measurable, quantifiable objectives. As the Conservancy does not have methodology to get to a "Sustainable Stream flow," at this time, we at the city want to have trackable results, and defer to CWCB's methodology, and quantifiable results. Currently the City goes above and beyond CWCB's definition of "protecting the environment to a reasonable degree," by using all 3 standard indicators versus the 2 standard indicators, which the state allows, to determine instream flows. Mark Uppendahl, of the Colorado Department of Wildlife, has confirmed that Aspen does go above and beyond state requirements by analyzing all 3 of these criteria. Q. Please explain the history of the Castle Creek hydroplant (beginning with dismantling the historic plant) and bring it up to date with the current application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Address why the power plant was taken off line, describe construction work that is currently taking place and give reasons, sequence and precedence for the conduit exemption. A. The historic Castle Creek hydroelectric plant operated from 1893-1958 and the turbine equipment was dismantled in the early 1960's. Up to that point in time the plant was capable of meeting all of Aspen's electric energy needs (as well as serving some surrounding area in Basalt). In the late 1950's, federally subsidized power from large dams became available to Aspen, eliminating the need to produce power locally. In the 1950's, Aspen had a critical need for a safe supply of clean drinking water in order to address public health issues associated with (then) existing groundwater supplies. Aspen acquired the hydroplant together with its related facilities (water rights, dams, headgates, flumes, reservoir and rights of way) in 1956 and set about converting these assets to serve its needs for a safe reliable supply of drinking water. The dams and headgates and flumes were modernized and reconstructed, a new water filtration plant was built, and the hydroelectric plant site was converted to serve as the City Shop for the Streets Department. The water treatment facilities were built with the capacity to serve Aspen as well as the surrounding area (water service to Snowmass Village was finally eliminated from discussion in the mid 1990's) as an aggressive plan to fully utilize Aspen's extensive water rights. Beginning in the 1990's, Aspen began to emphasize water conservation and reduced its use of water (on a per connection basis) by nearly 2/3, so that the current use of potable supply is the same in absolute terms as when the first water treatment plant opened in 1966. Aspen's water conservation efforts, together with growth controls, have made a portion of its facilities and water rights available for hydroelectric power generation, allowing a second use of the community owned assets. City staff began investigation of reconstruction of parts of the historic Castle Creek plant in 2006 following Council's direction as an action item in the Canary Initiative. A preliminary feasibility study was completed and FERC was contacted regarding the regulatory requirements of the Federal Power Act with respect to reconstructing the plant. Initial advice from the FERC staff was that because the proposed facility was within the scope and scale of the historic plant and because it would utilize many of the original facilities, the project may have been "pre -jurisdictional" —meaning that it wasn't under FERC's jurisdictions since it operational before the effective date of the Federal Power Act. FERC staff encouraged Aspen to apply for a "Declaration of Intention" which is the required federal action to recognize this "pre -jurisdictional" condition. In December, 2007, Aspen submitted a "Declaration of Intention" to FERC and the required notice was published in the federal register. FERC then ruled that because the turbine would be located in a new building adjoining the original plant site and not in the historic building, the project did not qualify as "pre -jurisdictional" and directed staff to apply for a preliminary permit for the facility and to consider applying for a "Conduit Exemption". A Conduit Exemption is the form of FERC approval that recognizes circumstances such as an additional use of a municipal water system to generate power. A preliminary permit is analogous to a zoning decision and in itself does not confer any rights to operate a hydroelectric facility under the Federal Power Act. A preliminary permit for the Castle Creek Hydroelectric project was issued by FERC following a July, 2008 submission to FERC. Applying for a "Conduit Exemption" provides a potentially shorter time to obtain FERC approval than pursuing a FERC License. However, it does not reduce the level of environmental protections offered. To obtain a conduit exemption, conditions recommended by resource agencies such as the Division of Wildlife are directly placed as conditions of approval. The scope of the environmental review conducted by the City, including the 2010 aquatic studies and stream health monitoring program may go beyond what would be required by FERC as part of obtaining a FERC license. The additional time required for obtaining a permit would work against the City in terms of delay and costs incurred by the City as a result of a more extensive process that is designed for large scale hydroelectric plants. Note that the City's existing experience on the FERC license for the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant is that the conditions imposed by FERC are less restrictive than those recommended by the State and that the City has voluntarily followed the more restrictive state standards related to by-pass flows. Following additional discussions with FERC staff regarding the form of licensing that would be most appropriate for the proposed Castle Creek project, staff and consultant staff began the required consultation process to initiate the Conduit Exemption Process. Before FERC can issue a Conduit Exemption, a public hearing is required along with a report describing "Preliminary Project Information (PPI) ". The PPI report was circulated to interested parties and agencies and a public hearing was held by the City in November, 2009 as required by FERC guidelines. Significant comments were received during 4 this process, including a request from the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) to conduct additional aquatic studies to determine appropriate levels of stream releases to protect the aquatic habitat in Castle and Maroon Creek. The additional studies requested by CDOQW were completed in the spring of 2010 and a series of additional public meetings were held to describe the results of the study and Dr. Miller's recommendation to increase the in -stream flow value to more fully protect the stream. During the PLID hearing before the P&Z in May of 2009, it was requested that the results of Dr. Miller's study be made available before consideration of the PLID application by the City Council. Work that is currently includes construction of a multi -purpose "penstock" and drainline from the Power Plant Road to Thomas Reservoir on the water plant site. This work serves the purpose of an emergency drain for Thomas Reservoir as well as the potential use as transmitting water from the reservoir to the proposed power house to generate electricity. The need for a drainline was identified as a critical safety need to protect recently developed properties in the vicinity of Thomas Reservoir during work being conducted by McLaughlin Water Engineers. The drainline will ensure that the reservoir is not overtopped by a higher flow rate entering the reservoir, beyond the capacity of existing drainage lines. Two 30 inch lines come into the reservoir, while only one 24 inch line is available to evacuate the inflow. Existing work also includes placement of electric conduit to provide a connection to the Aspen water plant and the ARC to the City electric grid, thereby reducing carbon emissions associated with current electric supplies for these facilities. In a letter from the City's attorney, FERC was advised in the summer of 2009 of the City's intent to move forward with construction of the multi -purpose drainline and penstock in 2010 because of the public safety issues that surfaced a s a result of design work on the hydroelectric project. In July of 2010 FERC staff conducted an investigation into construction activities by the City that were alleged to violate FERC's jurisdiction and concluded that no such violations had occurred. If the City is ultimately unsuccessful in obtaining a Conduit Exemption from FERC, it can amend its application to request a FERC license. The Conduit Exemption application to FERC is expected to be submitted prior the August 9`" City Council public hearing. There are no defined timelines for FERC to act on the Conduit Exemption application. However, staff believes it is reasonable that FERC's action will be known by the early 2011. If a conduit exemption is obtained prior to the 2011 construction season, staff would recommend proceeding with construction of the power house and tailrace facilities in order to commission the plant for operation in the third quarter of 2011. If FERC's response to the Conduit Exemption application is negative, it is likely that 2011 would be required to resubmit for a FERC License and that at least a year would be lost in the construction schedule. Q. Explain the technical benefit resultant from the increase on elevation between Thomas reservoir and the hvdrODlant. a. What is the effect on stream flows? A. There are several technical benefits resulting from the increase in elevation, as our preliminary studies transformed into final analysis, it was determined that water surface elevation (head) in Thomas reservoir was initially calculated from the bottom of the reservoir as opposed to Mean water surface elevation an additional 10-15 feet of head was determined to be available. Also upsizing the actual penstock/drain-line gave additional hydraulic capacity, after Thomas reservoir (upstream hydraulic Capacity is limited by existing Maroon Creek/ Castle Creek infrastructure). With this additional information we were able to fine tune our turbines and generator specifications to more efficiently produce power. The increased head's effect on stream flow is de-minimus due to the fact that our hydraulic capacity is limited by upstream structures, not the size of our penstock. Effectively this increase in elevation allows us to create more energy from the same flow amount as our initial analysis. Q. Clarify the Term healthy stream. A. The term Healthy stream is not a technical term. The State of Colorado Instream Flow program began in 1973 to "promote instream flows in river channels to preserve the natural environment." The City is currently working with CDOW, CWCB, and USFS to develop an agreement to monitor stream health and adapt our operations to maintain and improve aquatic health. Q. How lone can the stream sustain the recommended minimum stream flow? A. The Stream can be maintained for months at a time, so long as the hydrographs ascending and descending limbs are kept intact. As long as there are high flushing flows yearly the stream could be operated at base flows (maintaining 13.3 CFS) for the entirety of the low flow season (Oct -April). So long as there are higher volumes at critical (ascending limb, descending limb of the Hydrograph) there should be no degradation of the stream. Since the City's infrastructure, due to physical limitations, only allows the removal of 25 CFS, in Castle Creek, at any given point it would be impossible to level off the hydrograph as the stream peaks above several hundred CFS yearly during spring runoff. Dr. Miller will address these issues in more depth August 9th. Castle Creek Energy Center Supplemental for Application Date: August 9, 2010 Summary: Savings relative to Current M.E.A.N. contract for coal fired electric generation A) Savings relative to current M.E.A.N contract for Coal Fired Electric Generation. Data is on a Annual Basis Castle Creek Flows In -Stream Flow Level (cfs) 12 13.3 15 18 19 Net Energy Production in kWh/year (2) 6,358,958 6,250,527 6,042,005 5,725,051 5,616,620 Net Energy Purchase Savings in $/year (1) $ 50,895 $43,151 $28,258 $5,622 $ (2,123) Note 1: Data is calculated from beginning of bond payment in year 2008 through final bond payment in year 2035. Savings per year is the average savings of the net revenue for this 28 year period on an annual basis. Note 2 : Calculations for average hydrologic year B) Break -Even Point: Revenue exceeds expenditures Castle Creek Flows 12 13.3 15 18 19 Net Energy Production (2) 6,358,958 6,250,527 6,042,005 5,725,051 5,616,620 Year - Revenue exceeds Expenditure (3) Yr 2013 Yr 2013 Yr 2014 Yr 2015 Yr 2015 Note 3: Castle Creek Energy Center fully operational for year 2012 Note 4: Calculations up to 19 cfs consistent with representations during election. Data Table Inflation Factor 2012 Inflation Factor 2013 Inflation Factor 2014 Inflation Factor 2015 Inflation Factor for period 2016-2020 Inflation Factor for period 2021- 2025 Inflation Factor for period 2026 - 2030 Inflation Factor for period 2031- 2035 Inflation Factor for each S-yr period beginning yr 2036 Electric Dept Principle Amount $ 297,981.00 Interest Factor (max bond rate) 4.850% Amortization Period 27 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Losses Avoided Avoided Losses Wheeling Retail Power Other City Ling Cost Energy Capacity (dollars) Avoided(kwh) Charges Savings Facil 8.5% 8.5% 8.5% 0.0% 8.5% 8.5% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.D% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 5.09i Revisions: 1 Changed from 8.5% to 5.0% 2 Changed from 0%to 1% 3 Changed from 5%to 7.5%for a 1.5 %change per year, front end loaded in 1st year 4 Changed to match operating cost inflationary increase Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis Base assumptions used for analysis OF= Official Statement Sept 10, 2008, General Obligation Electric Utility Bonds, Series 2008 Tab Title Column Explanation Data Summary Principle B Debt service requirements, Table 1, OF, Page 12 Data Summary Interest C Interest payment on bonds, Table 1, OF, Page 12 Data Summary Electric Fund Proceeds P&I Interest and Principle repayment on electric fund contribution of $ 297,981 from same bond repayment period and interest E rate. Reference Attachment A from Ordinance 23, Series 2008 Data Summary (1a) Operating Cost Average rate for hydroelectric plant operating cost of $0.00578 - 7,200,000 kwh gross production = $ 41,616 initial annual operating cost. SOURCE - Energy Information Agency, Average Power Plant Operating Expenses from Major US Investor F Owned Utilities, report release 1/21/2010 Data Summary (Sb) Maintenance & Capital Cost Average rate for hydroelectric plant maintenance and capital cost of $ 0.00389 kwh' 7,200,000 kwh gross production = $ 28,008 maintenance and capital cost. SOURCE - Energy Information Agency, Average Power Plant Operating Expenses from G Major US Investor Owned Utilities, report release 1/21/2010 Data Summary (A)Total Costs The total of Bond debt service and interest payments, and principle and interest for repayment of electric fund contribution, H and plant operating and maintenance cost Data Summary (2) Savings Towards MEAN Contract Energy Refer to document " Aspen Power Cost Estimate CY 2010 Castle Creek" developed by Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, I May 10, 2010. Data Summary (3) Savings Towards MEAN Contract Capacity Refer to document "Aspen Power Cost Estimate CY 2010 Castle Creek" developed by Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska J (MEAN), May 10, 2010. Data Summary (4) Losses Avoided (Equiv in Dollars) Energy loss rate calculated at 2.5 %for transmission losses for an equivalent amount of MEAN power delivered to Aspen. 'Energy Year 2011 @ $ 238,636 plus Capacity @ $ 107,307 - 0.025 = $ 8649.'See data table tab for inflation factors. K Data Summary (5) Losses Avoided (kwh) L Above losses in kwh 6.2 million kwh . 2.5%= 155,000 kwh Data Summary (6) Avoided Wheeling Charges Estimated savings from Holy Cross contract of $ 11,300/year, and prorated saving of 1.1 MW (July Peak) and 0.55 MW (Dec Peak) vs. 13 MW Peak (0.0846'$18,650'12 months = $ 18,933/year) • 50% (coincident production at December peak) _ $ 9,467/year. Holy Cross Wheeling facilities charges prorated at 4%(0.55 MW/14 MW=4%) of existing contract with Holy Cross @ $ 23,961/month`0.04' 12 = $11,500/year. Total of $ 9,467 + $11,500 = $ 20,967. NOTE 1.1 MW/13 MW = 8.467 %, for Coincident 0.55/1.1= 50%. $18,650 is average monthly transmission service wheeling charge from PSCo for the year 2009. M Data Summary (7) Retail Power Savings (net) Water Plant 320,Oo0kwh @ $0.03/kwh net saving retail rate to wholesale rate = $ 9,600/Year. Data from franchise agreement between N Holy Cross Energy and City of Aspen dated September 8, 2003, Section 3.3, page 5. Data Summary (8) Other City Facilities 0 320,OOOkwh @ $0.03/kwh net saving retail rate to wholesale rate = $ 9,600/year Data Summary (B)Total Savings (Annual) P Sum of Title ffs 2,3,4,6,7,8 Data Summary Net Revenue (B-A) (Annual) Q (B) Total Savings minus (A) Total Costs Data Summary Cumulative Net Revenue R Cumulative sum of net revenue by year. e II I' I I I�1.I I I! 'I BOUNDRY: _ RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BRIDGE ABOVE 7— CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY STATE HIGHWAY 82: 60' R.ON ' ` I LINE OF BRIDGE ABOVE BOUY. T VREEN ` � RIGHTGHT OF OF WAY I /: r4-) PUD SITE PLAN ISSUED FOR: CTR'OFASPEN APPROVAL [].ILNi AiPWinL REVISION: PRROJECTNO: rill DRAWN BY: a0 CHECKED BY: ISSUE DATE: e \. C0PVRIGHT@RSA20I0 RENO • SMITH -ARCHITECTS- III cos W M NIAW r KEPT SLrte00t A9P[rv.COLOMOO Icll PA%IPW19isd99J TI SOI ..9 A" X 101 MBALT,O e111,nl PAxmnsnan xe.om ..LADDRCeP WhY:I�®Y6me CrtYSUBIA'ITALS: PUD7aT[PWN RNEETNO: A-1 7837'.9" -------------- T SFOP WORD FOR: CI'1'YORASPEN APPROVAL tven�ne9eu�At s REVLSION: 0 0 PROTECT NO: nn DRAWN RV: CRECEED RY: - WVE DATE: I COPYWCNT©RSA"10 RENO - SMITH •ARCxITECTS' CM W83L LL1Q16L9LLT SW ASP", LOI.OBADO Blfll (Y/p1935396L PAXI9iP)919�MJ TISOV311LIDLAVP. ry191 B.9S1LTL DO lll. 81631 Dig)9P411 PA%19iBI9Si614G w.awl LLURADOREss 'M ,—.M1 n CITY $UBM1x1TAl5: LDI MG PLAN sxeeT No: A-2 DN TOPOFSTEELCOLUMN TOP OF LEDGE �_"—.Y _—_____ TOPOF SIAS, 783W2 -lW-V b D ISSUED FOR CMOFASPEN APPROVAL O.IPAT MRO\'1L R REVISION: A A A PROJECT NO: mP DRAWN BY: BO CHECKED BY: ISSUE DATE: COPV1UCHT©ILSA 2010 RENO•SMITH -ARCHITECTS- III W.w MA1xR RT SNT60U3 Aran. m1ARAoo also m%sssvea PAX (91%9L459y TISOmm. AVL x RASALr.cOl4RApo e1631 l4/D1127� PARIn%9l]faw WE.., RMILADDRRSS CRY SUBM1 ALS: BL[VATgNe SHEET NO: A-3 TOP OF LEDCA 0-1051-r-------- _TOP OF PLATE nva _ = OP OF SLAD_0 783W-8 •1(XY ISSUEDFOR: CMOPASPM APPROVAL alettnPPml'u REVISION: A A A PRORSCP NO: m. DRAWN BY: 'P CNECEED EV: sl ISSUE DATE: COPVRIONTCRSA 3010 �.►F_ 1;1 •ARCRITICTS- E III wwe.rsLAln aruer eW3 AEP[N,.C111, OO D 1611 D]019SL596e PA%(%0192(199J N 101 .SALT.COLO. 91631 P.), /dUl wea srte e S1.uLwDDPess cTTv sueADTru.s: navAnona SREETNO: CATION A-4 ISSUED FOR: CIWOFASPEN APPROVAL u)evnnwTu x REVISION: A A PRORE NO: m) DRAWN RY: s^ CHECKED RY: m ISSUE DATE: COPYRIGHT DRSA FOIE RENO - SMITH -ARCHITECTS. III L%) W... MEET Elnnaz A6PLn COLOMDp 81611 Q1%9245%B PA%ryl%92 :99) 391 sOVLX EAVL n ml BAS1LT CtllOMDD B I621 Im) vxf.ew LALtyi%9Sli6W wessrte BMAILADDRER o1MLlrtonenhL�mp CHY SUBAHTTALS: 6TRRAAf eLCLIOn SHEEP NO: A-5 Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis @ 12 CFS Stream Flow Release Level Date 28-Jul-10 Revision 1 Data Summary Principle $ 5,500,000 Interest $ 4,019,797 Total P&I $ 9,519,797 Total Net Revenue (years 2008 through 2085) $ 35,662,460 Note: 2011 Baseline conditions. Plant construction and commissioning year 2011 with 2012 operational. Highlighted amounts not included in revenue or total cost benefit calculations. Shown for reference only. 28 year Average (life of bonds) Revenue in excess of MEAN Contract Net Revenue for period $ 1,425,061 Average/year $50,895 Savings Towards MEAN Contract Tedi rnncipie interest bona P&I Electric Fund (la) Operating (1b) Capital (A)Total Costs 2 Energy (3) Capacity (4) Lasses (5) Losses (6) Avoided (7) Retail Power (8) Other (B)Total Savings Net Revenue Cumulative Proceeds and Maintenance Cost Avoided Avoided Wheeling Savings (net) City Facilities (Annual) (B-A) Net Revenue P&I cost (Equiv in Dollars) (kwh) Charges Water Plant (Annual) 2008 $ - $ 46,957 $ 46,957 $ 2,544 $ - $ 49,501 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (49,501) $ (49,501) 2009 $ 125,000 $ 231,567 $ 356,567 $ 19,318 $ - $ 375,885 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (375,895) $ (425,386) 2010 $ 130,000 $ 227,818 $ 357,818 $ 19,386 $ - $ 377,204 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (377,204) $ (802,590) 2011 $ 135,000 $ 223,917 $ 358,917 $ 19,446 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 379,363 $ 238,636 $ 107,307 $ 8,649 155000 $ 20,967 $ 91600 $ 9,600 $ - $ (378,363) $ (1,180,953) 2012 $ 135,000 $ 219,868 $ 354,868 $ 19,226 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 443,718 $ 258,920 $ 116,428 $ 9,384 155000 $ 21,177 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 426,741 $ (16,977) $ (1,197,930) 2013 $ 140,000 $ 215,817 $ 355,817 $ 19,278 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 444,719 $ 271,866 $ 126,324 $ 10,182 155000 $ 21,388 $ 11,301 $ 11,301 $ 452,364 $ 7,645 $ (1,190,285) 2014 $ 145,000 $ 211,268 $ 356,268 $ 19,302 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,194 $ 285,459 $ 137,062 $ 11,047 155000 $ 21,602 $ 12,262 $ 12,262 $ 479,695 $ 34,501 $ (1,155,784) 2015 $ 150,000 $ 206,555 $ 356,555 $ 19,318 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,497 $ 299,732 $ 148,712 $ 11,986 155000 $ 21,818 $ 13,304 $ 13,304 $ 508,858 $ 63,361 $ (1,092,423) 2016 $ 155,000 $ 201,305 $ 356,305 $ 19,304 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,455 $ 314,719 $ 156,148 $ 12,586 155000 $ 23,455 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 534,846 $ 84,391 $ (1,008,032) 2017 $ 160,000 $ 195,880 $ 355,880 $ 19,281 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,007 $ 314,719 $ 156,148 $ 12,586 155000 $ 23,455 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 534,846 $ 84,839 $ (923,192) 2018 $ 165,000 $ 189,880 $ 354,880 $ 19,227 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 448,953 $ 314,719 $ 156,148 $ 12,586 155000 $ 23,455 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 534,846 $ 85,894 $ (837,299) 2019 $ 175,000 $ 183,692 $ 358,692 $ 19,433 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 452,971 $ 314,719 $ 156,148 $ 12,586 155000 $ 23,455 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 5 534,846 $ 81,875 $ (75SA24) 2020 $ 180,000 $ 176,955 $ 356,955 $ 19,339 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 451,140 $ 314,719 $ 156,148 $ 12,586 155000 $ 23,455 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 534,846 $ 83,706 $ (671,718) 2021 $ 185,000 $ 169,755 $ 354,755 $ 19,220 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,434 $ 330,455 $ 163,955 $ 13,215 155000 $ 25,214 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 562,175 $ 107,741 $ (563,977) 2022 $ 195,000 $ 161,985 $ 356,985 $ 19,341 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 456,785 $ 330,455 $ 163,955 $ 13,215 155000 $ 25,214 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 562,175 $ 105,390 $ (458,587) 2023 $ 205,000 $ 153,795 $ 358,795 $ 19,439 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 458,693 $ 330,455 $ 163,955 $ 13,215 155" $ 25,214 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 562,175 $ 103,482 $ (355,106) 2024 $ 210,000 $ 144,980 $ 354,980 $ 19,232 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,671 $ 330,455 $ 163,955 $ 13,215 155000 $ 25,214 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 562,175 $ 107,503 $ (247,602) 2025 $ 220,000 $ 135,950 $ 355,950 $ 19,285 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 455,694 $ 330,455 $ 163,955 $ 13,215 155000 $ 25,214 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 562,175 $ 106,481 $ (141,121) 2026 $ 230,000 $ 126,270 $ 356,270 $ 19,302 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,066 $ 346,978 $ 172,153 $ 13,876 155000 $ 27,105 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 590,914 $ 128,848 $ (12,273) 2027 $ 240,000 $ 116,150 $ 356,150 $ 19,296 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,939 $ 346,978 $ 172,153 $ 13,876 155000 $ 27,105 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 590,914 $ 128,975 $ 116,701 2028 $ 250,000 $ 105,350 $ 355,350 $ 19,252 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,096 $ 346,978 $ 172,153 $ 13,876 155000 $ 27,105 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 590,914 $ 129,818 $ 246,519 2029 $ 265,000 $ 94,100 $ 359,100 $ 19,455 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 465,049 $ 346,978 $ 172,153 $ 13,876 155000 $ 27,105 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 590,914 $ 125,865 $ 372,384 2030 $ 275,000 $ 81,513 $ 356,513 $ 19,315 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,322 $ 346,978 $ 172,153 $ 13,876 155000 $ 27,105 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 590,914 $ 128,592 $ 500,976 2031 $ 290,000 $ 68,450 $ 358,450 $ 19,420 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 470,851 $ 364,327 $ 180,761 $ 14,569 155000 $ 29,138 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 621,137 $ 150,286 $ 651,262 2032 $ 300,000 $ 54,675 $ 354,675 $ 19,216 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 466,871 $ 364,327 $ 180,761 $ 14,569 155000 $ 29,138 $ 16,171 $ 26,171 $ 621,137 $ 154,266 $ 905,528 2033 $ 315,000 $ 40,425 $ 355,425 $ 19,256 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,662 $ 364,327 $ 180,761 $ 14,569 155000 $ 29,138 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 621,137 $ 153,475 $ 959,003 2034 $ 330,000 $ 25,462 $ 355,462 $ 19,258 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,701 $ 364,327 $ 180,761 $ 14,569 155000 $ 29,138 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 621,137 $ 153,436 $ 1,112,439 2035 $ 195,000 $ 9,458 $ 204,458 $ 11,077 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 308,516 $ 364,327 $ 180,761 $ 14,569 155000 $ 29,138 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 621,137 $ 312,621 $ 1,425,061 2036 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 382,543 $ 189,799 $ 15,298 155000 $ 31,323 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 652,923 $ 552,968 $ 1,978,029 2037 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 382,543 $ 189,799 $ 15,298 155000 $ 31,323 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 652,923 $ 552,968 $ 2,530,997 2038 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 382,543 $ 189,799 $ 15,298 155000 $ 31,323 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 652,923 $ 552,968 $ 3,083,965 2039 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 382,543 $ 189,799 $ 15,298 155000 $ 31,323 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 652,923 $ 552,968 $ 3,636,934 2040 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 382,543 $ 189,799 $ 15,298 155000 $ 31,323 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 652,923 $ 552,968 $ 4,189,902 2041 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 401,670 $ 199,289 $ 16,063 155000 $ 33,672 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 686,352 $ 578,901 $ 4,768,803 2042 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 401,670 $ 199,289 $ 16,063 155000 $ 33,672 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 686,352 $ 578,901 $ 5,347,704 2043 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 401,670 $ 199,289 $ 16,063 155000 $ 33,672 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 686,352 $ 578,901 $ 5,926,605 2044 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 401,670 $ 199,289 $ 16,063 155000 $ 33,672 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 686,352 $ 578,901 $ 6,505,506 2045 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 401,670 $ 199,289 $ 16,063 1550DO $ 33,672 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 686,352 $ 578,901 $ 7,084,407 2046 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 422,753 $ 209,253 $ 16,866 155000 $ 36,198 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 721,511 $ 606,001 $ 7,690,408 2047 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 421,753 $ 209,253 $ 16,866 155000 $ 36,198 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 721,511 $ 606,001 $ 8,296,410 2048 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 421,753 $ 209,253 $ 16,866 155000 $ 36,198 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 721,511 $ 606,001 $ 8,902,411 2049 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 421,753 $ 209,253 $ 16,866 155000 $ 36,198 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 721,511 $ 606,001 $ 9,508,413 2050 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 421,753 $ 209,253 $ 16,866 1550DO $ 36,198 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 721,511 $ 606,001 $ 10,114,414 2051 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 442,941 $ 219,716 $ 17,709 155000 $ 38,913 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 758,492 $ 634,319 $ 10,748,733 2052 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,222 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 442,841 $ 219,716 $ 17,709 155000 $ 38,913 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 758,492 $ 634,319 $ 11,383,052 2053 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 442,841 $ 219,716 $ 17,709 155000 $ 38,913 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 758,492 $ 634,319 $ 12,017,370 2054 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,222 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 442,841 $ 219,716 $ 17,709 155000 $ 38,913 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 758,492 $ 634,319 $ 12,651,689 2055 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 442,841 $ 219,716 $ 17,709 155000 $ 38,913 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 758,492 $ 634,319 $ 13,286,008 2056 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,798 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 464,983 $ 230,702 $ 18,595 155000 $ 41,831 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 797,389 $ 663,903 $ 13,949,911 2057 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 464,983 $ 230,702 $ 18,595 155000 $ 41,831 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 797,389 $ 663,903 $ 14,613,814 2058 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 464,983 $ 230,702 $ 18,595 155000 $ 41,831 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 797,389 $ 663,903 $ 15,277,717 2059 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 464,983 $ 230,702 $ 18,595 155000 $ 41,831 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 797,389 $ 663,903 $ 15,941,621 2060 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 464,983 $ 230,702 $ 18,595 155000 $ 41,831 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 797,389 $ 663,903 $ 16,605,524 2061 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 488,232 $ 242,237 $ 19,524 155000 $ 44,968 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 838,304 $ 694,807 $ 17,300,331 2062 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 488,232 $ 242,237 $ 19,524 155000 $ 44,968 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 838,304 $ 694,807 $ 17,995,138 2063 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 488,232 $ 242,237 $ 19,524 155000 $ 44,968 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 838,304 $ 694,807 $ 18,689,945 2064 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 488,232 $ 242,237 $ 19,524 155000 $ 44,968 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 838,304 $ 694,807 $ 19,384,752 2065 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 488,232 $ 242,237 $ 19,524 155000 $ 44,968 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 838,304 $ 694,807 $ 20,079,559 2066 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 512,644 $ 254,349 $ 20,501 155000 $ 48,341 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 881,344 $ 727,084 $ 20,806,643 2067 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 512,644 $ 254,349 $ 20,501 155000 $ 48,341 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 881,344 $ 727,084 $ 21,533,727 2068 $ - $ - $ - S 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 512,644 $ 254,349 $ 20,501 155000 $ 48,341 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 881,344 $ 727,094 $ 22,260,811 2069 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 512,644 $ 254,349 $ 20,501 155000 $ 48,341 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 881,344 $ 727,094 $ 22,987,895 2070 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 512,644 $ 254,349 $ 20,501 155000 $ 48,341 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 881,344 $ 727,094 $ 23,714,979 2071 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 538,276 $ 267,066 $ 21,526 155000 $ 51,966 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 926,619 $ 760,790 $ 24,475,770 2072 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 538,276 $ 267,066 $ 21,526 155000 $ 51,966 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 926,619 $ 760,790 $ 25,236,560 2073 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 538,276 $ 267,066 $ 21,526 155000 $ 51,966 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 926,619 $ 760,790 $ 25,997,350 2074 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 538,276 $ 267,066 $ 21,526 155000 $ 51,966 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 926,619 $ 760,790 $ 26,758,141 2075 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 538,276 $ 267,066 $ 21,526 155000 $ 51,966 $ 23,993 $ 23,893 $ 926,619 $ 760,790 $ 27,518,931 2076 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 565,190 $ 280,419 $ 22,602 155000 $ 55,864 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 974,250 $ 795,983 $ 28,314,914 2077 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 565,190 $ 280,419 $ 22,602 155000 $ 55,864 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 974,250 $ 795,983 $ 29,110,898 2078 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 565,190 $ 290,419 $ 22,602 155000 $ 55,864 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 974,250 $ 795,983 $ 29,906,881 2079 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 565,190 $ 280,419 $ 22,602 155000 $ 55,864 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 974,250 $ 795,983 $ 30,702,864 2080 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 5 565,190 5 280,419 5 22,502 155000 5 55,864 5 2S,u8i > 25,uai > yi4,nu > rn>,yaa > 51,49a,a4/ 2081 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 593,450 $ 294,440 $ 23,732 155000 $ 60,054 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,024,359 $ 832,722 $ 32,331,570 2082 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 593,450 $ 294,440 $ 23,732 155000 $ 60,054 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,024,359 $ 832,722 $ 33,164,292 2083 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 291,636 $ 593,450 $ 294,440 $ 23,732 155000 $ 60,054 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,024,359 $ 832,722 $ 33,997,015 2084 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 593,450 $ 294,440 $ 23,732 155000 $ 60,054 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,024,359 $ 832,722 $ 34,829,737 2085 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 593,450 $ 294,440 $ 23,732 155000 $ 60,054 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,024,359 $ 832,722 $ 35,662,460 $ 5,500,000 $ 4,019,797 $ 9,519,797 $ 515,767 $ 5,393,093 $ 3,629,608 $ 19,058,265 $ 31,956,282 $ 15,829,959 $ 1,275,903 11470000 $ 2,826,191 $ 1,416,195 $ 1,416,195 1 $ 54,720,725 $ 35,662,460 $ 35,662,460 Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis @ 13.3 CFS Stream Flow Release Level Date 28-)ul-10 Revision 1 Data Summary Principle $ 5,500,000 Interest $ 4,019,797 Total P&I $ 9,519,797 Total Net Revenue (years 2008through 2085) $ 34,777,672 Note: 2011 Baseline conditions. Plant construction and commissioning year 2011 with 2012 operational. Highlighted amounts not included in revenue or total cost benefit calculations. Shown for reference only. 28 year Average (life of bonds) Revenue in excess of MEAN Contract Net Revenue for period $ 1,208,225 Average/year $43,151 Savings Towards MEAN Contract real rnnupie interest Bona P&i tiectnc Tuna (1a) operating (1b) Maintenance (A)Total Costs (2) Energy (3) Capacity (4) Losses 5 () Losses (6) Avoided (7) Retail Power (8) Other (B)Total Savings Net Revenue Cumulative Proceeds Cost and Capital Cost Avoided Avoided Wheeling Savings (net) City Facilities (Annual) (B-A) Net Revenue P&I (Equiv in Dollars) (kwh) Charges Water Plant (Annual) 2008 $ - $ 46,957 $ 46,957 $ 2,544 $ - $ 49,501 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (49,501) $ (49,501) 2009 5 125,000 $ 231,567 $ 356,567 $ 19,318 $ - $ 375,985 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (375,885) $ (425,386) 2010 $ 130,000 $ 2270818 $ 357,818 $ 19,386 $ - $ 377,204 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (3770204) $ (802,590) 2011 $ 135,000 $ 223,917 $ 358,917 $ 19,446 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 378,363 $ 234,567 $ 105,477 $ 8,502 152357 $ 20,609 $ 9,600 $ 91600 $ - $ (378,363) $ (1,180,953) 2012 $ 135,000 $ 219,868 $ 354,868 $ 19,226 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 443,718 $ 254,505 $ 114,443 $ 9,224 152357 $ 20,816 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 419,820 $ (23,899) $ (1,204,851) 2013 $ 140,000 $ 215,817 $ 355,817 $ 19,278 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 444,719 $ 267,230 $ 1240170 $ 10,008 152357 $ 21,024 $ 11,301 $ 11,301 $ 445,035 $ 317 $ (1,204,535) 2014 $ 145,000 $ 211,268 $ 356,268 $ 19,302 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,194 $ 290,592 $ 134,725 $ 10,859 152357 $ 21,234 $ 12,262 $ 12,262 $ 471,934 $ 26,739 $ (1,177,795) 2015 $ 150,000 $ 206,555 $ 356,555 $ 19,318 $ 41,616 $ 280008 $ 445,497 $ 294,621 $ 146,177 $ 11,782 152357 $ 21,446 $ 13,304 $ 13,304 $ 500,635 $ 55,138 $ (1,122,657) 2016 $ 155,000 $ 201,305 $ 356,305 $ 19,304 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,455 $ 309,352 $ 153,485 $ 12,371 152357 $ 23,055 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 526,202 $ 75,748 $ (1,046,909) 2017 $ 160,000 $ 195,880 $ 355,880 $ 19,281 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,007 $ 309,352 $ 153,485 $ 12,371 152357 $ 23,055 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 526,202 $ 76,196 $ (970,714) 2018 $ 165,000 $ 189,880 $ 354,880 $ 19,227 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 448,953 $ 309,352 $ 153,485 $ 12,371 152357 $ 23,055 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 526,202 $ 77,250 $ (893,464) 2019 $ 175,000 $ 183,692 $ 358,692 $ 19,433 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 452,971 $ 309,352 $ 153,485 $ 12,371 152357 $ 23,055 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 526,202 $ 73,231 $ (820,233) 2020 $ 180,000 $ 176,955 $ 356,955 $ 19,339 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 451,140 $ 309,352 $ 153,485 $ 12,371 152357 $ 23,055 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 526,202 $ 75,062 $ (745,170) 2021 $ 185,000 $ 169,755 $ 354,755 $ 19,220 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,434 $ 324,820 $ 161,160 $ 12,990 152357 $ 24,794 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 553,089 $ 98,655 $ (646,515) 2022 $ 195,000 $ 161,985 $ 356,985 $ 19,341 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 456,785 $ 324,820 $ 161,160 $ 12,990 152357 $ 24,784 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 553,089 $ 96,304 $ (550,212) 2023 $ 205,000 $ 153,795 $ 358,795 $ 19,439 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 458,693 $ 324,820 $ 161,160 $ 12,990 152357 $ 24,784 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 5530089 $ 94,396 $ (455,816) 2024 $ 210,000 $ 144,980 $ 354,980 $ 19,232 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,671 $ 324,820 $ 161,160 $ 12,990 152357 $ 24,794 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 553,089 $ 98,418 $ (357,398) 2025 $ 220,000 $ 135,950 $ 355,950 $ 19,285 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 455,694 $ 324,820 $ 161,160 $ 12,990 152357 $ 24,784 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 553,089 $ 97,395 $ (260,003) 2026 $ 230,000 $ 126,270 $ 356,270 $ 19,302 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,066 $ 3410061 $ 169,218 $ 13,639 152357 $ 26,643 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 581,363 $ 119,297 $ (140,706) 2027 $ 240,000 $ 116,150 $ 356,150 $ 19,296 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,939 $ 341,061 $ 169,218 $ 13,639 152357 $ 26,643 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 581,363 $ 119A24 $ (21,282) 2028 $ 250,000 $ 105,350 $ 355,350 $ 19,252 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,096 $ 3410061 $ 169,218 $ 13,639 152357 $ 26,643 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 581,363 $ 120,267 $ 98,985 2029 $ 265,000 $ 94,100 $ 359,100 $ 19,455 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 465,049 $ 341,061 $ 169,218 $ 13,639 152357 $ 26,643 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 581,363 $ 116,314 $ 215,299 2030 $ 275,000 $ 81,513 $ 356,513 $ 19,315 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,322 $ 341,061 $ 169,218 $ 23,639 152357 $ 26,643 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 581,363 $ 119,041 $ 334,340 2031 $ 290,000 $ 68,450 $ 358,450 $ 19,420 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 470,851 $ 358,114 $ 177,678 $ 14,321 152357 $ 28,641 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 611,097 $ 140,246 $ 474,586 2032 $ 300,000 $ 54,675 $ 3540675 $ 19,216 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 466,871 $ 358,114 $ 177,678 $ 14,321 152357 $ 28,641 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 611,097 $ 144,226 $ 618,812 2033 $ 315,000 $ 40,425 $ 355,425 $ 19,256 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,662 $ 358,114 $ 177,678 $ 14,321 152357 $ 28,641 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 611,097 $ 143,435 $ 762,247 2034 $ 330,000 $ 2SA62 $ 355,462 $ 19,258 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,701 $ 358,114 $ 177,678 $ 14,321 152357 $ 28,641 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 611,097 $ 143,396 $ 905,643 2035 $ 195,000 $ 9A58 $ 204,458 $ 11,077 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 308,516 $ 358,114 $ 177,678 $ 14,321 152357 $ 28,641 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 611,097 $ 302,581 $ 1,208,225 2036 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 376,020 $ 186,562 $ 15,037 152357 $ 30,789 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 642,368 $ 542,414 $ 1,750,638 2037 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 376,020 $ 186,562 $ 15,037 152357 $ 30,789 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 642,368 $ 542,414 $ 2,293,052 2038 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 376,020 $ 186,562 $ 15,037 152357 $ 30,789 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 642,368 $ 542,414 $ 2,835,466 2039 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 376,020 $ 186,562 $ 15,037 152357 $ 30,789 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 642,368 $ 542,414 $ 3,377,880 2040 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 376,020 $ 186,562 $ 15,037 152357 $ 30,789 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 642,368 $ 542,414 $ 3,920,294 2041 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 394,821 $ 195,891 $ 15,789 152357 $ 33,098 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 675,256 $ 567,805 $ 4,488,099 2042 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 394,821 $ 195,891 $ 15,789 152357 $ 33,098 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 675,256 $ 567,805 $ 5,055,905 2043 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 394,821 $ 195,891 $ 15,789 152357 $ 33,098 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 675,256 $ 567,805 $ 5,623,710 2044 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 3940821 $ 195,891 $ 15,789 152357 $ 33,098 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 675,256 $ 567,805 $ 6,191,516 2045 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 3940821 $ 195,891 $ 15,789 152357 $ 33,098 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 675,256 $ 567,805 $ 6,759,321 2046 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 414,562 $ 205,685 $ 16,578 152357 $ 35,580 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 709,847 1 594,337 $ 7,353,658 2047 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 414,562 $ 205,685 $ 16,578 152357 $ 35,580 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 709:847 $ 594,337 $ 7,947,995 2048 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 414,562 $ 205,685 $ 16,578 152357 $ 35,580 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 709,847 $ 594,337 $ 8,542,332 2049 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 414,562 $ 205,685 $ 16,578 152357 $ 35,580 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 709,847 $ 594,337 $ 9,136,669 2050 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 1150510 $ 414,562 $ 205,685 $ 16,578 152357 $ 35,580 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 709,847 $ 594,337 $ 9,731,005 2051 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 490952 $ 124,173 $ 435,290 $ 215,969 $ 17,407 152357 $ 38,249 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 746,228 $ 622,055 $ 10,353,061 2052 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 435,290 $ 215,969 $ 17,407 152357 $ 38,249 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 746,228 $ 622,055 $ 10,975,116 2053 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 435,290 $ 215,969 $ 17,407 152357 $ 38,249 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 746,228 $ 622,055 $ 11,597,172 2054 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 435,290 $ 215,969 $ 17,407 152357 $ 38,249 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 746,228 $ 622,055 $ 12,219,227 2055 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 435,290 $ 215,969 $ 17,407 152357 $ 38,249 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 746,228 $ 622,055 $ 12,841,283 2056 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 457,054 $ 226,768 $ 18,278 152357 $ 41,118 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 784,496 $ 651,010 $ 13,492,293 2057 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 457,054 $ 226,768 $ 18,278 152357 $ 41,118 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 784,496 $ 651,010 $ 14,143,303 2058 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 457,054 $ 226,768 $ 18,278 152357 $ 41,118 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 784,496 $ 651,010 $ 14,794,313 2059 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 457,054 $ 226,768 $ 18,278 152357 $ 41,118 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 784,496 $ 651,010 $ 15,445,324 2060 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 457,054 $ 226,768 $ 18,278 152357 $ 41,118 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 784,496 $ 651,010 $ 16,096,334 2061 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 479,907 $ 238,106 $ 19,191 152357 $ 44,202 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 824,749 $ 681,251 $ 16,777,585 2062 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 479,907 $ 238,106 $ 19,191 152357 $ 44,202 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 824,749 $ 681,251 $ 17,458,837 2063 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 479,907 $ 238,106 $ 19,191 152357 $ 44,202 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 824,749 $ 681,251 $ 18,140,088 2064 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 479,907 $ 238,106 $ 19,191 152357 $ 44,202 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 824,749 $ 681,251 $ 18,821,340 2065 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 479,907 $ 238,106 $ 19,191 152357 $ 44,202 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 824,749 $ 681,251 $ 19,502,591 2066 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 503,903 $ 250,011 $ 20,151 152357 $ 47,517 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 867,091 $ 712,832 $ 20,215,423 2067 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 503,903 $ 250,011 $ 20,151 152357 $ 47,517 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 867,091 $ 712,832 $ 20,928,255 2068 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 503,903 $ 250,011 $ 20,151 152357 $ 47,517 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 867,091 $ 712,832 $ 21,641,086 2069 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 503,903 $ 250,011 $ 20,151 152357 $ 47,517 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 867,091 $ 712,832 $ 22,353,918 2070 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 503,903 $ 250,011 $ 20,151 152357 $ 47,517 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 867,091 $ 712,832 $ 23,066,750 2071 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 529,098 $ 262,512 $ 21,159 152357 $ 51,080 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 911,634 $ 745,805 $ 23,812,554 2072 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 529,098 $ 262,512 $ 21,159 152357 $ 51,080 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 911,634 $ 745,805 $ 24,558,359 2073 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 529,098 $ 262,512 $ 21,159 152357 $ 51,080 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 911,634 $ 745,805 $ 25,304,164 2074 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 529,098 $ 262,512 $ 21,159 152357 $ 51,080 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 911,634 $ 745,805 $ 26,049,968 2075 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 529,098 $ 262,512 $ 21,159 152357 $ 51,080 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 911,634 $ 745,805 $ 26,795,773 2076 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 555,553 $ 275,638 $ 22,217 152357 $ 54,911 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 958,492 $ 780o226 $ 27,575,999 2077 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 555,553 $ 275,638 $ 22,217 152357 $ 54,911 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 958,492 $ 780,226 $ 28,356,225 2078 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 555,553 $ 275,638 $ 22,217 152357 $ 54,911 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 958,492 $ 780,226 $ 29,136,451 2079 9 - 9 - 9 - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 555,553 $ 275,638 $ 22,217 152357 $ 54,911 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 958,492 $ 780,226 $ 29,916,678 2080 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 555,553 $ 275,638 $ 22,217 152357 $ 54,911 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 958,492 $ 780,226 $ 30,696,904 2081 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 583,330 $ 289,420 $ 23,327 152357 $ 59,030 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,007,790 $ 816,154 $ 31,513,057 2082 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 583,330 $ 289,420 $ 23,327 152357 $ 59,030 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,007,790 $ 816,154 $ 32,329,211 2083 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 583,330 $ 289,420 $ 23,327 152357 $ 59,030 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,007,790 $ 816,154 $ 33,145,365 2084 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 583,330 $ 289,420 $ 23,327 152357 $ 59,030 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,007,790 $ 816,154 $ 33,961,518 2085 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 583,330 $ 289,420 $ 23,327 152357 $ 59,030 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 1,007,790 $ 816,154 $ 34,777,672 $ 5,500,000 $ 4,019,797 $ 9,519,797 $ 515,767 $ 5,393,093 $ 3,629,608 $ 19,058,265 $ 31,411,371 $ 15,560,030 $ 1,254,147 11274416 $ 2,778,000 $ 1,416,195 $ 1,416,195 $ 53,835,937 $ 34,777,672 $ 34,777,672 Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis @ 15 CFS Stream Flow Release Level Date 28-Jul-30 Revision 1 Data Summary Principle $ 5,500,000 Interest $ 4,019,797 Total P&I $ 9,519,797 Total Net Revenue (years 2008 through 2085) $ 33,076,157 Note: 2011 Baseline conditions. Plant construction and commissioning year 2011 with 2012 operational. Highlighted amounts not Included in revenue or total cost benefit calculations. Shown for reference only. 28 year Average (life of bonds) Revenue in excess of MEAN Contract Net Revenue for period $ 791,232 Average/year $28,258 Savings Towards MEAN Contract rear rrincipie Interest bona P&I Electric Fund (la) Operating (lb) Maintenance (A)Total Costs (2) Energy (3) Capacity (4) Losses (5) Losses (6) Avoided (7) Retail Power (8) Other (B)Total Savings Net Revenue Cumulative Proceeds Cost and Capital Cost Avoided Avoided Wheeling Savings (net) City Facilities (Annual) (8-A) Net Revenue P&I (Equiv in Dollars) (kwh) Charges Water Plant (Annual) 2008 $ - $ 46,957 $ 46,957 $ 2,544 $ - $ 49,501 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (49,501) $ (49,501) 2009 $ 125,000 $ 231,567 $ 356,567 $ 19,318 $ - $ 375,885 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (375,885) $ (425,386) 2010 $ 130,000 $ 227,818 $ 357,818 $ 19,386 $ - $ 377,204 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ $ $ (377,204) $ (802,590) 2011 $ 135,000 $ 223,917 $ 358,917 $ 19,446 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 378,363 $ 226,742 $ 101,958 $ 8,218 147274 $ 19,922 $ 9,600 $ 9,600 $ - $ (378,363) $ (1,180,953) 2012 $ 235,000 $ 219,868 $ 354,868 $ 19,226 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 443,718 $ 246,015 $ 110,625 $ 8,916 147274.24 $ 20,121 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 406,509 $ (37,209) $ (1,218,162) 2013 $ 140,0D0 $ 215,817 $ 355,817 $ 19,278 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 444,719 $ 258,315 $ 120,028 $ 9,674 147274.24 $ 20,322 $ 11,301 $ 11,301 $ 430,943 $ (13,776) $ (1,231,938) 2014 $ 145,000 $ 211,268 $ 356,268 $ 19,302 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,194 $ 271,231 $ 130,230 $ 10,497 147274.24 $ 20,526 $ 12,262 $ 12,262 $ 457,008 $ 11,814 $ (1,220,124) 2015 $ 150,000 $ 206,555 $ 356,555 $ 19,318 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,497 $ 284,793 $ 141,300 $ 11,389 147274.24 $ 20,731 $ 13,304 $ 13,304 $ 484,821 $ 39,324 $ (1,180,800) 2016 $ 155,000 $ 201,305 $ 356,305 $ 19,304 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,455 $ 299,032 $ 148,365 $ 11,958 147274.24 $ 22,286 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 509,580 $ 59,125 $ (1,121,675) 2017 $ 160,000 $ 195,880 $ 355,880 $ 19,281 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,007 $ 299,032 $ 148,365 $ 11,958 147274.24 $ 22,286 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ SD9,580 $ 59,573 $ (1,062,102) 2018 $ 165,000 $ 189,880 $ 354,990 $ 19,227 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 448,953 $ 299,032 $ 148,365 $ 11,958 147274.24 $ 22,286 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 509,580 $ 60,627 $ (1,001,474) 2019 $ 175,000 $ 183,692 $ 358,692 $ 19,433 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 452,971 $ 299,032 $ 148,365 $ 11,958 147274.24 $ 22,286 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 509,580 $ 56,609 $ (944,865) 2020 $ 180,000 $ 176,955 $ 356,955 $ 19,339 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 451,140 $ 299,032 $ 148,365 $ 11,958 147274.24 $ 22,286 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 509,580 $ 58,440 $ (886,425) 2021 $ 185,000 $ 169,755 $ 354,755 $ 19,220 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,434 $ 313,984 $ 155,783 $ 12,556 147274.24 $ 23,957 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 535,616 $ 81,182 $ (805,243) 2022 $ 195,000 $ 161,985 $ 356,985 $ 19,341 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 456,785 $ 313,984 $ 155,783 $ 12,556 147274.24 $ 23,957 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 535,616 $ 78,831 $ (726,412) 2023 $ 205,000 $ 153,795 $ 358,795 $ 19,439 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 458,693 $ 313,984 $ 155,783 $ 12,556 147274.24 $ 23,957 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 535,616 $ 76,923 $ (649,489) 2024 $ 210,0D0 $ 144,980 $ 354,980 $ 19,232 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,671 $ 313,984 $ 155,783 $ 12,556 147274.24 $ 23,957 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 535,616 $ 80,945 $ (568,544) 2025 $ 220,000 $ 135,950 $ 355,950 $ 19,285 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 455,694 $ 313,984 $ 155,783 $ 12,556 147274.24 $ 23,957 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 535,616 $ 79,922 $ (488,622) 2026 $ 230,000 $ 126,270 $ 356,270 $ 19,302 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,066 $ 329,683 $ 163,572 $ 13,184 147274.24 $ 25,754 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 562,996 $ 100,930 $ (387,692) 2027 $ 240,000 $ 116,150 $ 356,150 $ 19,296 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,939 $ 329,683 $ 163,572 $ 13,184 147274.24 $ 25,754 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 562,996 $ 101,057 $ (286,635) 2028 $ 250,000 $ 105,350 $ 355,350 $ 19,252 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,096 $ 329,683 $ 163,572 $ 13,184 147274.24 $ 25,754 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 562,996 $ 201,900 $ (184,735) 2029 $ 265,000 $ 94,100 $ 359,100 $ 19,455 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 465,049 $ 329,683 $ 163,572 $ 13,194 147274.24 $ 25,754 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 562,996 $ 97,947 $ (86,789) 2030 $ 275,000 $ 81,513 $ 356,513 $ 19,315 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,322 $ 329,683 $ 163,572 $ 13,194 147274.24 $ 25,754 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 562,996 $ 100,674 $ 13,885 2031 $ 290,000 $ 68,450 $ 358,450 $ 19,420 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 470,851 $ 346,167 $ 171,751 $ 13,943 147274.24 $ 27,685 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 591,790 $ 120,939 $ 134,824 2032 $ 300,000 $ 54,675 $ 354,675 $ 19,216 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 466,871 $ 346,167 $ 171,751 $ 13,943 147274.24 $ 27,685 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 591,790 $ 124,918 $ 259,742 2033 $ 315,000 $ 40,425 $ 355,425 $ 19,256 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,662 $ 346,167 $ 171,751 $ 13,943 147274.24 $ 27,685 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 591,790 $ 124,128 $ 383,870 2034 $ 330,000 $ 25,462 $ 355,462 $ 19,258 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,701 $ 346,167 $ 171,751 $ 13,843 147274.24 $ 27,685 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 591,790 $ 124,089 $ 507,958 2035 $ 195,000 $ 9,458 $ 204,458 $ 11,077 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 308,516 $ 346,167 $ 171,751 $ 13,843 147274.24 $ 27,685 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 591,790 $ 283,274 $ 791,232 2036 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 363,476 $ 180,339 $ 14,535 247274.24 $ 29,762 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 622,071 $ 522,117 $ 1,313,349 2037 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 363,476 $ 180,339 $ 14,535 147274.24 $ 29,762 $ 16,990 $ 16,980 $ 622,071 $ 522,117 $ 1,835,466 2038 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 363,476 $ 180,339 $ 14,535 147274.24 $ 29,762 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 622,071 $ 522,117 $ 2,357,583 2039 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 363,476 $ 180,339 $ 14,535 147274.24 $ 29,762 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 622,071 $ 522,117 $ 2,879,700 2040 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 363,476 $ 180,339 $ 14,535 147274.24 $ 29,762 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 622,071 $ 522,117 $ 3,401,817 2041 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,452 $ 381,649 $ 189,355 $ 15,262 147274.24 $ 31,994 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 653,919 $ 546,468 $ 3,948,285 2042 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 430225 $ 107,451 $ 381,649 $ 189,355 $ 15,262 147274.24 $ 31,994 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 653,919 $ 546,468 $ 4,494,753 2043 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 381,649 $ 189,355 $ 15,262 147274.24 $ 31,994 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 653,919 $ 546,468 $ 5,041,220 2044 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 381,649 $ 189,355 $ 15,262 147274.24 $ 31,994 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 653,919 $ 546,468 $ 5,587,688 2045 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 381,649 $ 189,355 $ 15,262 147274.24 $ 31,994 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 653,919 1 $ 546,468 $ 6,134,156 2046 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 400,732 $ 198,823 $ 16,025 147274.24 $ 34,393 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 687,415 $ 571,905 $ 6,706,061 2047 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,D43 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 400,732 $ 198,823 $ 16,025 147274.24 $ 34,393 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 687,415 $ 571,905 $ 7,277,966 2048 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 400,732 $ 198,823 $ 16,025 147274.24 $ 34,393 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 687,415 $ 571,905 $ 7,949,871 2049 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 400,732 $ 198,823 $ 16,025 147274.24 $ 34,393 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 687,415 $ 571,905 $ 8,421,776 2050 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 400,732 $ 198,823 $ 16,025 147274.24 $ 34,393 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 6875 $ 571,905 $ 8,993,681 2051 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 420,768 $ 208,764 $ 16,827 147274.24 $ 36,973 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 722,,41645 $ 598,472 $ 9,592,154 2052 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 420,768 $ 208,764 $ 16,827 147274.24 $ 36,973 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 722,645 $ 598,472 $ 10,190,626 2053 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 420,768 $ 208,764 $ 16,827 147274.24 $ 36,973 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 722,645 $ 598,472 $ 10,789,098 2054 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 420,768 $ 208,764 $ 16,827 147274.24 $ 36,973 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 722,645 $ 598,472 $ 11,387,570 2055 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 420,768 $ 208,764 $ 16,827 147274.24 $ 36,973 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 722,645 $ 598,472 $ 11,986,043 2056 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 441,807 $ 219,203 $ 17,668 147274.24 $ 39,746 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 759,702 $ 626,216 $ 12,612,259 2057 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 441,807 $ 219,203 $ 17,668 147274.24 $ 39,746 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 759,702 $ 626,216 $ 13,238,475 2058 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 441,807 $ 219,203 $ 17,668 147274.24 $ 39,746 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 759,702 $ 626,216 $ 13,864,690 2059 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 441,807 $ 219,203 $ 17,668 147274.24 $ 39,746 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 759,702 $ 626,216 $ 14,490,906 2060 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 441,807 $ 219,203 $ 17,668 147274.24 $ 39,746 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 759,702 $ 626,216 $ 15,117,122 2061 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 463,897 $ 230,163 $ 18,551 147274.24 $ 42,727 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 798,680 $ 655,183 $ 15,772,305 2062 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 463,897 $ 230,163 $ 18,551 147274.24 $ 42,727 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 798,680 $ 655,183 $ 16,427,489 2063 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 463,897 $ 230,163 $ 18,551 147274.24 $ 42,727 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 798,680 $ 655,183 $ 17,082,672 2064 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 463,897 $ 230,163 $ 18,551 147274.24 $ 42,727 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 798,680 $ 655,183 $ 17,737,855 2065 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 463,897 $ 230,163 $ 18,551 147274.24 $ 42,727 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 798,680 $ 655,183 $ 18,393,038 2066 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 487,092 $ 241,671 $ 19,479 147274.24 $ 45,931 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 839,683 $ 685,423 $ 19,078,461 2067 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 487,092 $ 241,671 $ 19,479 147274.24 $ 45,931 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 839,683 $ 695,423 $ 19,763,885 2068 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 487,092 $ 241,671 $ 19,479 147274.24 $ 45,931 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 839,683 $ 695,423 $ 20,449,308 2069 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 487,092 $ 241,671 $ 19,479 147274.24 $ 45,931 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 839,683 $ 685,423 $ 21,134,731 2070 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 487,092 $ 241,671 $ 19,479 147274.24 $ 45,931 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 839,683 $ 685,423 $ 21,820,154 2071 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 511,447 $ 253,754 $ 20,453 147274.24 $ 49,376 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 882,815 $ 716,986 $ 22,537,140 2072 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 511,447 $ 253,754 $ 20,453 147274.24 $ 49,376 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 882,815 $ 716,986 $ 23,254,126 2073 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 511,447 $ 253,754 $ 20,453 147274.24 $ 49,376 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 892,815 $ 716,986 $ 23,971,112 2074 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 511,447 $ 253,754 $ 20,453 147274.24 $ 49,376 $ 23,993 $ 23,893 $ 882,815 $ 716,986 $ 24,698,098 2075 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 511,447 $ 253,754 $ 20,453 147274.24 $ 49,376 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 882,815 $ 716,986 $ 25,405,084 2076 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 537,019 $ 266,442 $ 21,475 147274.24 $ 53,080 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 928,190 $ 749,924 $ 26,155,008 2077 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 537,019 $ 266,442 $ 21,475 147274.24 $ 53,080 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 928,190 $ 749,924 $ 26,904,932 2078 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 537,019 $ 266,442 $ 21,475 147274.24 $ 53,080 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 928,190 $ 749,924 $ 27,654,956 2079 $ - $ - $ - $ 106554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 537,019 $ 266,442 $ 21,475 147274.24 $ 53,080 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 928,190 $ 749,924 $ 28,404,780 2080 $ - $ - 5 - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 537,019 $ 266,442 $ 21,475 147274.24 $ 53,080 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 928,190 $ 749,924 $ 29,154,705 2081 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 563,870 $ 279,764 $ 22,549 147274.24 $ 57,060 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 975,927 $ 784,291 $ 29,938,995 2082 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 563,870 $ 279,764 $ 22,549 147274.24 $ 57,060 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 975,927 $ 784,291 $ 30,723,286 2083 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 563,870 $ 279,764 $ 22,549 147274.24 $ 57,060 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 975,927 $ 794,291 $ 31,507,576 2084 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 563,870 $ 279,764 $ 22,549 147274.24 $ 57,060 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 975,927 $ 784,291 $ 32,291,867 2085 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 563,870 $ 279,764 $ 22,549 147274.24 $ 57,060 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 975,927 $ 784,291 $ 33,076,157 $ 5,500,000 $ 4,019,797 $ 9,519,797 $ 515,767 $ 5,393,093 $ 3,629,608 $ 19,058,265 $ 30,363,466 $ 15,040,936 $ 1,212,307 10898293.76 $ 2,685,324 $ 1,416,195 $ 1,416,195 $ 52,134,423 1 $ 33,076,157 $ 33,076,157 Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis @ 18 CFS Stream Flow Release Level Date 28-Jul-10 Revision 1 Data Summary Principle $ 5,500,000 Interest $ 4,019,797 Total P&I $ 9,519,797 Total Net Revenue (years 2008 through 2085) $ 30,489,855 Note: 2011 Baseline conditions. Plant construction and commissioning year 2011 with 2012 operational. Highlighted amounts not included in revenue or total cost benefit calculations. Shown for reference only. 28 year Average (life of bonds) Revenue in excess of MEAN Contract Net Revenue for period $ 157,403 Average/year $5,622 Savings Towards MEAN Contract yen, rrinciple interest Bona Fw tiectric Fund (1a) Operating (Sb) Maintenance (A)Total Costs (2) Energy (3) Capacity (4) Losses (5) Losses (6) Avoided (7) Retail Power (8) Other (B)Total Savings Net Revenue Cumulative Proceeds Cost and Capital Cost Avoided Avoided Wheeling Savings (net) City Facilities (Annual) (B-A) Net Revenue P&I (Equiv in Dollars) (kwh) Charges Water Plant (Annual) 2008 $ - $ 46,957 $ 46,957 $ 2,544 $ - $ 49,501 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (49,501) $ (49,501) 2009 $ 125,000 $ 231,567 $ 356,567 $ 19,318 $ - $ 375,895 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (375,885) $ (425,386) 2010 $ 130,000 $ 227,818 $ 357,818 $ 19,386 $ - $ 377,204 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (377,204) $ (802,590) 2011 $ 135,000 $ 223,917 $ 358,917 $ 19,446 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 378,363 $ 214,847 $ 96,610 $ 7,787 139548 $ 18,877 $ 9,600 $ 9,600 $ - $ (378,363) $ (1,180,953) 2012 $ 135,000 $ 219,868 $ 354,868 $ 19,226 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 443,718 $ 233,109 $ 104,822 $ 8,449 139548.48 $ 19,066 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 386,277 $ (57,441) $ (1,238,394) 2013 $ 140,000 $ 215,817 $ 355,817 $ 19,278 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 444,719 $ 244,764 $ 113,732 $ 9,167 139548.48 $ 19,256 $ 11,301 $ 11,301 $ 409,522 $ (35,197) $ (1,273,591) 2014 $ 145,000 $ 211,268 $ 356,268 $ 19,302 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,194 $ 257,003 $ 123,399 $ 9,946 139548.48 $ 19,449 $ 12,262 $ 12,262 $ 434,320 $ (10,874) $ (1,284,464) 2015 $ 150,000 $ 206,555 $ 356,555 $ 19,318 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,497 $ 269,853 $ 1330888 $ 10,791 139548.48 $ 19,643 $ 13,304 $ 13,304 $ 460,784 $ 15,287 $ (1,269,177) 2016 $ 155,000 $ 201,305 $ 356,305 $ 19,304 $ 44,737 $ 30,209 $ 450,455 $ 283,345 $ 140,582 $ 11,331 139548.48 $ 21,117 $ 13,969 $ 130969 $ 494,314 $ 33,859 $ (1,235,318) 2017 $ 160,000 $ 195,880 $ 355,880 $ 19,281 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,007 $ 283,345 $ 140,582 $ 11,331 139548.48 $ 21,117 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 484,314 $ 34,307 $ (1,201,011) 2018 $ 165,000 $ 189,880 $ 354,880 $ 19,227 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 448,953 $ 283,345 $ 140,582 $ 11,331 139548.48 $ 21,117 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 484,314 $ 35,361 $ (1,165,650) 2019 $ 175,000 $ 183,692 $ 358,692 $ 19,433 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 452,971 $ 283,345 $ 140,582 $ 11,331 139548.48 $ 21,117 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 484,314 $ 31,343 $ (1,134o307) 2020 $ 180,000 $ 176,955 $ 356,955 $ 19,339 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 451,140 $ 283,345 $ 140,582 $ 11,331 139548.48 $ 21,117 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 484,314 $ 33,174 $ (1,101,133) 2021 $ 185,000 $ 169,755 $ 354,755 $ 19,220 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,434 $ 297,513 $ 147,611 $ 11,898 139548.48 $ 22,700 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 5D9,058 $ 54,623 $ (1,046,510) 2022 $ 195,000 $ 161,985 $ 356,985 $ 19,341 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 456,785 $ 297,513 $ 147,611 $ 11,898 139548.48 $ 22,700 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 509,058 $ 52,272 $ (994,237) 2023 $ 205,000 $ 153,795 $ 358,795 $ 19,439 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 458,693 $ 297,513 $ 147,611 $ 11,898 139548.48 $ 22,700 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 509,058 $ 50,364 $ (943,873) 2024 $ 210,000 $ 144,980 $ 3540980 $ 19,232 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,671 $ 297,513 $ 147,611 $ 11,898 139548.48 $ 22,700 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 509,058 $ 54,386 $ (889,487) 2025 $ 220,DD0 $ 135,950 $ 355,950 $ 19,285 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 455,694 $ 297,513 $ 147,611 $ 11,898 139548.48 $ 22,700 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 509,058 $ 53,364 $ (836,123) 2026 $ 230,000 $ 126,270 $ 356,270 $ 19,302 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,066 $ 312,388 $ 154,992 $ 12,492 139548.48 $ 24,403 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 535,078 $ 73,012 $ (763,111) 2027 $ 240,000 $ 116,150 $ 356,150 $ 19,296 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,939 $ 312,388 $ 154,992 $ 12,492 139548.48 $ 24,403 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 535,078 $ 73,139 $ (689,972) 2028 $ 250,000 $ 1050350 $ 355,350 $ 19,252 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,096 $ 312,388 $ 154,992 $ 12,492 139548.48 $ 24,403 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 535,078 $ 73,982 $ (615,990) 2029 $ 265,000 $ 94,100 $ 359,100 $ 19,455 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 465,049 $ 312,398 $ 154,992 $ 12,492 139548.48 $ 24,403 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 535,078 $ 70,029 $ (545,961) 2030 $ 275,000 $ 81,513 $ 356,513 $ 19,315 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,322 $ 312,388 $ 154,992 $ 12,492 139548.48 $ 24,403 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 535,078 $ 72,756 $ (473,205) 2031 $ 290,000 $ 68,450 $ 358,450 $ 19,420 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 470,851 $ 328,008 $ 162,741 $ 13,117 139548.48 $ 26,233 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 562,442 $ 91,591 $ (381,614) 2032 $ 300,000 $ 54,675 $ 354,675 $ 19,216 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 466,871 $ 328,008 $ 162,741 $ 13,117 139548.48 $ 26,233 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 562,442 $ 95,571 $ (286,044) 2033 $ 315,000 $ 40,425 $ 355,425 $ 19,256 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,662 $ 328,D08 $ 162,741 $ 13,117 139548.48 $ 26,233 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 562,442 $ 94,780 $ (191,264) 2034 $ 330,DDO $ 25,462 $ 35SA62 $ 19,258 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,701 $ 328,008 $ 162,741 $ 13,117 139548.48 $ 26,233 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 562,442 $ 94,741 $ (96,523) 2035 $ 195,000 $ 9,458 $ 204,458 $ 11,077 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 308,516 $ 328,008 $ 162,741 $ 13,117 139548.48 $ 26,233 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 562,442 $ 253,926 $ 157,403 2036 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 344,408 $ 170,878 $ 13,773 139548.48 $ 28,201 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 591,220 $ 491,266 $ 648,669 2037 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 344,408 $ 170,878 $ 13,773 139548.48 $ 28,201 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 591,220 $ 491,266 $ 1,139,934 2038 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 344,408 $ 170,878 $ 13,773 139548.48 $ 280201 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 591,220 $ 491,266 $ 1,631,200 2039 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 344,408 $ 170,878 $ 13,773 139548.48 $ 28,201 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 591,220 $ 491,266 $ 2,122,465 2040 $ - $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 344,408 $ 170,878 $ 13,773 139548.48 $ 28,201 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 591,220 $ 491,266 $ 2,613,731 2041 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 361,629 $ 179,422 $ 14,462 139548.48 $ 30,316 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 621,486 $ 514,035 $ 30127,766 2042 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 361,629 $ 179,422 $ 14,462 139548.48 $ 30,316 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 621,486 $ 514,035 $ 3,641,801 2043 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 361,629 $ 179,422 $ 14,462 139548.48 $ 30,316 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 621,486 $ 514,035 $ 4,155,836 2044 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 361,629 $ 179,422 $ 14,462 139548.48 $ 30,316 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 621,486 $ 514,035 $ 4,669,871 2045 $ - $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107AS1 $ 361,629 $ 179,422 $ 14,462 139548.48 $ 30,316 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 621,486 $ 514,035 $ 5,183,906 2046 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 379,710 $ 198,393 $ 15,185 139548.48 $ 32,589 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 653,318 $ 537,808 $ 5,721,715 2047 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 379,710 $ 198,393 $ 15,185 139548.48 $ 32,589 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 653,318 $ 537,808 $ 60259,523 2048 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 379,710 $ 198,393 $ 15,185 139548.48 $ 32,589 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 653,318 $ 537,808 $ 6,797,332 2049 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 379,710 $ 188,393 $ 15,185 139548.48 $ 32,589 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 653,318 $ 537,808 $ 7,335,140 2050 $ - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 379,710 $ 198,393 $ 15,185 139548.48 $ 32,589 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 653,318 $ 537,808 $ 7,872,948 2051 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 398,696 $ 197,813 $ 15,944 139548.48 $ 35,033 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 686,799 $ 562,626 $ 8,435,574 2052 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 398,696 $ 197,813 $ 15,944 139548.48 $ 35,033 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 686,799 $ 562,626 $ 8,998,200 2053 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 398,696 $ 197,813 $ 15,944 139548.48 $ 35,033 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 686,799 $ 562,626 $ 9,560,826 2054 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 398,696 $ 197,813 $ 15,944 139548.48 $ 35,033 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 686,799 $ 562,626 $ 10,123,452 2055 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 398,696 $ 197,813 $ 15,944 139548.48 $ 35,033 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 686,799 $ 562,626 $ 10,686,078 2056 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 418,630 $ 207,704 $ 16,741 139548.48 $ 37,661 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 722,014 $ 588,529 $ 11,274,606 2057 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 418,630 $ 207,704 $ 16,741 139548.48 $ 37,661 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 722,014 $ 588,529 $ 11,863,135 2058 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 418,630 $ 207,704 $ 16,741 139548.48 $ 37,661 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 722,014 $ 588,529 $ 12,451,663 2059 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 418,630 $ 207,704 $ 16,741 139548.48 $ 37,661 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 722,014 $ 588,529 $ 13,040,192 2060 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,798 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 418,630 $ 207,704 $ 16,741 139548.48 $ 37,661 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 722,014 $ 588,529 $ 13,628,721 2061 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 439,562 $ 218,089 $ 17,578 139548.48 $ 40,486 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 759,057 $ 615,559 $ 14,244,280 2062 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 439,562 $ 218,089 $ 17,578 139548.48 $ 40,486 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 759,057 $ 615,559 $ 14,859,840 2063 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 439,562 $ 218,089 $ 17,578 139548.48 $ 40,486 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 759,057 $ 615,559 $ 15,475,399 2064 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 439,562 $ 218,089 $ 17,578 139548.48 $ 40,486 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 759,057 $ 615,559 $ 16,090,959 2065 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 439,562 $ 218,089 $ 17,578 139548.48 $ 40,486 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 759,057 $ 615,559 $ 16,706,518 2066 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 461,540 $ 228,993 $ 18,457 139548.48 $ 43,522 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 798,022 $ 643,762 $ 17,350,280 2067 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 461,540 $ 228,993 $ 18,457 139548.48 $ 43,522 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 798,022 $ 643,762 5 17,994,042 2068 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 461,540 $ 228,993 $ 18,457 139548.48 $ 43,522 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 798,022 $ 643,762 $ 18,637,804 2069 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 461,540 $ 228,993 $ 18,457 139548.48 $ 43,522 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 798,022 $ 643,762 $ 19,281,566 2070 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 461,540 $ 228,993 $ 18,457 139548.48 $ 43,522 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 798,022 $ 643,762 $ 19,925,329 2071 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 484,617 $ 240,443 $ 19,380 139548.48 $ 46,786 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 839,011 $ 673,182 $ 20,598,510 2072 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 484,617 $ 240,443 $ 19,380 139548.48 $ 46,786 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 839,011 $ 673,182 $ 21,271,692 2073 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 484,617 $ 240,443 $ 19,380 139548.48 $ 46,786 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 839,011 $ 673,182 $ 21,944,874 2074 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 494,617 $ 240,443 $ 19,380 139548.48 $ 46,786 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 839,011 $ 673,182 $ 22,618,056 2075 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 484,617 $ 240,443 $ 19,380 139548.48 $ 46,786 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 839,011 $ 673,182 $ 23,291,238 2076 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 508,948 $ 252,465 $ 20,349 139548.48 $ 50,295 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 882,131 $ 703,865 $ 23,995,102 2077 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 508,948 $ 252,465 $ 20,349 139548.48 $ 50,295 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 882,131 $ 703,865 $ 24,698,967 2078 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 508,848 $ 252,465 $ 20,349 139548.48 $ 50,295 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 882,131 $ 703,865 $ 25,402,832 2074 5 - 5 - 5 - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 508,848 $ 252,465 $ 20,349 139548.48 $ 50,295 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 882,131 $ 703,865 $ 26,106,697 2080 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 508,848 $ 252,465 $ 20,349 139548.48 $ 50,295 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 982,131 $ 703,865 $ 26,810,562 2081 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 534,290 $ 265,098 $ 21,366 139548.48 $ 54,067 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 927,495 $ 735,859 $ 27,546,420 2082 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 534,290 $ 265,088 $ 21,366 139548.48 $ 54,067 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 927,495 $ 735,859 $ 28,282,279 2083 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 534,290 $ 265,088 $ 21,366 139548.48 $ 54,067 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 927,495 $ 735,859 $ 29,018,138 2094 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 534,290 $ 265,088 $ 21,366 139548.48 $ 54,067 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 927,495 $ 735,859 $ 29,753,997 2085 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 534,290 $ 265,088 $ 21,366 139548.48 $ 54,067 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 927,495 $ 735,859 $ 30,489,855 $ 5,500,000 $ 4,019,797 $ 9,519,797 $ 515,767 $ 5,393,093 $ 3,629,608 $ 19,058,265 $ 28,770,649 $ 14,251,914 $ 1,148,712 10326587.52 $ 2,544,456 $ 1,416,195 $ 1,416,195 1 $ 49,548,121 1 $ 30,489,855 $ 30,489,855 Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Economic Analysis @ 19 CFS Stream Flow Release Level Date 28-1ul-30 Revision 1 Data Summary Principle $ 5,500,000 Interest $ 4,019,797 Total P&I $ 9,519,797 Total Net Revenue (years 2008 through 2085) $ 29,605,068 Note: 2011 Baseline conditions. Plant construction and commissioning year 2011 with 2012 operational. Highlighted amounts not included in revenue or total cost benefit calculations. Shown for reference only. 28 year Average (life of bonds) Revenue in excess of MEAN Contract Net Revenue for period $ (59,433) Average/year $ (2,123) Savings Towards MEAN Contract --• • ^••�•r•�.__�• ��u ray Lmui IL rums iadi uperaung {to) maintenance (A)Total Costs (2) Energy p ty (3) Capacity (4) Losses (5) Losses (6) Avoided (7) Retail Power (8) Other (B)7otal5avings Net Revenue Cumulative Proceeds Cost and Capital Cost - Avoided Avoided Wheeling Savings (net) City Facilities (Annual) (B-A) Net Revenue 2008 $ P&I (Equiv in Dollars) (kwh) Charges Water Plant (Annual) - $ 46,957 $ 46,957 $ 2,544 $ - $ 49,501 $ - $ - $ _ 0 $ _ $ _ $ _ $ - $ $ 2009 $ 125,000 $ 231,567 $ 356,567 $ 19,318 $ - $ 375,885 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ $ $ (49,501) (49,501) (49,501) (49,501) 2010 $ 130,000 $ 227,818 $ 357,818 $ 19,386 $ - $ 377,204 $ - $ - $ - 0 - $ - - $ - $ ( $ ( 2011 $ 135,000 $ 223,917 $ 358,917 $ 19,446 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 378,363 $ 210,778 $ 94,780 $ 7,639 236905 _ $ 18,519 $ $ _ 9,600 $ $ - 9,600 $ $ - - $ $ (375,985) (378,363) $ (425,386) $ (1,180,953) 2012 $ 135,000 $ 219,868 $ 354,868 $ 19,226 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 443,718 $ 228,694 $ 102,836 $ 8,289 136905.4569 $ 18,705 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 379,356 $ (64,363) $ (1,245,315) 2013 $ 140,000 $ 215,817 $ 355,817 $ 19,278 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 444,719 $ 240,129 $ 111,577 $ 8,993 136905.4569 $ 18,892 $ 11,301 $ 11,301 $ 402,194 $ (42,525) $ (1,287,840) 2014 $ 145,000 $ 211,268 $ 356,268 $ 19,302 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,194 $ 252,135 $ 121,062 $ 9,758 136905.4569 $ 19,080 $ 12,262 $ 12,262 $ 426,559 $ (18,635) $ (1,306,476) 2015 $ 150,000 $ 206,555 $ 356,555 $ 19,318 $ 41,616 $ 28,008 $ 445,497 $ 264,742 $ 131,352 $ 10,587 136905.4569 $ 19,271 $ 13,304 $ 13,304 $ 452,561 $ 7,064 $ 11,299,412) 2016 $ 155,OD0 $ 201,305 $ 356,305 $ 19,304 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,455 $ 277,979 $ 137,919 $ 11,116 136905.4569 $ 20,727 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 475,670 $ 25,215 $ (1,274,196) 2017 $ 160,000 $ 195,880 $ 355,880 $ 19,281 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 450,007 $ 277,979 $ 137,919 $ 11,116 136905.4569 $ 20,717 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 475,670 $ 25,664 $ (1,248,533) 2018 $ 165,000 $ 189,980 $ 354,990 $ 19,227 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 448,953 $ 277,979 $ 137,919 $ 11,116 136905.4569 $ 20,717 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 475,670 $ 26,718 $ (1,221,815) 2019 $ 175,000 $ 183,692 $ 358,692 $ 19,433 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 452,971 $ 277,979 $ 137,919 $ 11,116 136905.4569 $ 20,717 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 475,670 $ 22,699 $ (1,199,116) 2020 $ 180,0()0 $ 176,955 $ 356,955 $ 19,339 $ 44,737 $ 30,109 $ 451,140 $ 277,979 $ 137,919 $ 11,116 136905.4569 $ 20,717 $ 13,969 $ 13,969 $ 475,670 $ 24,530 $ (1,174,595) 2021 $ 185,000 $ 169,755 $ 354,755 $ 19,220 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,434 $ 291,878 $ 144,815 $ 11,672 136905.4569 $ 22,270 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 499,972 $ 45,537 $ (1,129,048) 2022 $ 195,000 $ 161,985 $ 356,995 $ 19,341 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 456,785 $ 291,878 $ 144,815 $ 11,672 136905.4569 $ 22,270 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 499,972 $ 43,187 $ (1,085,861) 2023 $ 205,000 $ 153,795 $ 358,795 $ 19,439 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 458,693 $ 291,878 $ 144,815 $ 11,672 136905.4569 $ 22,270 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 499,972 $ 41,279 $ (1,044,583) 2024 $ 210,000 $ 144,980 $ 354,980 $ 19,232 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 454,671 $ 291,878 $ 144,815 $ 11,672 136905.4569 $ 22,270 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 499,972 $ 45,300 $ (999,283) 2025 $ 220,000 $ 135,950 $ 355,950 $ 19,285 $ 48,092 $ 32,367 $ 455,694 $ 291,878 $ 144,815 $ 11,672 136905.4569 $ 22,270 $ 14,668 $ 14,668 $ 499,972 $ 44,278 $ (955,005) 2026 $ 230,000 $ 126,270 $ 356,270 $ 19,302 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,066 $ 306,472 $ 152,056 $ 12,256 136905.4569 $ 23,941 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 525,527 $ 63,461 $ (891,544) 2027 $ 240,000 $ 116,150 $ 356,150 $ 19,296 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,939 $ 306,472 $ 152,056 $ 12,256 136905.4569 $ 23,941 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 525,527 $ 63,588 $ (827,956) 2028 $ 250,000 $ 105,350 $ 355,350 $ 19,252 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 461,096 $ 306,472 $ 152,056 $ 12,256 136905.4569 $ 23,941 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 525,527 $ 64,431 $ (763,525) 2029 $ 265,000 $ 94,100 $ 359,100 $ 19,455 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 465,049 $ 306,472 $ 152,056 $ 12,256 136905.4569 $ 23,941 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 525,527 $ 60,478 $ (703,047) 2030 $ 275,000 $ 81,513 $ 356,513 $ 19,315 $ 51,699 $ 34,794 $ 462,322 $ 306,472 $ 152,056 $ 12,256 136905.4569 $ 23,941 $ 15,401 $ 15,401 $ 525,527 $ 63,205 $ (639,842) 2031 $ 290,000 $ 68,450 $ 358,450 $ 19,420 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 470,851 $ 321,795 S 159,659 $ 12,869 136905.4569 $ 25,736 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 552,402 $ 81,551 $ (558,291) 2032 $ 300,000 $ 54,675 $ 354,675 $ 19,216 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 466,871 $ 321,795 $ 159,659 $ 12,869 136905.4569 $ 25,736 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 552,402 $ 85,531 $ (472,760) 2033 $ 315,000 $ 40,425 $ 355,425 $ 19,256 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,662 $ 321,795 $ 159,659 $ 12,869 136905.4569 $ 25,736 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 552,402 $ 84,740 $ (388,020) 2034 $ 330,000 $ 25,462 $ 355,462 $ 19,258 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 467,701 $ 321,795 $ 159,659 $ 12,869 136905.4569 $ 25,736 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 552,402 $ 84,701 $ (303,319) 2035 $ 195,000 $ 9,458 $ 204,458 $ 11,077 $ 55,577 $ 37,404 $ 308,516 $ 321,795 $ 159,659 $ 12,869 136905.4569 $ 25,736 $ 16,171 $ 16,171 $ 552,402 $ 243,886 $ (59,433) 2036 2037 $ - $ $ $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 337,895 $ 167,642 $ 13,512 136905.4569 $ 27,666 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 580,665 $ 480,711 $ 421,278 2038 - $ $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 337,885 $ 167,642 $ 13,512 136905.4569 $ 27,666 $ 26,980 $ 16,980 $ 580,665 $ 480,711 $ 901,989 2039 - $ $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 337,885 $ 167,642 $ 13,512 136905.4569 $ 27,666 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 580,665 $ 480,711 $ 1,382,701 2040 - $ $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 337,885 $ 167,642 $ 13,512 136905.4569 $ 27,666 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 580,665 $ 480,711 $ 1,863,412 2041 - $ $ - $ - $ 59,745 $ 40,209 $ 99,954 $ 337,885 $ 167,642 $ 13,512 136905.4569 $ 27,666 $ 16,980 $ 16,980 $ 580,665 $ 480,711 $ 2,344,123 2042 - $ $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 354,779 $ 176,024 $ 14,188 136905.4569 $ 29,741 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 610,390 $ 502,940 $ 2,847,062 2043 - $ $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 354,779 $ 176,024 $ 14,188 136905.4569 $ 29,741 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 610,390 $ 502,940 $ 3,350,002 2044 - $ $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 354,779 $ 176,024 $ 14,188 136905.4569 $ 29,741 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 610,390 $ 502,940 $ 3,852,942 2045 - $ $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 354,779 $ 176,024 $ 14,188 136905.4569 $ 29,741 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 610,390 $ 502,940 $ 4,355,881 2046 - $ $ - $ - $ 64,226 $ 43,225 $ 107,451 $ 354,779 $ 176,024 $ 14,188 136905.4569 $ 29,741 $ 17,829 $ 17,829 $ 610,390 $ 502,940 $ 4,858,821 2047 - $ $ $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 372,518 $ 184,825 $ 14,897 136905.4569 $ 31,972 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 641,653 $ 526,144 $ 5,384,965 2048 - $ $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 372,518 $ 184,825 $ 14,897 136905.4569 $ 31,972 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 641,653 $ 526,144 $ 5,911,108 2049 - $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 125,510 $ 372,518 $ 184,825 $ 14,897 136905.4569 $ 31,972 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 641,653 $ 526,144 $ 6,437,252 2050 - $ $ - $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 372,518 $ 184,825 $ 14,897 136905.4569 $ 31,972 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 641,653 $ 526,144 $ 6,963,396 - $ $ $ - $ 69,043 $ 46,467 $ 115,510 $ 372,518 $ 194,825 $ 14,897 136905.4569 $ 31,972 $ 18,720 $ 18,720 $ 641,653 $ 526,144 $ 7,489,540 2051 - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 391,144 $ 194,066 $ 15,642 136905.4569 $ 34,370 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 674,535 $ 550,363 $ 8,039,902 2052 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 391,144 $ 194,066 $ 15,642 136905.4569 $ 34,370 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 674,535 $ 550,363 $ 8,590,265 2053 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 391,144 $ 194,066 $ 15,642 136905.4569 $ 34,370 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 674,535 $ 550,363 $ 9,140,628 2054 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 391,144 $ 194,066 $ 15,642 136905.4569 $ 34,370 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 674,535 $ 550,363 $ 9,690,990 2055 $ - $ - $ - $ 74,221 $ 49,952 $ 124,173 $ 391,144 $ 194,066 $ 15,642 136905.4569 $ 34,370 $ 19,656 $ 19,656 $ 674,535 $ 550,363 $ 10,241,353 2056 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 410,702 $ 203,770 $ 16,424 136905.4569 $ 36,948 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 709,121 $ 575,636 $ 10,816,988 2057 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 410,702 $ 203,770 $ 16,424 136905.4569 $ 36,948 $ 20,639 5 20,639 $ 709,121 $ 575,636 $ 11,392,624 2058 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,788 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 410,702 $ 203,770 $ 16,424 136905.4569 $ 36,948 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 709,121 $ 575,636 $ 11,968,259 2059 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,798 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 410,702 $ 203,770 $ 16,424 136905.4569 $ 36,948 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 709,121 $ 575,636 $ 12,543,895 2060 $ - $ - $ - $ 79,798 $ 53,698 $ 133,486 $ 410,702 $ 203,770 $ 16,424 136905.4569 $ 36,948 $ 20,639 $ 20,639 $ 709,121 $ 575,636 $ 13,119,531 2061 $ - $ - $ - $ 95,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 431,237 $ 213,958 $ 17,245 136905.4569 $ 39,719 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 745,501 $ 602,004 $ 13,721,535 2062 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 431,237 $ 213,958 $ 17,245 136905.4569 $ 39,719 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 745,501 $ 602,004 $ 14,323,539 2063 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 431,237 $ 213,958 $ 17,245 136905.4569 $ 39,719 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 745,501 $ 602,004 $ 14,925,543 2G64 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 431,237 $ 213,958 $ 17,245 136905.4569 $ 39,719 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 745,501 $ 602,004 $ 15,527,547 2065 $ - $ - $ - $ 85,772 $ 57,725 $ 143,497 $ 431,237 $ 213,958 $ 17,245 136905.4569 $ 39,719 $ 21,671 $ 21,671 $ 745,501 $ 602,004 $ 16,129,550 2066 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 452,799 $ 224,656 $ 18,107 136905.4569 $ 42,698 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 783,769 $ 629,510 $ 16,759,060 2067 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 452,798 $ 224,656 $ 18,107 136905.4569 $ 42,698 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 783,769 $ 629,510 $ 17,388,570 2068 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 452,798 $ 224,656 $ 18,107 136905.4569 $ 42,698 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 783,769 $ 629,510 $ 18,018,079 2069 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 452,798 $ 224,656 $ 18,107 136905.4569 $ 42,698 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 783,769 $ 629,510 $ 18,647,589 2070 $ - $ - $ - $ 92,205 $ 62,055 $ 154,260 $ 452,798 $ 224,656 $ 18,107 136905.4569 $ 42,698 $ 22,755 $ 22,755 $ 783,769 $ 629,510 $ 19,277,099 2071 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 475,438 $ 235,889 $ 19,013 136905.4569 $ 45,900 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 824,025 $ 658,196 $ 19,935,295 2072 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 475,438 $ 235,889 $ 19,013 136905.4569 $ 45,900 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 824,025 $ 658,196 $ 20,593,491 2073 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 475,438 $ 235,889 $ 19,013 136905.4569 $ 45,900 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 824,025 $ 658,196 $ 21,251,687 2074 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 475,438 $ 235,889 $ 19,013 136905.4569 $ 45,900 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 824,025 $ 658,196 $ 21,909,893 2075 $ - $ - $ - $ 99,120 $ 66,709 $ 165,829 $ 475,438 $ 235,889 $ 19,013 136905.4569 $ 45,900 $ 23,893 $ 23,893 $ 824,025 $ 658,196 $ 22,569,079 2076 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 499,210 $ 247,683 $ 19,963 136905.4569 $ 49,342 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 866,374 $ 688,108 $ 23,256,187 2077 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 499,210 $ 247,683 $ 19,963 136905.4569 $ 49,342 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 866,374 $ 688,108 $ 23,944,295 2078 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 499,210 $ 247,683 $ 19,963 136905.4569 $ 49,342 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 866,374 $ 698,108 $ 24,632,402 2079 $ _ $ - $ - $ 106.554 5 71.712 S 178.266 S 499,210 $ 247,683 $ 19,963 136905.4569 $ 49,342 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 866,374 $ 688,108 $ 25,320,510 2080 $ - $ - $ - $ 106,554 $ 71,712 $ 178,266 $ 499,210 $ 247,683 $ 19,963 136905.4569 $ 49,342 $ 25,087 $ 25,087 $ 866,374 $ 688,108 $ 26,008,618 2081 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 524,171 $ 260,068 $ 20,962 136905.4569 $ 53,043 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 910,926 $ 519,290 $ 26,727,908 2082 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 524,171 $ 260,068 $ 20,962 136905.4569 $ 53,043 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 910,926 $ 719,290 $ 27,447,198 2083 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 524,171 $ 260,068 $ 20,962 136905.4569 $ 53,043 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 910,926 $ 719,290 $ 28,166,488 2084 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 524,171 $ 260,068 $ 20,962 136905.4569 $ 53,043 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 910,926 $ 719,290 $ 28,985,778 2085 $ - $ - $ - $ 114,546 $ 77,090 $ 191,636 $ 524,171 $ 260,068 $ 20,962 136905.4569 $ 53,043 $ 26,341 $ 26,341 $ 910,926 $ 719,290 $ 29,605,068 $ 5,500,000 $ 4,019,797 S 9,519,797 $ 515,767 $ 5,393,093 $ 3,629,608 $ 19,058,265 $ 28,225,738 $ 13,981,985 $ 1,126,955 10131003.81 $ 2,496,265 $ 1,416,195 $ 1,416,195 $ 48,663,333 1 $ 29,605,068 $ 29,605,068 Castle Creek Energy Center Supplemental for Application Stream Flow Monitoring Plan Date: August 9, 2010 1) Draft Memorandum of Understanding between City of Aspen and Colorado Division of Wildlife 2) Draft Castle Creek Stream Flow Monitoring Plan DRAFT 073010 2.3 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is entered into , 20_ between the City of Aspen, a Colorado home rule city ("Aspen"), and the State of Colorado, acting by and through the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife ("CDOW'). Recitals t. Aspen operates municipal utility enterprise that provides water service and electrical service to its customers within the city and extraterritorially by contract. 2. Aspen owns, controls, operates, and manages water rights, water supplies, and water treatment facilities and other water system infrastructure for the benefit of its customers. 3. Aspen owns, controls, operates and manages the electrical power system used to provide electric power to its customers, and currently purchases mucho of the energy required for this purpose from coal-fired sources. 4. To address the need to reduce carbon emissions, Aspen adopted its "Canary Initiative," which identified a new hydroelectric facility on Castle Creek as part of the City's strategy to reduce carbon emissions. The Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project was approved by the voters in 2007. 5. CDOW is a division of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources as provided in C.R.S. §24-1-124, and, among other things, is responsible for fisheries in the State of Colorado, and conducts investigations and provides input to the Colorado Water Conservation Board ("CWCB") to assist it in determining stream flow requirements for instream flows to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable decree, in accordance with C.R.S. § 37-92-102(3). 6. CDOW consulted with Aspen in connection with its analysis of stream flow and stream habitat impacts of the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project, and requested Aspen to conduct certain studies and data collection efforts in order to evaluate needed instream flows for Castle Creek, and to better describe the stream habitat. This consultation occurred in accordance with Part 4 of 18 CFR, governing approvals of hydroelectric projects by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 7. Aspen's independent consultant, Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc., has undertaken the studies requested by CDOW, and prepared a report of its findings, entitled "Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Environmental Report (June 11, 2010.)" DRAFT 073010 2.3 8. Aspen has agreed to develop and implement, under the direction of CDOW, a stream monitoring program ("Monitoring Program") in order to monitor possible impacts of the Castle Creek hydroelectric project operations on the Maroon Creek and Castle Creek fisheries and stream habitat, and, in addition, to monitor Maroon Creek streamflows in order to monitor possible impacts of the existing Maroon Creek hydroelectric operations on fisheries and stream habitat. 9. By this MOU, Aspen and CDOW wish to provide a framework for ongoing cooperation in the development and implementation of the Monitoring Program over a ten-year period after the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant becomes operational. 10. Aspen and CDOW are both empowered to enter into this MOU and are vested with all necessary powers to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement. 11. This Agreement has been approved pursuant to resolutions of the Aspen City Council and the Division of Wildlife of the State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows. 12, Background. Aspen currently operates the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant that diverts water for hydroelectric purposes at the Maroon Creek pipeline, located on Maroon Creek as shown on the attached map. Aspen is planning to construct and operate the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant that will operate in substantially the same manner as the original Castle Creek hydroelectric plant that operated from 1893 to 1958. The planned Castle Creek hydroelectric plant will divert water for hydroelectric production at the Castle Creek -Midland Flume intake, located as shown on the attached map, and will also take delivery of water from Maroon Creek, as was historically done in the original hydroelectric operation. In connection with its application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regarding the Castle Creek hydroelectric project, Aspen engaged Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. to conduct an environmental review of Castle Creek and Maroon Creek, including, as requested by CDOW, additional aquatic studies to determine appropriate levels of stream flow to protect the aquatic habitat in Castle Creek and Maroon Creek. The additional studies requested by CDOW were completed in the spring of 2010, and are reported in Miller Ecological Consultants' report entitled "Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Environmental Report (June 11, 2010) ("Miller Report.") With the execution of this MOU, Aspen and CDOW agree that, as between them, the consultation required under 18 CFR Part 4, for development of a small conduit hydroelectric facility to be located as the Castle Creek Hydroelectric DRAFT 073010 2.3 Project, FERC Project No. 13254, has been completed and the consultation requirements of 18 CFR Part 4 have been met. 13. Purpose and Need. The purpose of this MOU is to provide for Aspen's development and implementation, aided by CDOW's expertise and the input of the interested governmental entities, of the Monitoring Program for Castle Creek and Maroon Creek. CDOW does not currently have the capability to undertake a lengthy and specialized monitoring program itself, but will provide support and expertise to Aspen as described herein. The Monitoring Program will allow Aspen and CDOW to confirm the appropriate instream flows, and will allow Aspen to develop sufficient information regarding the fisheries and stream habitat in Maroon and Castle Creeks to determine impacts, if any, to the streams from operation of the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant operations. That information will allow the adaptive management of Aspen's hydroelectric plant operations to protect the fisheries and stream habitat. 14. Monitoring Program. The Monitoring Program as approved by the parties is attached as Exhibit 1. The Monitoring Program may be revised from time to time as Aspen and CDOW deem appropriate in order to better achieve the purposes of the Monitoring Program as described in Section 12 above. Aspen will seek input from the interested governmental entities prior to any substantial revision to the Monitoring Program. No revision of the Monitoring Program will reduce the number of monitoring stations on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek, nor the 10-year period of the Monitoring Program. Any revisions or additions (including maps) to the Monitoring Program will be set forth in writing, signed by CDOW and Aspen, dated, and attached hereto as a Revised Exhibit 1, without the need to amend this MOU. The Monitoring Program attached as Exhibit 1 has been reviewed and approved by the interested governmental entities. 15. Consultation with Interested Governmental Entities. The Monitoring Program shall provide for consultation among CDOW, the Aspen Utilities Department, the Aspen Engineering Department, and, to the extent it is willing and able to do so, the United States Forest Service ("USFS") (collectively, "interested governmental entities") with regard to implementation of the Monitoring Program, including but not limited to, data collection sites, data collection timing and method, data reporting, data analysis, and any recommendations resulting from such analysis, and implementation of such recommendations. USFS is not party to this MOU, and although its input as an "interested governmental entity" will be solicited, such input will not be a prerequisite to collection or analysis of data or any decision -making process described in this MOU or the Monitoring Program, or any later revisions or additions to the Monitoring Program. 16. Operation of Castle Creek and Maroon Creek Hydroelectric Plants. Aspen will operate its hydroelectric water rights and hydroelectric diversions on Castle Creek to divert water to the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant in a manner that will It] DRAFT 073010 2.3 allow maintenance of an instream flow in Castle Creek in the amount of 13.3 cubic feet per second (cfs) immediately downstream of the point of diversion for the Castle Creek municipal intake, and an instream of 17.2 cfs in Castle Creek immediately downstream of the point at which return flows from the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant return to Castle Creek. Aspen will continue to operate its Maroon Creek hydroelectric water rights and hydroelectric diversions on Maroon Creek to divert water to the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant in a manner that will allow maintenance of an instream flow of 14 cfs immediately downstream of the point of diversion for the Maroon Creek pipeline. When streamflows in Castle Creek at the point of hydroelectric diversion are insufficient to permit Aspen to maintain the foregoing minimum flows at the specified locations, Aspen reduce or curtail its hydroelectric diversions and hydroelectric plant operation at the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant as needed to allow the above -described instream flows to be met. In addition, Aspen shall continue to operate its hydroelectric water rights and hydroelectric diversions on Maroon Creek to divert water to the Maroon Creek hydroelectric plant in a manner that will allow maintenance of a minimum stream flow in Maroon Creek in the amount of 14 cfs immediately downstream of the point of diversion of the Maroon Creek pipeline. The parties acknowledge that while Aspen may operate its municipal and hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek in order to maintain the certain stream flows at specified locations, only the Colorado Water Conservation Board ("CWCB") is legally authorized to appropriate and hold instream flow water rights. 17. Adaptive Management. If at any time during the course of the Monitoring Program, CDOW determines, after review of data and consultation with the interested governmental entities, that stream flows immediately downstream of the point of diversion for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant should be increased in order to protect the fisheries and stream habitat, Aspen shall operate its hydroelectric water rights on Castle Creek to provide such increased stream flow at that location, so long as such operation is also consistent with Aspen's commitments and objectives for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. Furthermore, if at any time during the course of the Monitoring Program, CDOW determines, after review of data and consultation with the interested governmental entities, that the hydropower diversions at Castle Creek are degrading the fisheries or stream habitat of Maroon Creek or Castle Creek, Aspen agrees to work cooperatively with the CDOW to develop an operation or mitigation plan to restore the Maroon and/or Castle Creek fisheries to pre - operation levels, provided, however, that such operation or mitigation plan is consistent with Aspen's commitments and objectives for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. 0 DRAFT 073010 2.3 If a requested increase in stream flow in Castle Creek or Maroon Creek, or any other operation or mitigation plan requested by CDOW, is deemed by Aspen staff be inconsistent with Aspen's commitments and objectives for the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant, the Aspen City Council will be required resolve the inconsistency. 18. Availability of MOU: Recording. A full and complete copy of this MOU, together with all exhibits, revisions and additions, as well as data collection forms and reports as required by the Monitoring Program, will be maintained at the office of the Aspen Water Department, and will be available for review during the Water Department's normal business hours. Aspen will record a memorandum of this MOU with the Pitkin County Clerk & Recorder. The memorandum will state that a full and complete copy of this MOU, together with all exhibits, revisions and additions, as well as data collection forms and reports as required by the Monitoring Program, will be maintained at the office of the Aspen Water Department, and will be available for review during the Water Department's normal business hours. 19. Amendment. Except as provided in Section 14, this MOU may be amended only in a writing signed by the parties, and may not be assigned without the written consent of the parties. 20. Authorization of Signatures. The parties acknowledge and represent to each other that all procedures necessary to validly execute this MOU have been performed and that the persons signing for each party have been duly authorized to do so. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum of Agreement the date and year first above written. THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO A Municipal Corporation and Home Rule City Mayor Attest: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney, City of Aspen '.,v DRAFT 073010 2.3 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Wildlife Z Attest: APPROVED AS TO FORM: "DRAFT" Castle Creek Plan Developed by: Colorado Division of Wildlife " July 22, 2010 Purpose This monitoring plan was written to address stakeholder concerns related to the proposed increased water diversions associated with the City of Aspen's Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant located in Pitkin County, Colorado. Local stakeholders have expressed concern that the increased future fall and winter water diversions may degrade the existing fisheries and fish habitat in Maroon and Castle Creeks. The existing information on the fishery in Castle and Maroon Creeks is scant; replicate sampling locations do not exist and only a few surveys have been conducted in the lower sections of these creeks. The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) is recommending that the City of Aspen engage in a long term monitoring study of the effects of their future diversion operations on the fishery and fish habitat in Maroon and Castle Creeks. The intent of this monitoring plan is to identify appropriate study design and data collection efforts for the City of Aspen to pursue by monitoring possible impacts to the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek fisheries and stream habitat. Although the CDOW is responsible for fisheries statewide, a lengthy and 'specialized monitoring program will require resources and personnel beyond the scope of Regional capabilities. However, the CDOW will provide support and expertise to a monitoring program funded and executed by the City of Aspen and their consultants. The monitoring program should build sufficient information regarding the fish population and fish habitat in Castle and Maroon Creeks to determine impacts to the streams from powerplant operations. The CDOW and City of Aspen agree to participate in the selection of representative sampling sites and regular collection of data based upon an agreed schedule. Should degradation of the fishery or stream habitat be obsgrved, a cooperative effort will be used to address the modification of future diversioh operations. Monitoring Program Components Fishery In the fall of 2010, the sampling sites will be identified in consultation with the interested parties and agencies, and the CDOW will conduct fisheries surveys at each of the selected stations. Permanent monitoring station locations will be located in both Castle and Maroon Creeks. Sampling collection efforts should occur during the months of September through October. Annual sampling should be completed within two weeks of the original sample date to maintain data consistency. For example, if the stations were sampled the second week of October than future surveys should be conducted on a yearly basis as close to that week as possible. Stations should be at least 500 feet long and contain representative habitat conditions in the area. Fishery sampling will be conducted using standard electrofishing techniques by depletion sampling using a modified Seber - Le Cren population estimation technique. After data is collected and analyzed, raw field date and population estimates will be distributed tc interested parties. Proposed Sampling Locations On Castle Creek, the CDOW recommends continuing the sampling stations located below and above the diversion point on Castle Creek established by Miller Ecological in 2010. In addition, two additional stations on Castle Creek should also be established above and below the outlet of the hydroelectric plant. On Maroon Creek, the CDOW recommends at least three stations be established on Maroon Creek including the Miller Ecological Site, and two additional sites located above the diversion with a lower basin station near the confluence with the Roaring Fork River. The number and location of the sampling sites may be adjusted after the initial field visit by the interested parties. Stream Habitat Evaluation of habitat should be conducted in the same location as the fish sampling stations. To determine changes in aquatic habitat, the USFS has provided standard habitat monitoring protocol (Appendix A) that is used locally to monitor stream habitat and would be appropriate for this monitoring program. Habitat evaluation will include channel form, habitat units, depth, wetted width, vegetation, bank stability, riparian characterization, and presence of debris/wood/beaver. Hydrologic Monitoring Data will be collected by the City of Aspen on a continuous basis quantifying their water diversion flow and stream flows in Castle and Maroon Creeks. The information will identify the timing, frequency, and duration of low and high flow events that may impact (positively or negatively) the stream fish population or aquatic habitat. It has also been proposed that the City of Aspen will provide a visual gauge of stage height that will provide the public an easy way to monitor the local streams. This gauge measurement would then be correlated to a website providing information about flow. Proposed Monitoring Schedule The CDOW will conduct the initial fisheries surveys at each of the identified stations in the fall of 2010. After the initial 2010 surveys, monitoring will be the responsibility of the City of Aspen for the first ten years after beginning operations of the hydroelectric facility that includes increased water diversion from Castle and Maroon Creeks. The CDOW will consult with and provide assistance when available during the primary 10 year monitoring period. During the first four years of operations, the sample locations will be sampled yearly for fishery and habitat conditions. From five to ten years following hydroelectric operations, data will be collected every second year (i.e. year six, eight and ten). Data collection results will be made available within one year of data collection activities, and could include subsequent meeting of stakeholders to discuss interpretation and/or consequences of survey results. Ten years following operation changes and monitoring, the CDOW will collect data at their discretion as needed. Adaptive Management If at any time during the above monitoring plan it is determined by the CDOW, after discussions with the interested stakeholders, that the additional hydropower diversions are degrading the fisheries of Maroon and Castle Creeks, the City of Aspen agrees to work cooperatively with the CDOW to develop an operation or mitigation plan to restore the Maroon and Castle Creek fisheries to pre -operation levels. Appendix A: White River Nation Forest Stream Inventory Protocol White River National Forest Stream Monitoring Protocol July, 2002 Mark Lacyt, Greg Laurie 2, Robert Parrish3 Fisheries Biologist, White River National Forest, Carbondale, CO, 81623 2Hydrologist, White River National Forest, Silverthorne, CO, 80498 3Lead Hydrological Technician, White River National Forest, Mintum, CO, 81645 Form 1 Stream Name: Write the complete name of the stream you are sampling. Do not add the names of major Forks (e.g., do not write South Fork Red Sandstone; simply Red Sandstone). USGS HUC Code: This number (HUC stands for Hydrologic Unit Code) can be obtained from any of the larger project maps and is listed for each watershed. Map Gradient: Obtain this number from either MapTech software or by hand measuring on a 7.5 minute topographic map. Map gradient is taken only once per reach and should be done before you leave the office for the field. Reference Stream: Is this stream on our list of pre -determined reference streams (see 2002 Vail Valley Project Stream Monitoring List; listed in parentheses)? Gross Geology: Is this stream in granitic, sedimentary, or a combination of these two geologic types (granitic/sedimentary)? This information can be found on the 2002 Vail Valley Project Stream Monitoring List. Sub -geology: Forest: List the National Forest under whom the stream is administered. District: List the National Forest District under whom the stream is administered. Base Quad: List the 7.5 minute USGS topographic map quadrangle(s) that cover the stream. UTM Coordinates, Lower -boundary: Mark a waypoint at the beginning of the reach using your GPS unit. Write down the UTM position saved in the GPS' memory and NOT from the satellite screen. Use the following nomenclature system for naming waypoints: 1) Assign one of the following two -digit codes for the watershed you are working in: Stream Name Code Gore Creek GO Bighorn Creek BG Pitkin Creek PC S raddle Creek SC Middle Creek MD Red Sandstone Creek RS Buffehr Creek BU Ptarmigan Creek PT Mill Creek ML Northeast Bowl NB Game Creek GA Cross Creek CC Martin Creek MA Grouse Creek GR Stone Creek ST Beaver Creek BE Indian Creek IN McCoy Creek MC Nottin ham Creek NO Buck Creek BK Metcalf Creek MF Timber Creek TB Booth Creek BO 2) Write the two -digit reach number (e.g, number 1 should be written as O1). 3) If you are at the top of the reach, then your reach number should be followed by a "T" (for top). Do not add any additional letters for the bottom location of the reach. 4) Save this waypoint in the GPS unit by selecting the "OK" button, once on the keypad and once at the bottom of the waypoint screen. UTM Coordinates, Upper -boundary: Same procedure as lower -boundary only at the top of a reach. Name this waypoint in the GPS as you would the lower -boundary, but be sure to add a "T" to the end of the ID number. Surveyors: List your names. If you switch partners at some point during the reach, note these changes and the switch date. Date Sampled/Time: List ALL of the days that you spend on a particular reach and the time you started sampling each day. Reach Gradient: Reach gradient should be measured with a hand level and a stadia rod. First choose a representative segment of stream near the beginning of the reach (you may have to walk upstream a bit first to get an idea of habitat unit types if you measure gradient first). Shoot gradient over a minimum of 20 meters in length. Take at least 3 measurements along the reach to obtain an average. Ideally, shoot gradient once at least every 20 habitat units. Channel Form: Based on your reach gradient measurements list the associated channel form. Form Gradient General Description Aa+ >10% Very steep, very confined, debris transport streams. A 4-8% Steep, confined, cascading, step -pool streams. High energy/debris transport associated with depositional soils. Very stable if bedrock or boulder dominated channel. B 24% Moderately confined, moderate gradient, riffle dominated channel, with infrequently spaced pools. Very stable in most substrate types. C <2% Low gradient, meandering, point -bar, riffle -pool, alluvial channels with often broad, well defined floodplains. Channel is wide and shallow in cross section. Commonly these are valley -bottom streams (at any elevation) in our area. E <2% Low gradient, meandering, riffle -pool and glide - pool streams that are usually very stable and highly sinuous. Commonly the channel is narrow and deep in cross section and is typically observed in trench - meadows in our area. Form 2 Unit Number: Label each separate habitat unit you come to. If you come to an unsampleable unit (such as a waterfall, cliff, or other unit greater than 30% gradient), still give this unit a unique number, note what type of feature it is, and move on to the next sampleable unit. Valley Type: Use the following picture to help you classify the valley type present. Use the following abbreviations on your data sheet: Abbreviation Valley Type Descrintion C Confined "V-shaped" valley floor no floodplain MU U present; channel does not have room to meander; little or no deposition possible Mod. Confined Floodplain is small (relative to channel width); floodplain present on one side but still confined on the other; channel has or can meander a little bit; occasional deposition possible Unconfined valley floor is broad; obvious floodplain present on both sides of channel; channel has and does meander across valley floor; frequent depositional zone CONFINED: Valley Mdlb is nanY . Channel is narrow and daep; rharelN Dad Cansiels Of caaWium or bedrock; CM.anneI is a Wurce and lranspan channel. MODERATELY CONF1s1ED: Valley v lh is mmoderately llarfaw d'wnmi It aderaleq, narraw end deep. channel bed may raraist of collwnum. bedrock. and shallar allWium; channel Is a Iranspw mann►I. UNCONPIN@D: Valley vadih is broad; Good Plain Is Wolf-devaaped. carved cut 0rd&cP JSII rWm; channel is easponse Channel Channel type: Use the following figure to help you determine the channel type. An unbraided channel with no tributaries or side channels entering it in this habitat unit is an "00." The habitat unit where a tributary or side channel enters the main channel is always IV." The habitat units up the first side channel you come to are "02.11 All habitat units up the second side channel you come to are "03." A braid off the side channel is given the next available side channel number (e.g., "04" for unit 16 in the picture below). Continue numbering each side channel you come to. Habitat units in a tributary are "l L" Do not use channel type "12;f1 ignore side channels in valley tributaries. When no more side channels are again present, resume "00" for the main channel habitat units. a. Maanai Type --hannal irdi irq coca halgr or ciannal b,; s,ra and Iocatmn Grdr's ihr. acyua'1-e of alnpla• rl'ul'ipla, and si;le cYarnN: (* We Man,pIS 17"annela 'all 14-n in arw rhan•,r l Cl Pr.Tary ClVnnn .rl Multiple c1rannal rvW h or In tra Wil. M III a -.4b.na'F anLera Lit Cia-n'ul: 02 Sh1wr,dnry Charno: for rnulhRo d'arnCl rca_hl 09 rar!,nry Chanral yd'Pinipin charlral rrachl CunL-1Ve patrtl,n Ivr 04. Ob. 0v level channaly 10 ,salatnd pup;• Alrooae. ui Backa'atar Pavls 11 Pnt u,ry c l,annel rl vv lcy roar laGu'III q •r lric tnb..j.'y has a nA't!. Write Ir.n rha''Ole cah..ili 12 1ieyG'IdarY Cnai, Itll Cr'JEIIPJ 1.1u, V'bi.lary LN' :IJH:[t J:LI f�:'� SL•eL4. 'Yrl a RUIN Fr ,x r tr n. .10 ea n' fa Ct .a O1 a 't n, U1 'a '[ Xr x m y p an q Habitat Unit Type: Use the following tables for classifying each habitat unit type you come to. Write the specific abbreviations on your data sheet. In order to be considered a separate habitat unit, an area must have distinct physical attributes and be AT LEAST as long as it is wide (wetted width). For example, a scour pool in the middle of an otherwise continuous cascade must be longer than it is wide. If the pool constitutes 75% of the wetted channel width and 25% flows shallowly over some cobbles, use the dimensions of the pool itself (and NOT total wetted width) to determine if it is as long as wide. If this area does not constitute a specific habitat unit, then lump it into the adjacent habitat unit. All units must also constitute at least 50% of wetted width to be considered separately. General Habitat Unit Types High Gradient Low Gradient special Case Units Cascades Step -Pool Complex Riffles Pools Glides Culverts Dry Unit Backwaters Abbreviation Unit Type CA Cascades STP Step -pool complex RI Riffles SP Mid -channel scour pool LP 11" Lateral scour pool Attributes • >9% gradient • less than 3 qualifying pools (see: pool criteria below) to be considered a step -pool • any gradient • 3 or more qualifying pools (see: pool criteria below) • included pools do NOT have to be at least as long as wide, but must meet all other criteria and be FUNCTIONING as a pool in the complex • <9% gradient • generally shallow, turbulent, complex water and habitat • may or may not have boulders present • meets all pool criteria (see: pool criteria below) • occurs in or near the middle of the channel (related to its wetted width) • thalweg runs through the pool • meets all pool criteria (see: pool criteria below) • occurs along the bank, usually on a meander • thalweg runs through the pool Plunge pool • meets all pool criteria (see: pool criteria below) • scour pool formed by water falling steeply (usually freefalling) over rock or wood; turbulence present in the plunge GR CC MIS IM Dam pool • meets all pool criteria (see: pool criteria below) • scour pool formed upstream of rocks, wood, or other blocking debris Glides/Runs • <2% gradient • smooth, non -turbulent water • may be either shallow or deep water Culvert crossing • culvert passes all or part of stream's flow • adjacent culverts should be itemized separately (i.e, do not lump two together) • if culverts are dry, still label them as "CC" and not "DU" • also complete Form 7 for this unit type Dry unit • no water present at time of survey • can occur in main or side channels • if culverts are dry, still label them as "CC" and not "DU" Backwater • meets basic habitat unit criteria and is large enough to be inventoried separately • includes large alcoves, eddys, and isolated pools adjacent to the main channel Pool Criteria • bounded by a distinct head crest (upstream break in slope) and tail crest (downstream break in slope) • thalweg runs through the pool • pools are concave in profile • pools occupy greater than half of the wetted channel width • maximum pool depth is at least 1.5 times the pool tail depth • pool length is greater than its width • step -pools need not be as long as wide, but should meet all other pool criteria and be functioning as pools •* adapted from Kershner, J., Henderson, R., and Archer, E. (2002). Effectiveness monitoring for streams and riparian areas within the tipper Columbia River basin: Sampling protocol for integrator reaches; USDA Forest Service, Fish and Aquatic Ecology Unit; Logan, UT. Unit Igth — unit length, measured in meters. Unit wdth — unit width, bankful Slone% - individual slope of individual unit, we need to discuss further. Ie. clino shot. Shade L degrees and Shade R degrees — Take degrees for left and right at each unit. This formula is built into the analysis package and what it does is converts the degrees by subtracting the total from 180 degrees and converting it to percentages. Depth Pools: Max depth is just that Tail crest depth is taken at the top of the tail out, (holding point of the pool) Residual depth - Max pool depth - tail crest depth = residual depth Avg depth - max depth + the tail crest divide by 2. Then find this depth and take a cross section of 3 depths and divided by 4 to get the avg depth. Non -Pool Habitats: Take 3 depths where the width was taken and divide by 4 to come up with the average depth. Bldr Cot #'s - Boulder Count, count the numbers of boulders in each unit type, min boulder is 0.5 cubic meter. Will be useful particularly in RP riffle with pockets to have an idea of fish habitat, refugia. Bnk Ly-th, Undcut, Bnk Stbl. R/L, bank length, undercut, prefer lengths as opposed to percentages, however we do it just needs to be accurate, bank stability - seems like if we have the total bank length then we either need the meters of stable and subtract the length minus stable to give us unstable, short on paper and columns more than anything is why I have it this way. Vee type/size class: vegetation type and size N - No vegetation, bare soil, rocks B - Sagebrush, rabbit brush, etc (desert type brush) G - grasses,forbs, herbs P- perrenial grasses, sedges rushes S - shrubs, willow, currants, etc D - deciduous, more than 70% dominated by aspen, alder etc M - mixed 50150 conifer/hardwoods C - Coniferous dominated (canopy dominated by 70% conifer) Size class - centimeters - dbh, diameter breast height 0- no veg 1 - <1 2-1-3 3 - 3-15 4 - 15-50 5 - >50 So under veg type it will be ie: (there are a multitude of combinations) 0/N 1/S 0/G 4/D 4/M 5/C Land Use - Determined from ovserving the area on the terraces and hillslopes beyond the riparian area. Use slash between codes for areas that have several uses or note by stream side rt bk, It bk. AG — agriculture SK — ski area LG — lite grazing HG — Heavy grazing T — Timber, evidense of past activities, not an old growth area, probably will be mostly what ya see BK — bug kill timber PT — partial cut unit, ie shelterwood cut, understory thinning OG — Old growth MI- mining WE — wetland UR — urban RR rural residential Temp 112o, C — water temperature Riparian Inventory Form 4 Unit # - go figure Surface: FP — floodplain LT — low terrace HT — high terrace HS — hillslope SC secondary channel TC —tributary channel IP — isolated pool WL — wetland or bog RB — road bed RG — railroad grade RR- riprap Hillslope % - percent slope of the dominant surface in the zone Size classes - as per sheet 4 Wood/Beaver Form 5 Pretty much as per ODFW wood sheet with a couple of exceptions: DBH classes Wood Configuration Beaver Info Wood (debris) Configuration (personally, I dislike the word "debris" as it is thought of as trashy). All wood will be enumerated and measured within reason and safety. All wood will be tallied that is in the channel, over the channel, along the sides, basically wood within bankful or on a low terrace that the stream interacts with on an annual or biannual basis. Rch# - reach number Unit # - unit number Unit tune — pool, etc, same as Form 2 Config — configuration of wood (5 class types) Wood Config — A measure of the complexity of woody structure within a channel unit; particularity as it influences fish habitat. A rating of quality, ranging from 1 to 5 using the following definitions. It is not statistically relevant or intended for that level of analysis. Config (wood configuration classes) 1. Wood absent or in very low abundance. No habitat complexity or cover created. 2.Wood present, but contributes little to habitat complexity. Mostly small, single pieces, creating little cover or complex flow patterns. Ineffective at moderate to high discharge. 3.Wood present as combinations of single pieces and small accumulations. Providing cover and some complex habitat at low to moderate discharge, less effective at high discharge. 4.Wood present with medium and large pieces comprising accumulations and debris jams that incorporate smaller root wads and branches. Good hiding cover for fish or other aquatic species. Wood provides cover and complex habitat that persists over most stream discharge levels. 5.Wood present as single large pieces, accumulations, and jams that trap large amounts of additional material and create a variety of cover and refuge habitats. Wood provides excellent persistent and complex habitat. Complex flow patterns will exist at all discharge levels. Debris Type/ Location are out together in the same column ie. — N/S, A/M Debris Type N — natural RN — root wd attached to natural bole (whole tree) A — artificial. Part of human -made structure. Ie. log weir etc. Locat - Wood location S — side of channel M — mid channel I — island. At upstream end of mid channel island F — Full channel. Completely across channel within the bankful channel. Pieces may be above the wetted channel at the time of the survey. When part of a jam, include all pieces regardless if they are touching the water, piled, or submerged. O — Over channel. Suspended over the active channel with the ends above the active channel. Include wood with suspended bole, but with branches in the water. DBH Clas — DBH — wood size groups 0.05-0.15 m 0.15-0.30 m 0.30-0.50 m 0.50- 0.70 m 0.70-1.00 m >1.00 m Length Class (m) — wood length groups Beaver Dams Rch # - reach number Unit # unit number Lgth (m) — length of beaver dam Height (m) — approximate height of beaver dam from existing bottom of channel Wood/Beaver Notes — any comments on wood stuff or beaver stuff. Ie. Wood species, note if hardwood, aspen, cottonwood, etc; Beaver dam creates: 0.1 acre of wetland habitat within the channel; 0.1 acre of wetland habitat created off channel; multiple complex beaver dams providing for complex habitat for 1.0 acres. Photos are good and additional notes can be written up in your yellow (rite in the rain) notebooks. When estimating large amounts of wood, (measure some of them if you need to calibrate your eye) and visually group it into length and diameter classes then count and tally onto the data sheet. Do not try and evaluate one piece at a time. Beaver dams, wood, or jams can be dangerous to walk or work around so be safe at all times and do not exceed your comfort level. Castle Creek Energy Center Supplemental for Application Energy and Carbon Saving Overview Perspective from CORE (Community Office for Resource Efficiency) Provided by Nathan Ratledge, Director CORE Date: August 9, 2010 • Castle Creek will produce roughly 5,500,000 kWh of clean energy per year. o Let me provide some perspective on how significant that is. Through CORE's rebate program we've seen that the average residential installation for PV is about 4.5 kW. A system of this size would produce roughly 8,000 kWh per year. In comparison, Castle Creek would represent over 675 residential solar systems. • If the City were to erect a comparable PV array, at least 5 acres of public land (and likely much more) would be needed. • Let me take this comparison one step further. • The average household annual electricity consumption on Aspen electric is 700 kWh per month, or 8,400 kWh per year. Castle Creek would provide enough clean energy to power over 650 homes, per year. • This fact cannot be over emphasized, particularly given the life span of the system. • Castle Creek could produce for up to 75 years. o This is far longer than a solar installation or a wind turbine. Solar PV installations, for example, may last for 25 — 30 years under optimal conditions, with decreasing efficiencies. o At 5.5m kWh per year, a 75 year life cycle equals 412,500,000 kWh! o Per the facts above, the City of Aspen will be providing clean, affordable, locally produced energy to roughly 650 homes for 75 years. That's sustainability. Regarding carbon savings, Castle Creek will save 5,200 tons (10,400,000 pounds) per year of COZ. o Over 75 years that equals 390,000 tons. o According to the EPA, this is equal to taking just over 900 cars off the road for an ENTIRE year, every year, for 75 years. (This factor will only go up in the future as cars become more efficient.) o In 2004, the City of Aspen electric system was emitting roughly 40,000 tons of CO2. Castle Creek will take that amount down by roughly 13%. I'm not sure you could reasonably try and beat a 13% reduction through one project. • Carbon savings can be a bit tough to visualize though. After all, what does a ton of CO2 look like? o I found this comparison through the Environmental Defense Fund, one of the largest non-profit, environmental groups in the U5. • "Picture a football field, and then imagine a round balloon with one end lined up on the goal line and the other on the 10 yard line —that is, a balloon with a diameter of 10 yards. If that balloon were filled with COz, it would weigh about 1 ton; it would be a 1-ton CO2 balloon." We'll be saving 5,200 balloons per year! • Don't forget the lifecycle of CO2 in our atmosphere. It's often cited that CO2 will last a century or more. Unfortunately, portions really last quite longer. The IPPC reports that about 20% of our CO2 emissions will remain for over a thousand years. o Another way to visualize this is by instead considering what Castle Creek's savings would look like in terms of coal. The EIA (Energy Information Agency) states that a ton of coal equals about 5,858 kWh of energy, Castle Creek will avoid burning 938 tons of coal per year. As a common rail car carries 100 tons of coal, we'll essentially be eliminating 9.5 boxcars of coal per year, or over 700 rail cars during the 75 year life of the project. • Finally, I'd quickly like to view this project through the REMP lens. o (The Castle Creek project has received two $200,000 grants equaling $400,000.) o Total cost of the project, after repayment, is roughly $10,000,000, representing a 4% contribution from REMP. • Per REMP investment, we're leveraging at $.001 per kWh Per REMP investment, we're leveraging at just over $1 per ton of CO2. As far as I can tell, Aspen is providing the cleanest energy in the country. If not, we're in the top 1%. 75+% renewable is amazing. After Castle Creek, we'll be at nearly 85% renewable -- reliable clean energy and a comparative cost. This is a model project, which can and should be replicated. What an accomplishment! Thomas S. Starodoj II P. 0. Box 2298 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970-925-6920 August 2, 2010 / �� s Dear Councilman The Energy Center plant the City of Aspen is planning to build on Castle Creek (CC) involves reducing the stream flows between the intake and discharge points on both CC and Maroon Creek (MC). The minimum stream flow numbers presently being recited for CC are 12 and 13.3cubic feet per second (cfs). On 11/3/09 I attended a public meeting on CC at the city's maintenance facility with Phil Overeynder, Director of Public Works and John Hines, the then project manager for the Energy Center. They stated that the present stream flow on CC was 55 cfs, a normal low cfs for this time of year. This is not very much water. A quick look at the stream and then invisioning what 12 and 13.3 cfs (a 79% and 76% reduction in cfs) would look like was shocking. There would be but a trickle of water left! You do not need to be a scientist to understand this. Have you had the opportunity to envision what 12 and13.3 cfs looks like? It is important that you do. You cannot artificially reduce the stream flow on CC to 13.3 cfs, regardless of duration, without negatively impacting the stream and its reparian zone. The issue of duration or the timeframe that CC would experience at 13.3 cfs, is the crucial issue. Bill Miller never directly answered this question when asked if 13.3 cfs was OK. The recent CC stream study done by biologist Bill Miller over a 3 month period is a poor substitute for a full environmental study (fes) that would encompass a 12 month period and would have been much more informative. This is what should have been part of the due-dilligence process before this issue was ever put on the ballot for voter approval. Presently Pitkin County is proposing a twelve month study of the Roaring Fork River as part of their Healthy Rivers and Stream Program. This would have been the proper way to approach this issue. Why are we contemplating a serious negative impact on our local environment in order to achieve a very small reduction in our carbon footprint that in turn benefits only 8% of the City of Aspen electricity users? TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: July 20, 2010 RE: Ordinance #19, Series of 2010 — Proposed Charter Amendment Defining Publication Resolution #57, 2010 on your action items would refer to the voters this proposed ordinance to amend the City Charter changing the definition of publication. The Charter currently requires ordinances be published in full if an ordinance is adopted on first reading and by title after final passage. Staff feels publication of ordinances in full is not the best use of resources. Costs for publication of ordinances in the newspaper are between $15,000 and $20,000/year. Proposed ordinances are currently available online with Council agenda. If adopted, this Charter amendment would allow when ordinances are required to be published in full or by title, it may be done by posting to the city's website. As the official publication site, ordinances would be available to interested persons 24/7 and in the Sunday Aspen Times Weekly, they are available when one goes and gets that paper. Staff would put a link upfront on the city's website for navigating to public notices. Staff could also have people sign up to received public notices by e-mail. Voters in 4 cities approved publishing bills and official documents on the city's website in the April 2010 elections. These are New Castle, Granby, Grand Lake and Kremmling. In the April 2010 elections, voters in 9 out of 10 towns approved publishing ordinance by title only. Alternatives: Council can chose not to refer this Charter amendment to the voters and continue publishing ordinances in full adopted after first reading. Motion: I move to adopt Ordinance #19, Series of 2010, on second reading. If Council adopts Ordinance #19, Series of 2010, on second reading, they should also adopt Resolution 957, Series of 2010, which places the question on the November 2010 ballot. ORDINANCE NO. (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING SECTION 4.10 OF THE CITY OF ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUBSECTION (h) TO PERMIT THE PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCES BY POSTING ON THE CITY OF ASPEN'S INTERNET WEBSITE. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Home Rule Charter requirement that ordinances be published in newspapers has proven to be a great expense to the City of Aspen without appreciably providing a good method for informing the public of proposed legislation before the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the publication of ordinances on the City's intemet website instead of once -per -week publication in a newspaper would offer members of the public a more convenient and effective method to read proposed and adopted ordinances of the city of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the Home Rule Charter authorizes the City Council to propose amendments to the City Charter in accordance with the State Constitution; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Home Rule Charter as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO: Section 1. That Section 4.10 of the Aspen Home Rule Charter shall be and hereby is amended by the addition of a new subsection (h) to read as follows: (h) Whenever an ordinance is required to be published in full or by title pursuant to this Article W of the Aspen Home Rule Charter, it may be made by posting the same on the City's internet website, www.aspenpitkin.com, or successor website. Said publication shall be made available for viewing by the public for a minimum of 30 days. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective on January 1, 2011, provided that the electors of the City approve the same at the special municipal election on November 2, 2010. Section 3. That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5. That this ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the _ day of 2010, 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 12010. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor 2 FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of 2010. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor JPW-7/16/2010-G:\john\word\ords\charter-amd-2010-notice.doc Dear Mayor and Council Members: I planned to attend the April 9 Council meeting but an unexpected family emergency may require me to fly to Chicago. I read the public notice in the newspaper that you intended to abolish public notices in the newspaper. I agree that public notices should be put on the internet for those that do not read newspapers, and I assume you are already using the internet for these notices. There is still a great advantage, however, for information to be transmitted to the citizens through the newspapers. Nearly every day the City and other governmental agencies publish ads in the newspapers or distribute press releases, and I am sure you will continue this practice. Nearly everyone reads the newspapers. They are free and easily available. Everyone does not have a computer or internet access particularly senior citizens. Do you really think a citizen will set aside time on a regular basis to open the Aspen/Pitkin County website and find these official notices on this very extensive site? Do you really think this ordinance eliminating newspaper notice will make the citizens more informed? This particular form of notice does not lead to transparency and can easily lead to abuse. A simple solution is to amend the ordinance and only require titles of ordinances in the newspaper notice, and provide the body of the ordinance on the internet. This will be a great saving of costs which seems to be the purpose of the attempt to change our Charter. Publication of the titles will cost nearly nothing and the City government will still retain transparency. Thank you for your review of this note. If you wish to be truthful to the public please amend the proposed ordinance. If you want to hide notice of important City matters from the public pass the ordinance in its present form. You probably will have no opposition at the polls with the amended ordinance. It is my understanding you weren't able to pass the proposed ordinance in the past, and the proposed ordinance just creates distrust in the citizenry. Best wishes, Bob Nix, 323 Vine, Aspen, 544- 5725 Ix a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer/—�9)J RE: 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, Ordinance #48 negotiation DATE: August 9, 2010 PROCESS: In July 2007, Aspen City Council adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. That ordinance prohibited any exterior alterations, land use applications, or building permits affecting all non-landmarked buildings constructed at least 30 years ago, unless it was determined that no potential historic resource was negatively affected. The purpose of the Ordinance was to protect Aspen's significant architectural heritage; not only Victorians, but more modern structures as well. Ordinance #30 was in place for 5 months, during which time Council held numerous meetings to discuss the effect of the new regulations and potential amendments. In particular, Council wished to see the applicability of the Ordinance narrowed down dramatically from all properties over 30 years of age to a specific list researched by staff and found to potentially qualify for landmark designation. In December 2007, Ordinance 948, Series of 2007 was adopted to replace Ordinance #30. Ordinance #48 creates a formal list of potential historic resources in Aspen that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance. Detrimental development or demolition actions affecting these properties will be limited while the City undertakes an evaluation of the historic preservation program via the Historic Preservation Task Force. The Task Force is completed and code amendments are expected to be presented to Council in the coming months. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, is identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources as part of Ordinance #48. Owners of a property listed on Ordinance #48 can still move forward with proposed projects if they: A. Submit the plans and seek staff determination that the work is exempt from delay under Ordinance 448 (routine maintenance work for example); or B. Submit plans and seek staff determination that the work, while not exempt from Ordinance #48, can move forward by voluntarily complying with Staff or HPC review (depending on the scope of work) of the project, or 1 C. Submit plans with the intention of triggering a 90 day delay period, during which time City Staff and Council will negotiate for appropriate preservation of the property. If the negotiation does not result in an agreement to landmark designate the property, the building permits will be processed as requested. The Regents of the University of Colorado, the property owner of The Given Institute, have submitted a letter (Exhibit A) indicating their intention to demolish all of the existing buildings on the site, which includes the primary building and two Victorian era structures. Typically, a letter of intent, as opposed to an actual permit or land use application, is not adequate to trigger Ordinance #48 review, however The Regents assert that "as a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc." The City Attorney's Office has requested evidence that this authority exists, but no further information has been provided by The University of Colorado. HPC had several discussions about this issue, held a worksession on June 23, 2010, and attended the City Council meeting on June 28, 2010, successfully lobbying City Council to pass a resolution committing to take action to try to preserve the property and buildings (Exhibit B). From the beginning, representatives of The University of Colorado have very clearly indicated that no incentives, negotiation, or other development options are of interest, and that their goal is sale of the property. They have indicated receipt of an offer for $17 million. In early July, the City worked with the University to develop a Memorandum of Understanding, that would allow the community to consider purchasing the property on the November ballot. Council placed certain conditions on their signing of the MOU, such as verification of the offer from a private buyer, which staff understands have not been satisfied to date. The MOU is not in effect and the University has submitted a demolition permit. Although the MOU calls for the City to withdraw a National Register of Historic Places nomination that has been prepared, the nomination still stands (since the document has not been signed) and will go before the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board on October I't. A committee of interested citizens is meeting on a weekly basis to brainstorm possible organizations and funding sources that could assist in a public purchase. If the efforts to maintain the property as a community asset are unsuccessful, a private owner could take advantage of the R-6 zoning in place on the site, which allows for residential development, including subdivision. A single family home on the current undivided lot would be allowed to be approximately 6,200 square feet of FAR. On July 14, 2010, HPC approved the attached resolution (Exhibit C), finding by a vote of 5-0 that the property meets all landmark designation criteria, has considerable historic significance to The City of Aspen and is worthy of historic preservation. HPC recommends Council pursue negotiation to preserve the property. APPLICANT: Regents of the University of Colorado, owner. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-851. ADDRESS: 100 E. Francis Street. ZONING: R-6. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: Council is asked to decide whether this property's significance warrants negotiations with the property owner for its preservation. The criteria for designation are listed below and staff s analysis follows. The City cannot designate properties listed on Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 without the owner's consent. The 90 day negotiation period began on May 251h, 2010 and ends on August 23, 2010, unless extended for an additional 30 days by a majority vote of Council. 26.415.030.B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of properties will be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating an historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the criteria described below: 1. A property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is: a. In whole or in part more than one hundred (100) years old, and b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; or 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th Century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that all three designation criteria, and the integrity considerations, are met. Criterion 2.a Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre-internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would-be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year-round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on 4 everything from bio-terrorism to sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. Criterion 2.a is met through the property's strong connection to the legacy of "The Aspen Idea." Criterion 2.b. The Given Institute is directly connected to the Paepcke family, credited as the founders of Modern Aspen. As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Elizabeth Paepcke, forming her own legacy in the years following her husband's death in 1960, must have seen value in the nurturing of additional educational organizations within the community. Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift -purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Criterion 2.b. is met through the property's direct connection to Elizabeth Paepcke and the institutions and tradition of high modernism that her family introduced to Aspen. Criterion 2.c. Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modem architecture that began here in 1945, when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945-1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960-1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International E Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (... ) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design." Eero Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local property owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. N Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof and no ornamentation. The neutral color scheme allows the form of the building to predominate, and it fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing/reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a 7 "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. As noted by one architectural historian, "Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings that allude to the sails of boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Weese located the building to take advantage of views and preserve natural site features. Mature trees are abundant, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half -century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. He helped to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20`h Century. Other influential buildings of his include the Time -Life Building, Chicago; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17th Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; and the US Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. H Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." Criterion 2.c. is met as The Given Institute is an outstanding and relatively unaltered example of the work of Harry Weese. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans of the building, original model, and building permit files, the exterior of the primary building on the property and the site itself are largely unaltered from their original design, with the exception of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake that was rebuilt in 2002, and minor landscaping. The form, plan, scale and proportions of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship are true to the Modernists tenets: monochromatic white color scheme, concrete masonry units and glazing, detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects, the materials are manufactured and standardized and the "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Some glazing was replaced in 1996 to increase "u" value; however the original window composition remains. Most of the interior is original. The original built in desks and microphones in the seminar room are intact. There have been minimal alterations that include updating the interior bathrooms, and entrance into the seminar room (by adding a ramp) to meet accessibility standards in 1993 and converting a laboratory into a conference room in 1993. Some paint finishes and light fixtures have been altered as well. Overall, the integrity of the building is very high. Typically, as part of the designation assessment, staff completes an "Integrity Assessment Form," for the property. Our assessment is attached (Exhibit D.) Staff finds that the building warrants 96 points out of 100. Staff believes that demolishing this building would be a very significant loss to Aspen's small collection of potential historic resources remaining from the post-war period. RECOMMENDATION: This meeting was noticed as a public hearing, which would have been required for Council to grant any incentives to the applicant. No incentives are of interest to them. Council may choose whether or not to accept public comment at the negotiation meeting, though there has been community interest in this topic. Staff is concerned that the MOU remains unsigned. At this time the applicant will automatically receive their demolition permit on August 23, 2010, the expiration of the negotiation period. 9 Staff recommends that Council communicate the immediate need to complete the MOU with the University of Colorado. Ballot language must be drafted within the next few weeks. Because the negotiation period ends very soon, Staff suggests Council pass a resolution now, extending negotiation by 30 days, to September 22, 2010. In addition, staff recommends Council continue the noticed public hearing in order to preserve the opportunity to grant incentives, if a preservation solution other than what is defined by the draft MOU, arises. Exhibits: Resolution # Series of 2010 A. Letter from The University of Colorado B. City Council Resolution 447, Series of 2010 C. HPC Resolution #8, Series of 2010 D. Integrity Assessment E. Process: Architecture No. 11, Harry Weese; Humanism and Tradition F. Historic photos related to The Given Institute 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL EXTENDING THE ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007, NEGOTIATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, 100 E. FRANCIS STREET Resolution No. 41 Series of 2010 WHEREAS, the property at The Given Institute, 100 E. Francis Street, is subject to Ordinance #48, Series of 2007. This Ordinance identifies potential historic resources and creates a review process for any proposed alterations. The Ordinance also establishes a framework for City Council to negotiate with the property owner to secure voluntary historic designation; and WHEREAS, The Regents of the University of Colorado, owners of The Given Institute, have communicated their intention to demolish the buildings located at 100 E. Francis Street, which property is legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW '/4 OF THE SW '/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE'/4 OF THE SE '/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6T" PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 5 1 " WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, AY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES I F 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado asserts that as a state entity, it is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado has indicated that it is voluntarily participating in a ninety day negotiation process established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, relative to potential historic resources identified in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code, which codifies Ordinance #48, states that "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and representatives of The University of Colorado attended the meeting; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 14, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a motion to recommend Council pursue negotiations to preserve the Given Institute by a vote of 5 to 0; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Director shall confer with the City Council regarding the proposed building permit, the nature of the Potential Historic Resource, and the staff and Historic Preservation Commission's assessment of the Resource and the effects of the building permit upon the resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with City Council; and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated August 9, 2010, performed an analysis of the property at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, found that the City's criteria for historic designation to be met, and recommended that Council extend the Ordinance #48 negotiation period by 30 days, in order to pursue all options to preserve this important historic resource; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that an extension is necessary to execute a draft Memorandum of Understanding with the University of Colorado, or to explore other preservation solutions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: The negotiation period established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, as it affects the property at The Given Institute, 100 E. Francis Street, is hereby extended to September 22, 2010. Council furthermore extends the noticed public hearing for consideration of preservation incentives to August 23, 2010. APPROVED by the City Council at its regular meeting on August 9, 2010. Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Attest: Mayor: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ,tom VG11n LIGNI' �j 8µ1k,C University of Colorado Denver Office ofunleeryltyCounsel Campus Box 183 P.O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364 Office: 303-315-6617 Fax: 303-315.4446 May 25, 2010 Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Given Institute and Property Dear Ms. Adams: By way of introduction, I am a lawyer in the Office of University Counsel for the University of Colorado. Pursuant to state statute 23-20-101 et s% UC Denver is one of the campuses of the University of Colorado and is under the control of the University of Colorado Board of Regents. CRS 23-20-102 provides that the members of the Board of Regents are elected by the voters of the State of Colorado. The election of the members of the Board of Regents for the University of Colorado is also outlined in Article D{, Section 12, of the Colorado Constitution. CRS 23-20- 111 outlines the supervisory powers of the Board of Regents over all of the campuses of the University of Colorado, including UC Denver. In summary, the University of Colorado is a state entity under the supervision and control of the elected members of the Board of Regents. As I believe you are aware, the Board of Regents has been the property owner of the Given Institute since the early 1970s. Since that time, the Board of Regents has maintained and operated the Given Institute as a conference center. For a variety of reasons, the University is going to sell the Given Institute. This decision was not made lightly. In anticipation of the sale, the University will be moving forward with the demolition of the structures on the property. As a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc. However, without granting jurisdiction to the City of Aspen over the Board of Regents or its property, and without waiving the sovereign authority of the Board of Regents, with respect to the demolition, the University plans to follow various City of Aspen processes and procedures. We value our relationship with the City of Aspen and its citizens and want to be good neighbors. The University will be submitting an application to the City's Building Department in the near future to demolish both Given Institute buildings and the Blue House that is also located on the property as well as their associated foundations. It is my understanding that the Given Institute property has been listed as a "Potential Historic Resource" pursuant to Aspen City Council Ordinance 48, Series of 2007, It is also my understanding that the 90-day negotiation period provided for in Ordinance 48 cannot begin until a complete demolition permit and associated Downtown Campus Denve4 Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus Aurora, Colorado documents have been submitted to the City, Although we are already working on the demolition permit package and anticipate it will be submitted sometime soon, we hereby request that the Ordinance 48 process be triggered immediately and that it not be delayed until the University has submitted the complete demolition permit. We will not be requesting any incentives from the City of Aspen in lieu of obtaining the permit. In addition, we ask that once the completed demolition application is submitted that the application be processed immediately without having to wait until the Ordinance 48 process has been completed. The University will agree not to act on the demolition permit until the Ordinance 48 process is completed I look forward to hearing from you regarding our request. Sincerely, Steve Zweck-Bronner Managing Senior Associate University Counsel SZB/md RESOLUTION NO. J�_ (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE WHEREAS, The City of Aspen has been informed that The Given Institute, located in Aspen and owned by the Regents of the University of Colorado, is proposed to be demolished in October 2010, and sold for residential development; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and other citizens have urged City Council to take action towards preventing the loss of the facility as a community asset; and WHEREAS, City Council recognizes that Aspen has an over 60 year long standing tradition, initiated by Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity; and WHEREAS, The Given Institute building was designed by Harry Weese, a prominent modernist American architect. Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design The Given Institute fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began in Aspen in 1945; and WHEREAS, integration of non-profit and community facilities throughout the West End neighborhood adds enormous vitality to Aspen. The value of the property as a publically owned asset, with important cultural and natural significance, including the only remaining public overlook adjacent to the Hallam Lake Nature preserve, cannot be replaced. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council commits to take immediate action to establish an on -going dialogue with the University of Colorado with the intention to support them in achieving their goals for sale of the property, without damage to the community's history and interests. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on June 28, 2010. 4KathrynS. Koch, ty er Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joktn'u}ec`es'ter( City Attorney A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) REGARDING ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR PRESERVATION OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, LOCATED AT 100 E. FRANCIS STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO.8, SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-851 WHEREAS, The Regents of the University of Colorado have communicated their intention to demolish the buildings located at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, which property is legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW /4 OF THE SW '/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE'/4 OF THE SE'/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6T" PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 1 of 12 RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES I F 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado asserts that as a state entity, it is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado has indicated that it is voluntarily participating in a ninety day negotiation process established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, relative to potential historic resources identified in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code, which codifies Ordinance #48, states that "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and representatives of The University of Colorado attended the meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated July 14, 2010, performed an analysis of the property at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, found that the City's criteria for historic designation to be met, and recommended preservation; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 14, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a motion to recommend Council pursue negotiations to preserve the Given Institute by a vote of 5 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC finds that The Given Institute buildings and property meet all designation criteria, have considerable historic significance to The City of Aspen and are worthy of historic preservation. HPC recommends Council pursue negotiation. HPC's specific findings regarding the designation criteria are as follows: Criterion 2.a Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 2 of 12 Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre-intemet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would-be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year-round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on everything from bio-terrorism to 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 3 of 12 sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. Criterion 2.a is met through the property's strong connection to the legacy of "The Aspen Idea." Criterion 2.b. The Given Institute is directly connected to the Paepcke family, credited as the founders of Modern Aspen. As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Elizabeth Paepcke, forming her own legacy in the years following her husband's death in 1960, must have seen value in the nurturing of additional educational organizations within the community. Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift -purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Criterion 2.b. is met through the property's direct connection to Elizabeth Paepcke and the institutions and tradition of high modernism that her family introduced to Aspen. Criterion 2.c. Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began here in 1945, when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer. Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945-1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960-1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 4 of 12 materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Fero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (... ) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design." Eem Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962), As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War I1, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local properties owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance 448, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 5 of 12 Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof and no ornamentation. The neutral color scheme allows the form of the building to predominate, and it fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing/reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. As noted by one architectural historian, "Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings that allude to the sails of 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 6 of 12 boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Weese located the building to take advantage of views and preserve natural site features. Mature trees are abundant, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half -century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. He helped to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20`h Century. Other influential buildings of his include the Time -Life Building, Chicago; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17`h Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; and the US Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance 448, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 7 of 12 Criterion 2.c. is met as The Given Institute is an outstanding and relatively unaltered example of the work of Harry Weese. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans of the building, original model, and building permit files, the exterior of the primary building on the property and the site itself are largely unaltered from their original design, with the exception of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake that was rebuilt in 2002, and minor landscaping. The form, plan, scale and proportions of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship are true to the Modernists tenets: monochromatic white color scheme, concrete masonry units and glazing, detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects, the materials are manufactured and standardized and the "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Some glazing was replaced in 1996 to increase "u" value; however the original window composition remains. Most of the interior is original. The original built in desks and microphones in the seminar room are intact. There have been minimal alterations that include updating the interior bathrooms, and entrance into the seminar room (by adding a ramp) to meet accessibility standards in 1993 and converting a laboratory into a conference room in 1993. Some paint finishes and light fixtures have been altered as well. Overall, the integrity of the building is very high. An "Integrity Assessment Form," concluding that the building warrants 96 points out of 100, is attached as "Exhibit A," to this resolution. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of July, 2010. Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Sarah Broughton, Vice Chair 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 8 of 12 EXHIBIT A INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- MODERNIST Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5 - The structure is in its original location. 3 - The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 0 - The structure has been moved to a location that is dissimilar to its original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) — 5 points. The structure is in its original location. • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM 10 -The original plan form, based on authenticating documentation, is still intact. 6 - The plan form has been altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Alterations and/or additions to the building are such that the original form of the structure is obscured. Response: 10 — The original plan form is unchanged based on original Weese sketches and floor plans. ROOFFORM 10 -The original roof form is unaltered. 6 - Additions have been made that alter roof form that would meet the current design guidelines. 0 -Alterations to the roof have been made that obscure its original form. Response: 10 — The original flat roof is unaltered. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance 448, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 9 of 12 SCALE 5 - The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 3 - The building has been expanded but the scale of the original portion is intact and the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - The scale of the building has been negatively affected by additions or alterations. Response: 5 — The original scale and proportions are intact. SOLIDNOID PATTERN 10 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is intact. 6 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered but in a manner that would meet the design guidelines. 0- The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is altered. Response: 10 — the original pattern of glazing and materials is intact. CHARACTER -DEFINING FEATURES 10 — The horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment are intact. 6 - There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. 0 - There have been major alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. Response: 10 — the character -defining features, including cottonwood trees that dictated the location of building and influenced Weese's design remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 45 points. • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. 5- The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed. 3-There are minor modifications to the physical surroundings but the changes conform to the design guidelines. 0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 10 of 12 TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 points. The physical environment is largely unchanged from the date of construction. MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR SURFACES 15- The original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing are intact. 10-There have been minor alterations to the original exterior wall materials and glazing made in a manner that conform to the design guidelines. 5- There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing. 0- All exterior wall materials and glazing has been replaced. Response: 15 points — the original combination of concrete masonry units and glazing is intact. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 5 - Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Most of the original door and window units have been replaced with units that would not meet design guidelines. Response: 8 — Some of the glazing was replaced in 1993, but the window composites remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 23 points. WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. COMPOSITION 15 -The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. Detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and at the roof edge. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 11 of 12 10-There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would meet the design guidelines 0 - There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would not meet the design guidelines Response: The building is void of decoration and is clearly follows Modernist tenets. All exterior surfaces are CMU blocks or glazing. FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME 5 - The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. 3 - There have been minor alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. 0- There have been significant alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. Response: 3 — The color scheme has been altered: instead of pure white the building is painted off-white and the window trim is green instead of the original black TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 20 points. GRAND TOTAL= 96 POINTS MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 75 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 12 of 12 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- MODERNIST Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred 5 - The structure is in its original location. 3 - The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 0 - The structure has been moved to a location that is dissimilar to its original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) — 5 points. The structure is in its original location. • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM 10 -The original plan form, based on authenticating documentation, is still intact. 6 - The plan form has been altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Alterations and/or additions to the building are such that the original form of the structure is obscured. Response: 10 — The original plan form is unchanged based on original Weese sketches and f oor plans. ROOFFORM 10 -The original roof form is unaltered. 6 - Additions have been made that alter roof form that would meet the current design guidelines. 0 -Alterations to the roof have been made that obscure its original form. Response: 10 — The original fat roof is unaltered. SCALE 5 - The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 3 - The building has been expanded but the scale of the original portion is intact and the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - The scale of the building has been negatively affected by additions or alterations. Response: 5 — The original scale and proportions are intact. SOLIDNOID PATTERN 10 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is intact. 6 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered but in a manner that would meet the design guidelines. 0- The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is altered. Response: 10 — the original pattern of glazing and materials is intact. CHARACTER -DEFINING FEATURES 10 — The horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment are intact. 6 - There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. 0 - There have been major alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. Response: 10 — the character -defining features, including cottonwood trees that dictated the location of building and influenced Weese's design remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 45 points. • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. 5- The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed. 3-There are minor modifications to the physical surroundings but the changes conform to the design guidelines. 0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 points. The physical environment is largely unchanged from the date of construction. • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR SURFACES 15- The original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing are intact. 10-There have been minor alterations to the original exterior wall materials and glazing made in a manner that conform to the design guidelines. 5- There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing. 0- All exterior wall materials and glazing has been replaced. Response: 15 points — the original combination of concrete masonry units and glazing is intact. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 5 - Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Most of the original door and window units have been replaced with units that would not meet design guidelines. Response: 8 — Some of the glazing was replaced in 1993, but the window composites remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 23 points. • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. COMPOSITION 15 -The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. Detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and at the roof edge. I0-There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would meet the design guidelines 0 - There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would not meet the design guidelines Response: The building is void of decoration and is clearly follows Modernist tenets. All exterior surfaces are CMU blocks or glazing. FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME 5 - The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. 3 - There have been minor alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. 0- There have been significant alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. Response: 3 — The color scheme has been altered: instead of pure white the building is painted off-white and the window trim is green instead of the original black TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 20 points. Grand Total = 96 points MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS=100 MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 75 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. I a] ;lwlm� HARRY WEES'E :HUMANISM AND TRADITION 4/ *lj IVIV bIZ^ Pvt Py 104*A^ GIVEN INSTITUTE OF PATHOBIOLOGY Aspen, Colorado, 1972 all J "All t CSC CIS 4 Conceptual sketches Conceptual sketch SR�I�ffi�. 12•..16/�N9.�oJa599aidi3'E3tA�7f# �m�ffi/Ak��A�t3'#iuTY.7t. ��C�31.h.IlA�j$ ItttLTP2, #7.sxN2�, 97wq'q;ia.'i•x 97, *AIL OLD, lz, t)OWRii7 r—rP, iw�3�.rxT�i� 9ox90 �.r—rP�a, t,t—�rspliSP. 'p9CNpK7— �%H•i97>)tp�7, --fi Kibl$>1t9i b. kld6g`-Xta�:d�&ffi5ffi.o-ito��it— !fiK{¢IA�hb, tyf—Kia4�Tli. �{Nv�iY311'At �Pfirt�tta. fir, ilIFBiLis2iFPVeffi'9itr )fi4sAicgld'J.<T4Kk oTftlbi�'^t�YdGh➢'fi[ �iri63�tAtP'$b. �vJ�'.bjFt. =w9 Fk`-j` K6AClA&T VL'P�/6 At#4T4sb. LO129tc1l �= `�'�d'4ido�fs�lR ki�LT, 1#1b13 s7Y>�'#t {e�AA�51Alf v9—L LTMICt6. n— VA�I¢p9k-f'� 1±OJPp a�L4.��pt3�a lk1N11:5�S�tFo5kiKfbc tat, :. o��ffio� T 9�-i YK�SjL$hir�$Pbolt. 17i��. �i4j1ffifd, )kK=;iy9—F•7wr9 P, L#afSS'F�cK bP1'j�K'6�4s2.}LT4sa, !✓: #FMIT' l Fl*ffir=:i79—hi�P�b. =Y 49—F•7w y�fi'f''�T.:i#ffi9 �Xa$ t ai—+/ i A• x') 7 $ffi4si:�lt'i'�T i+—•: v F �tiP9ia. PtiiVlc9ix9—KkoT{Tbh.b. t>t—$Yi!lSJ:oo���4—J • ==v f•Kkb�AI �!'7R�Dtf7b#1.3. itllD86$)f2 @i��Y.:TAP Is. k_� Y~'-d'N �" -C.1 The project program included a main seminar room to seat 50 people, a laboratory, a library, one special conference room for 12—I6 people, and three multi -purpose confcreneelrear screen projection areas. Related facilities required were two offices, reproduction area, storage areas, toilets, and kitchen. Total space provided is approximately 12,000 square feet. The build- ing measures 90' x 90' in plan. The main semi. nar room is in -the -round with a center working area and dais. The building is used for seminar, of various sizes dealing with medical topics. At these scatinars actual demonstrations can be per- formed in the laboratory, and a complete sys. tern of audio-visual and television equipment will afford the beat possible communication of information to all participants. The building is linked with the University of Colorado campuses ��c at Boulder and Denver by means of closed cur- cult TV. Through the use of such electronic equipment, the building serves as a national center for the gathering and distribution of the latest research and development in pathobio- logy and related fields. A major design requirement was that the building relate well to its site, a beautiful garden overlooking Hallam Lake. The load -bearing and non -bearing walls are concrete block masonry, exterior and interior. Roof and columns are heavy timber. Floon are wood Game and concrete slab on -grade. All block is painted and all boors (except for lab and service spaces) are carpeted. Heat is furnished by perimeter hot water radiation. There is natural ventilation in all areas except the main seminar room, which has forced air heating and cooling from a roof -mounted package unit. 171 Oie\ �-• f.� L. � i IiI lY111µt\��.��. bile plan 1 6 4 r B i I 7 L77T � s 4 s .�t tat floor plan 2nd floor plan 1—Seminar room 1--Seminar room 2—Conference room 2—Library 3—Kitchen 3—Carrels 4—Foyer 4—Conference/projecimn roan 5—Hall 5—lobby 5—Lobby 8—Bridge 7—Closet 7—Office 8—Demonstration laboratory 8—Supply room 8—Mechanical a —Reproduction room North -South section Eaet�OWst d"--i--A I # Not ir 0 r bW MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Drew Alexander, Planner RE: Appeal of Administrative Decision — Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA DATE: August 9, 2010 APPLICANT /OWNER: Toni Kronberg LOCATION: Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA, Lot 1. SUMMARY: The Applicant is appealing an administrative decision issued by the Community Development Director, which approved an Insubstantial SPA Amendment for improvements to the Rio Grande SPA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's decision by adopting the proposed Resolution affirming the Insubstantial SPA Amendment. Figure 1: Vicinity Map of Rio Grande Recycle Center SUMMARY: One of the jobs assigned to the Community Development Director is to authorize Insubstantial Amendments for Specially Planned Areas (SPA) and the associated development order for the final development plan. This is an administrative process where an applicant may request approval of an Insubstantial Amendment if the proposed scope of work does not include any of the following: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than (3) percent of the approved open space. 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. 8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the development. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting of a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Once made, the determination by the Community Development Director is subject to appeal. Toni Kronberg has appealed the determination. Section 26.316.030, Appeal Procedures, sets forth the applicable standards of review that Council should follow in these matters and the actions available to Council following the hearing on the appeal. STANDARDS of REVIEW: Section 26.316.030(E) reads as follows: Standard of review. Unless otherwise specifically stated in this title, the decision - making body authorized to hear the appeal [City Council] shall decide the appeal based solely upon the record established by the body from which the appeal is taken [Community Development Director]. A decision or determination shall not be reversed or modified unless there is a finding that there was a denial of due process, or the administrative body has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. The Applicant has submitted an appeal (Exhibit E) of the Insubstantial SPA Amendment granted; however, a reason for the basis of the appeal is not stated. Staff is assuming that the Applicant believes that it is not within the Community Development Director's authority to approve the proposed improvements for the recycling center. Staff s memo is written with that assumption in mind. 2 The Land Use Code does not define the terms: "a denial of due process", "exceeded its jurisdiction," or "abused its discretion" which are standards that Council weighs during the hearing. Court cases, however, have helped define these terms as follows and may be used by Council in its deliberation of the appeal: A denial of due process may be found if some procedural irregularity is determined to have occurred that affected a significant right of the appellant, or the administrative body otherwise acted in violation of the appellant's constitutional or statutory rights. Ad Hoc Executive Committee of Medical Staff of Memorial Hospital v Runyan, 716 P. 2d 465 (Colo. 1986.) A decision may be considered to be an abuse of discretion if the "decision of the administrative body is so devoid of evidentiary support that it can only be explained as an arbitrary and capricious exercise of authority." Ross v Fire and Police Pension Assn., 713 P.2d 1304 (Colo. 1986); Marker v Colorado Springs, 336 P.2d 305 (Colo. 1959). A decision may be considered to be in excess of Jurisdiction if the decision being appealed from "is grounded in a misconstruction or misapplication of the law," City of Colorado Springs v Givan, 897 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1995); or, the decision being appealed from was not within the authority of the administrative body to make. City of Colorado Springs v SecureCare Self Storage, Inc., 10 P.3d 1244 (Colo. 2000). STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Due Process — Insubstantial Amendments are permitted under Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Area and may be authorized by the Community Development Director if the request does not exceed nine standards as outlined on page 2 of this memo. Staff determined that the improvement to the recycling center did not exceed these standards and could be reviewed administratively and was subsequently approved. As required by section 26.304.070, Development orders, publication of the approval was provided in the Aspen Times. As required by the Land Use Code, the appellant was provided notice of tonight's meeting via mail and all other affected parties were noticed by publication in the newspaper, as required. (Please see Exhibit Q. Assuming tonight's meeting does not contain any procedural flaws staff believes that proper due process has been provided. 2. Discretion — With respect to abuse of the Director's discretion, the Director did need to use his discretion in determining whether the request to make certain improvements to the Rio Grande Recycling Center could or could not be considered an insubstantial amendment. The question is whether the Director abused that discretion. In considering the request, the Director evaluated the nine (9) criteria adopted to determine whether the review could be evaluated administratively or before a city board. 3. Jurisdiction — The Community Development Director's jurisdiction to grant administrative approvals is established in section 26.440.090 A, which note that an insubstantial amendment "may be authorized by the Community Development Director." 3 ACTIONS BY COUNCIL FOLLOWING APPEAL HEARING: Section 26.316.030(F) reads as follows: Action by the decision -making body hearing the appeal. The decision -making body hearing the appeal may reverse, affirm, or modify the decision or determination appealed from, and, if the decision is modified, shall be deemed to have all the powers of the officer, board or commission from whom the appeal is taken, including the power to impose reasonable conditions to be complied with by the appellant. The decision shall be approved by resolution. All appeals shall be public meetings. TWO RESOLUTIONS: Attached are two Resolutions. One finds that the Director acted correctly and affirms the interpretation. The second finds that the Director exceeded his jurisdiction, abused his authority, or failed to provide due process and reverses the interpretation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the Director's decision was rendered ethically and that no abuse of authority or exceeding of jurisdiction occurred. Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's decision by adopting the proposed Resolution affirming the approval for an insubstantial amendment to the Rio Grande SPA. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: (all motions must be made in the positive) "I move to approve Resolution No. Series of 2010, [affirming or reversing] the Community Development Director's decision which approved an insubstantial amendment to Rio Grande SPA. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Notice of Approval, Development Order and Public Notice for SPA Amendment Exhibit B — Land Use Code criteria regarding Insubstantial SPA Amendments Exhibit C — Affidavit of notice Exhibit D — General background and History Report excerpt from the Rio Grande Master Plan Exhibit E — Applicant's appeal 13 RESOLUTION NO. &O J (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMING AN ADMNISTRATIVE DECISION BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGARDING AN INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE RIO GRANDE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a Land Use Application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval for an Insubstantial Special Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically the area containing the Rio Grande Recycle Center; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440.090 — Amendment to development order, the Director rendered a decision of approval; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant, Toni Kronberg appealed the Directors decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, has the authority to affirm the decision of the Director or modify or reverse the decision upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and oral argument from Applicant and the Community Development Director, and has found that the Director provided due process and neither exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the Interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council affirms the Community Development Director's decision to approve and Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically for the Rio Grande Recycle Center. This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on 2010. (Signatures on following page) Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 1 ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. _ (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REVERSING AN ADMNISTRATIVE DECISION BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGARDING AN INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE RIO GRANDE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a Land Use Application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval for an Insubstantial Special Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically the area containing the Rio Grande Recycle Center; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440.090 — Amendment to development order, the Director rendered a decision of approval; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant, Toni Kronberg appealed the Directors decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, has the authority to affirm the decision of the Director or modify or reverse the decision upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and oral argument from Applicant and the Community Development Director, and has found that the Director did not provide due process or either exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the Decision; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council reverses the Community Development Director's decision to approve and Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically for the Rio Grande Recycle Center. This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on 2010. {Signatures on following page) Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 1 ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 2 Exqlrstr 4 NOTICE OF APPROVAL For an Insubstantial Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, located within Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA Parcel ID No. 2737-07-3-06-851 APPLICANT: City of Aspen REPRESENTATIVE: Lee Cassin, Enviromnental Health Director SUBJECT & SITE OF AMENDMENT: Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, located within Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA. The property lacks a physical address at this time. SUMMARY: The Applicant has requested an Insubstantial Amendment to the Rio Grande Recycle Center, a Specially Planned Area (SPA). The site that contains the Recycle Center has served a multitude of uses since the Rio Grande property received SPA approval in 1977. Some of these uses include a towed car impound lot, a snow retention and melting center, and the existing recycling center. For a more detailed history on the subject site, see Exhibit A. The Recycle Center is accessed off of Rio Grande Place and consists of a dirt parking and drop-off area. The site includes six large storage bins that the various recyclables are deposited into. Once full, these bins are loaded onto trucks and taken to the Pitkin County Landfill or a separate processing facility. The site also includes smaller drop-offs for yard waste and paper products. There is no sort of enclosed office space at the Recycle Center or an employee dedicated to facility upkeep. The Applicant has planned a number of changes to the Recycle Center to increase the overall performance of the site. Asphalt has been proposed for driving areas to assist with mud issues, drainage, and cleaning. Curb, gutter, and concrete bases for the bins are also included with this plan to assist with drainage and cleaning. Vegetative screening has been designated around the perimeter of the property to reduce visibility from neighboring properties (see Exhibit B). Smaller elements of the application include ADA accessible containers, designated snow storage, and a surveillance camera for security. STAFF EVALUATION: Staff supports the proposed SPA Amendment to the Rio Grande Recycle Center - a facility that has been a valuable community benefit since the 1980's. These changes address elements of the facility that have been a burden to both users and operators of the Recycle Center. Hardscaping will eliminate problems with mud and assist with the Page 1 of 4 cleaning of debris. Curb and gutter installation will aid site drainage. The landscaping and vegetative screening will reduce the facilities visibility from neighboring properties and enhance the appeal of the property. DECISION: The Community Development Director finds the Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center to be consistent with the review criteria (Exhibit C) and thereby, APPROVES the amendment as specified below. The approved Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA, allows for site improvements to the subject property. Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A — Site History Exhibit B — Site Plan Exhibit C — Review Standards Date Page 2of 4 3t5 SF, OF CONCRETE PAVING LOCATED UNDER RECYCLE BI15 ` A vy l STOPo1 WATER PIPE To eE L M5TALLED ADA PARKING/ RING y / - �, f' \' STORD WATER 5AMPLER - STOR WATER VAULT I 1110 SF. OF ASPHALT PAVING A, STOR1 WATER SAMPLER LANDSCAPE PLAN L1 I 1 DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development Department 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-year 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 granted 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. City of Aspen, 130 S. Galena Property Owner's Name, Maili CO 81611 Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park — Recycle Center (No physical address for this Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Site and operational improvements to the Recycle Center, including hardscaping, concrete bases for the recycling bins, and landscaping around the property. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Approval by the City of Aspen Community Development Director for an Insubstantial Specially Planned Area Amendment. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) June 13 2010 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) 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) 2"" day of June, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. Development Director AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ss. County of Pitkin 1 �— ` (name, please print) being or represe ting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Signature O The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledg$ed before me this IA day oft_ 200&_, by eljn�+y.//I s WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE P UBLICATION s/ City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times Weekly on June 13. 2010 [51435591 - See. 26.440.090.Amendment to development order. A. An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order for a final development plan may be authorized by the Community Development Director. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. 2. An increase by greater than three percent (3%) in the overall coverage of structures on the land. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development or the demand for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than three percent (3%) of the approved open space. 5. A reduction by greater than one percent (I%) of the off-street parking and loading space. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. An increase of greater than two percent (2%) in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. 8. An increase by greater than one percent (1%) in the approved residential density of the development. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting of a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. B. All other modifications shall be approved pursuant to the terms and procedures of the Final Development Plan, provided that the proposed change is consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final plan. If the proposed change is not consistent with the approved Final Development Plan, the amendment shall be subject to both conceptual and the final development review and approval. C. During the review of the proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council may require such conditions of approval as are necessary to insure that the development will be compatible with current community conditions. This shall include, but not be limited to, applying to the portions of the development which have not obtained building permits or are proposed to be amended to any new community policies or regulations which have been implemented since the original approval or taking into consideration changing community circumstances as they affect the project's original representations and commitments. The applicant may withdraw the proposed amendment at any time during the review process. City of Aspen Land Use Code Part 400, Page 94 ;,. C,,; ) F-YHir31T-G Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The fore oing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 11 day of 200p_, by � r�`3C��`i WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL FY pU6 ,too My commission expires: -,,�C� 6" E f C Notary Public F J;TM o Ex6res 0312912014 mland. Chair p 1V3C-1ry— ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: obll&-d i6 th. AaPan Tumaa W"kly o� July1e oUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 Exhibit D BACKGROUND: As mentioned previously, this appeal is in response to an administrative decision which approved certain site improvements to the Rio Grande Recycle Center. The scope of work included landscaping around the site, an installation of a hard surface, and a reconfiguration of the recycling bins. The recycling center has been at this location for some time and in 1993 a Master Plan was ultimately developed and was intended to serve "as a tool to guide future development on the site," for the Rio Grande parcels. The Master Plan addressed two specific areas, referenced as Site A and Site B (see Figure 1 below). Site A included "the area between the river and bike path next to the snow melter" and Site B included "the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing field." Site A 7�wy • �. iran�pert�:ie.uAeenansn Ho� fj aw rikiijx ON Figure 1: Master Plan Site A and Site B 6) Recycle Center site, called for C� "transportation or essentials community services." h 5 development. The Group concluded this level of review was necessary to ensure that future uses were not:only appropriate but were compatible with each other. With development information provided by organizations, such as rail and trolley advocates who hope to utilize the property in the future, the Group was able to consider several land use scenarios. A phased build out of the property and two full build out programs identified the range of possibilities for the property. In order to preserve the Group's work, three different, approaches to development are presented on the maps in Appendix A. Again these maps are to be used as guides and were not adopted as the land use maps for this master plan. Although the Group considered facility needs for specific projects, it was not their purpose to make recommendations on community -wide issues such as the valley -wide rail or across -town trolley system. There are other decision -making arenas that will decide the fate of those projects.. The Rio Grande Group met approximately 16 times over an eight month period. one of the first tasks of the Rio Grande Group was to review existing and proposed land uses for this vital piece of community property. Initial meetings were devoted to a presentation and discussion of particular land uses on each section of property. The property was divided into two manageable discussion sites for which primary land use goals and recommendations for development were made: Site A: the area between the river and bike path next to the snow welter (page 6); and Site B: the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing field (page 13). HISTORY This is a brief summary of the planning review history of the property. For a more thorough history refer to Appendix B. In 1967, the Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began discussions with the City and County regarding redevelopment of their property and right-of-way. Since those initial discussions there have been many plans regarding this 18 acre parcel: * 1973 - The City used 7th penny transportation funds to purchase a majority of the Rio Grande property. 3 * 1975 - A Performing Arts Center for the property was 1978 studied. * 1981 A non -specified 1.5 acre site was set aside for a future Performing Arts/Conference Center and the City moved the snow dump from the Sanitation District property to the Rio Grande property.. * 1982 - The City and County exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable properties. * 1987 - The City installed the snow melter. * 1988 - A conceptual SPA master plan was adopted by council identifying a parking garage, the library, the Spring Street extension, a snow melt facility and an arts usage area. * 1989 - A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the parking garage and the Pitkin County library. * 1990 - A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the Youth Center. * 1991 - Council denied conceptual SPA approval for the trolley, Theatre is the Park, recycle facility and snow melt operation and instead directed staff to prepare a master plan for the entire .site. s_ YIuIWM l k . The Group identified several assumptions with regard to the Property. From the basis of these assumptions the Group began their review of existing land uses and proposed land uses. 1. Rather than completely replan the parcel, the Group began their review of the property from the the of existing uses and past plans. 2. The Group considered why and how the different pieces of property were purchased. Some of Site A and all of Site B were purchased with transportation funds and most of the river frontage was purchased with open space funds. 3. The extensive work on the whitewater course and initial regrading of Site A, has required adjustments to the traditional method of dumping snow on Site A. In 1991, the City Council 4 RECEIVED NOTICE OF APPEAL JUN 16 2010 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT According to Sec. 26.316.030. Appeal procedures. A. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within 14 days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. I, hereby, file this NOTICE of Appeal within the fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed regarding the Approval of a site -specific development plan and the Creation of a Vested property right by The community Development Director for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the following legally described property in Exhibit A cn h1,bt Rio Grande Pubic Notice Public Notice Of Development Approval 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 Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following legally described property: RECEIVED JUN 16 2010 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park, Recycle Center, Aspen, Colorado 81611, the property commonly known as the Rio Grande Recycle Center (no physical address for this property), by order of the City of Aspen Community Development Director on June 1, 2010. Parcel ID # 27-37-073-06-851. The Applicant received an administrative approval for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment. The approvals were granted for site and operational improvements to the recycle facility. For further information contact Drew Alexander, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2739. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on June 13, 2010. (5143559) Refunds of unused hours shall be made at the rate of two hundred forty-five dollars ($245.00) per hour of time. 4. The Community Development Director shall establish a t® o w tY P appropriate guidelines for the a, NCL collection of additional billings as required. cc V= z o1 5. This fee structure shall be reviewed annually as part of the City's budget hearing W� process and, should any adjustments be necessary, they shall be changed to become effective ce 3 on January 1. 6. The Community Development Department shall identify, prior to or at the time of submission of a land use application, whether an application is to be referred to the Engineering, Housing or Environmental Health Department. The Community Development Department shall also identify whether an application constitutes a minor or a major referral, based on the number of hours that will be required to review the application, and charge the applicant for each referral accordingly. Additional billings and refunds shall not apply to the computation of referral fees. 7. Land use review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion of the Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a nonprofit organization or in which the fee may be excessive for the work proposed. (Ord. No. 57-2000, §9; Ord. No. 47-2002, §8; Ord. No. 63-2003, §4; Ord. No. 38-2004, §7; Ord. No. 49-2005, §9; Ord. No. 48, 2006, § 13; Ord. 52-2007) Sec. 26.104.071.Historic preservation application fees. The types of applications and fees for the processing of historic preservation and applications shall be as follows (historic preservation review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion of the Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a nonprofit WC, RESOLUTION NO. (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, SUBMITTING TO THE ELECTORATE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN A CERTAIN QUESTION RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY OF ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER CHANGING THE PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Home Rule Charter requirement that ordinances be published in full has proven to be a great expense to the City of Aspen without appreciably providing a good method for informing the public of proposed legislation before the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the publication of ordinances on the City's internet website instead of once -per -week publication in a newspaper would offer members of the public a more convenient and effective method to read proposed and adopted ordinances of the city of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the Home Rule Charter authorizes the City Council to propose amendments to the City Charter in accordance with the State Constitution; and WHEREAS, the State Constitution requires that Home Rule Charter amendments be made by the adoption of an ordinance and thereafter approved by the voters; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted on first reading an ordinance to amend the Aspen Home Rule City Charter and desires to refer to the voters a ballot question seeking voter approval of the proposed amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: The following question, seeking voter approval of Ordinance No. 0-, Series of 2010, shall be placed on the ballot at the City's special election to be held on November 5, 2010; provided, however, that Ordinance No.(— L, Series of 2010, is duly adopted by the City Council. AMENDMENT TO CITY OF ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER Shall Ordinance No. 1), Series of 2010, be adopted? This ordinance proposes to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter by adding the following subsection to section 4.10: (h) Whenever an ordinance is required to be published in full or by title pursuant to this Article IV of the Aspen Home Rule Charter, it may be made by posting the same on the City's internet website, www.aspennitkin.com, or successor website. Said publication shall be made available for viewing by the public for a minimum of 30 days. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _ day of 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JP W-7/16/2010-G:\john\word\resos\ba11ot I0-charter-amen-pub]icationd.doc SPECIAL MEETING CALLED FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION A Date August 9, 2010 neilmembers present: .Mick Ireland Steve Skadron Dwayne Romero Torre Derek Johnson Call to order at: Councilmembers not present: ❑ Mick Ireland ❑ Steve Skadron ❑ Dwayne Romero ❑ Torre ❑ Derek Johnson iI. Motion to go into executive session by ; seconded by Other persons present: AGAINST: FOR: Mick Ireland ® Steve Skadron Dwayne Romero Torre Derek Johnson ❑ Mick Ireland ❑ Steve Skadron ❑ Dwayne Romero ❑ Torre ❑ Derek Johnson III. MOTION TO CONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION OF: C.R.s. 24-6-402(4) (a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest (b onferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. (c) Matters required to be kept confidential by federal or state law or rules and regulations. (d) Specialized details of security arrangements or investigations, including defenses against terrorism, both domestic and foreign, and including where disclosure of the matters discussed might reveal information that could be used for the purpose of committing, or avoiding prosecution for, a violation of the law; (e) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators; (f) (I) Personnel matters except if the employee who is the subject of the session has requested an open meeting, or if the personnel matter involves more than one employee, all of the employees have requested an open meeting. IV. ATTESTATION: The undersigned attorney, representing the Council and being present at the executive session,attests that the subject of the unrecorded portions of the session constituted confidential attorney -client m t,� The undersigned chair of the executive session attests that the discussic to the topic(s) described in Section III, above. Adjourned at: