Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformation Update.20190311 INFORMATION UPDATE I. Shift/Mobility Lab Update II. Shining Mountains Film Festival Next Steps III. King Street Drainage Alternatives INFORMATION UPDATE Shining Mountains Film Festival Next Steps King Street Drainage Alternatives Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ashley Perl, Climate Action Manager THROUGH: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: March 11, 2019 RE: Information Only - Shift/Mobility Lab Update BACKGROUND: Since early 2017, City Council and City of Aspen staff have been working to accomplish City Council’s Goal #4 which was to: Leave the transportation landscape forever changed and dramatically alter the way we move ourselves into, out of and around Aspen by experimenting with technologies and modes that are not reliant on more lanes and more parking in town but are reliant on making the new modes competitive with the personal, single-occupancy automobile. This extended experiment will look at possible futures of mobility and the results will inform future solutions that improve the quality of life and community experience. To achieve this goal, the City of Aspen started a project that was first called the Aspen Mobility Lab, and later referred to as Shift. The project took on many forms over the course of the last two years and included more access to bikeshare, more buses and micro-bus services, a mobile rewards app, and a focus on carpooling. Shift brought together numerous community partners, national mobility experts, and input from Roaring Fork Valley residents to create a comprehensive, forward-thinking plan with the goal of delivering new and improved transportation services to those who want and need more alternatives to driving alone. DISCUSSION: After much thought regarding, and prioritization within, the City of Aspen organizational workplan, all efforts on this City Council goal and the Shift project have been indefinitely paused and all vendor contracts associated with the project have been closed. The key lesson to take away from these planning efforts is that while the Aspen community desires and supports innovative transportation services, an incremental approach of adding and improving services over time, rather than all at once, will be more successful in terms of community engagement and education as well as overall implementation. Moving forward, transportation and mobility efforts will stem from two adopted and existing planning documents that were put in place to identify Aspen’s mobility needs and service growth possibilities. The City of Aspen Short Range Transit Plan was adopted by City Council in early 2018 and provides an overview of existing transportation services in the Aspen area along with recommendations for improving and adding services in the coming years. In addition, the Aspen Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is a guide to maintaining and improving Aspen’s robust bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Staff will follow up with Council in a future work session regarding the next steps in developing a Dockless Mobility Ordinance and management plan. These next steps include community engagement to obtain input on the future of dockless bikes and scooters in the City. In addition, Aspen will continue to take bold steps towards innovation and will lead the way by providing modern-day solutions to reduce traffic and its associated impacts on the Aspen community. During the 2020 and 2021 budget cycles, staff will use these existing plans and the learnings from Shift to continue growing Aspen’s transportation systems and services. With even more dependable and diverse transportation options, Aspen can reduce traffic congestion and support the high quality of life that Aspen is known for. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Gena Buhler, Wheeler Opera House Executive Director THRU: Jeff Woods, Parks & Recreation Manager CC: Mitzi Rapkin, Community Relations Director Wheeler Opera House Board of Directors DATE: TBD RE: FIO: Shining Mountains Film Festival | Next Steps BACKGROUND: In October 2017, Aspen City Council voted unanimously to recognize the second Monday of October as ‘Indigenous Peoples Day’ rather than Columbus Day. At the time, it was recommended that Aspen do more than just pass a resolution. It was suggested Aspen have an official event to celebrate Native American people. In the spring of 2018, Deanne Vitrac-Kessler, director of the Aspen Ute Foundation, and supporter of the City’s resolution, came to the City with an idea for a Native American film festival and the Shining Mountains Film Festival was created. At the direction of Council, the Wheeler Opera House funded and produced the first Shining Mountains Film Festival in October 2018, in partnership with the Aspen Ute Foundation. The Aspen Ute Foundation provided the film content, film guests, and emcees, with the Wheeler operationally launching, running, and funding the event. The Aspen Ute Foundation secured donated hotel rooms for some of the filmmakers and collected cash donations at the event but did not receive direct revenue. Shining Mountains Film Festival was well received, with an average of 200 people in attendance for each of three programs, hosted over two days at the Wheeler Opera House. First year expenses were $37,000. Tickets were priced affordably at $15 (public), $10 (Wheeler Wins member). Ticket revenue totaled $10,000, off-setting total expenses, resulting in an approximate 75% subsidy from the Wheeler fund. Audience demographics year one (based on buyer data and survey responses): 70% - Roaring Fork Valley Resident 17% - Tourist 3% - Second Homeowner Results from the end of festival audience survey revealed: · The top three factors to attending future festival events are: o Quality of Films o Diversity of Programming o Participation of guests in Q&As and discussions · Thirty-eight percent of respondents do not attend any other film festival events in Aspen, and 92% of respondents said that they would return in future years. · Areas of suggested future improvement included quality of film programming, Aspen Historical Society involvement, program timing changes, requests for more specific program information earlier in ticket buying process, improvement with diversity of program flow, creation of youth programs, and finding activities outside of films (crafts, food, dancing, music). · Comments also revealed that non-sanctioned marketing flyers were distributed outside of the Wheeler channels that had incorrect and misleading information contained in them. DISCUSSION: Based on feedback and audience attendance, Wheeler staff and the Wheeler Board support continuing Shining Mountains Film Festival under a restructured model. There are two avenues to proceed with continuing this festival. One would be that the Wheeler produce Shining Mountains Film Festival under its festival umbrella as a community partnership, which would include the Aspen Ute Foundation. The other would be to allow an outside organizer, such as the Aspen Ute Foundation, the opportunity to rent the Wheeler and produce the festival at their expense, with no producing support from Wheeler resources. It should be noted that the Aspen Ute Foundation was asked to submit a grant during the regular City of Aspen grant cycle to fund this festival in 2019 if they wanted to produce it. The Aspen Ute Foundation did not submit a grant. Moving forward, the best path to success is to have the Wheeler produce and fund the festival in partnership with Aspen Film and overseen by a group of advisors made up of representatives from the Aspen Ute Foundation, Aspen Historical Society, Colorado Commission of Indian Affairs, local filmmakers, and others that can strongly represent the Native voice such as the Southern Ute Tribal Council. Aspen Film is a natural local partner to produce this festival in partnership with the Wheeler, as the organization has the professional experience and film festival connections, and already has an ongoing co-producing relationship with the Wheeler. High quality programming is a brand standard for Wheeler events and festivals. Feedback suggests that the long-term viability of the project will rely on such a partnership and festival restruture. The Wheeler partnership model roles are listed below. WHEELER The Wheeler, as festival producer, will continue to produce the event annually, including operations and marketing/PR. The event will be hosted at the Wheeler Opera House in October surrounding Indigenous People’s Day (Sunday and Monday events currently). ASPEN FILM Aspen Film, serving as the Roaring Fork Valley’s film society, is best suited for programming high quality film programs across many different genres. Executive and Artistic Director, Susan Wrubel brings years of film programming knowledge to the project. Her contacts extend across the film industry, including with other Indigenous People’s film programmers. Wheeler Executive Director, Gena Buhler will serve as an advisor to Aspen Film in the programming process. This partnership will further strengthen the co-producing relationship between Aspen Film and Wheeler. Submissions will be solicited to allow filmmakers from all over the world to submit their films (shorts and features) for consideration. Program quality, flow, and diversity will be important factors to the expectations of film programs to be delivered. Final decision-making authority for programming will be shared between Aspen Film and Wheeler, with input from the advisory group. ADVISORY BOARD An advisory group will be formed to ensure that there is a wide range of cultural input in the programming process. It is important that those who represent the cultures portrayed on screen and throughout the festival have a voice in the process of finding content. This group will be managed by COA’s Community Relations Director Mitzi Rapkin. The group will advise Aspen Film and Wheeler staff, establish a set of criteria for film and guest selection, and will advise Aspen Film and Wheeler on potential themes, conflicts, and other cultural interests. Partnership and collaborations are key to the long-term success of the festival. The first year exhibited an engaged and interested audience, with both locals and destination guests. Produced in early October, the festival will provide unique programming in a slower time of year. In addition, little to no Indigenous People’s film programming is happening locally. Aspen’s focus and priority to supporting, producing, and growing this programming allows Aspen the distinction of celebrating Native American culture and responding actively to the change of focusing on Indigenous Peoples the second Monday in October. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS Expenses for year one of the festival was funded by savings in the 2018 Wheeler operational budget. As discussed with Council during the 2019 budget cycle, funding for this project will be requested as a part of the 2019 spring supplemental budget process. Staff projects the following costs and subsidy from 2019 - 2021 YEAR 2 – 2019 | $52,000* | Target 75% subsidy, ticket prices will be increased to an average of $17.50 YEAR 3 – 2020 | $54,500 | Target 70% subsidy YEAR 4 – 2021 | $57,000 | Target 65% subsidy *Note year two and following years’ estimates include guest lodging that was not paid for out of the year one budget funding. Budget is set at approximately $10K in lodging costs for approximately 15 guests. For Information Only. Council will receive the formal budget increase request during the spring supplemental budget process. Any questions or concerns can be directed to Wheeler Opera House Executive Director, Gena Buhler. Page 1 of 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Michael Horvath, P.E., Civil Engineer II THROUGH: Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer April Long, P.E., Stormwater Manager DATE OF MEMO: March 1, 2019 RE: King St. Infrastructure Improvements – Follow up to Council Work Session Alternative Design Options for the Roadway SUMMARY: During the Critical Pedestrian Connection Work Session held on January 8th, staff reviewed the sidewalk connection proposed on King Street with Council. During this discussion, Council directed staff to assess alternative options for the drainage implementation that did not involve the use of curb and gutter. The following memo describes alternatives that could be applied to the King Street roadway that would effectively manage the stormwater flooding. BACKGROUND: Several years ago, staff began to receive concerns from residents of King Street regarding a drainage issue that flooded the entire width of the roadway during storm events. There is no stormwater conveyance system for this street and there is a low point located in the middle of the street between two speed humps. This flooding issue was highlighted during the development of the Smuggler Hunter Master Drainage Plan (completed in 2015) and infrastructure improvements on King Street were added to a list of capital improvement needs in that area. In the fall of 2017, King Street residents experienced more frequent flooding during snowmelt events that threatened flooding a nearby home and created unsafe driving and walking conditions. They notified staff that they would like improvements made to address this flooding. Staff attempted a quick and simple in-house solution that involved a shallow roadside gravel-filled trench. However, the attempt was not successful and in the winter of 2017-2018, the City’s Streets Department regularly responded to requests from adjacent property owners to remove ponding to prevent downstream flooding. Therefore, staff worked to design a more effective and permanent solution – King Street Infrastructure Improvements - as recommended in the Smuggler Hunter Drainage Master Plan. Page 2 of 9 The design included two inlets located in the low spot, connected to the Neale Ave main storm line by 260 linear feet of 18-inch stormwater pipe. It included curb and gutter to convey drainage to the inlets and prevent downstream flooding, and a 4 ft sidewalk on the north side to provide public connectivity between Neale Avenue and Smuggler trailhead as recommended in the 2015 Bike and Pedestrian Masterplan. The design was based on public outreach that was performed throughout the design project. Conceptual plans were presented at an open house on April 5, 2018. All residents that live within 300 ft of King St were notified of the open house. Citizen feedback was split 50/50 on the addition of a sidewalk. It was communicated to citizens that curb and gutter was necessary to solve drainage issue with extensive tree removal. Numerous King St residents were met with or communicated with via email following the open house to discuss the design and how final design was settled on. The King Street Infrastructure Improvements contract with Aspen Digger was approved by Council on December 10, 2018. At that time, and due to concerns voiced by residents, Council indicated they would like more discussion on the proposed sidewalk. As requested, staff followed up on the sidewalk connection on King Street during the Critical Pedestrian Connections Council Work Session on January 8, 2019. Council discussed the scope of the King Street project with staff and residents in attendance. Council directed staff to suspend the project until alternatives, specifically ones with a more natural aesthetic, could be fully vetted. DISCUSSION: At Council request, staff has prepared four alternatives to the originally proposed design for King Street Infrastructure Improvements (one is a do-nothing alternative, which leaves the street in its existing condition). A cross section and narrative for each design option, including the original, is provided in Attachment A. Staff has included “advantages” and “disadvantages” as well. Page 3 of 9 Only Option B has been fully designed. The other cross sections are conceptual and may have further impacts or not be feasible. To provide opportunity to review the design, the contract with Aspen Digger (approved in December 2018) was put on hold. Cancelling this project will result in a breach of the executed contract. RECOMMENDATION: Having reviewed and considered potential alternatives, staff continues to recommend Option B as the option most capable of alleviating the flooding issue and meeting the recommendations of the Smuggler Hunter Master Drainage Plan and the Bike and Ped Master Plan while meeting all other City requirements and standards. ATTACHMENT A – King Street Design Options Page 4 of 9 ATTACHMENT A OPTION A - EXISTING CONDITION: The existing asphalt pavement section on King St. varies considerably in width from 17 ft to 27 ft. The existing roadway section includes an 8 ft parking lane for the majority of the roadway and a travel lane that varies between 9 ft and 19 ft. The City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards require a travel lane of 11 ft. Parking is prohibited in the section where the roadway does not meet a minimum 11 ft of width. During the January 8th work session, citizens described vehicle speeds being high and staff concludes this could be due to a widened road. Citizens also described pedestrians travelling within the road, but view this as part of the character of the neighborhood. Page 5 of 9 OPTION B - RECOMMENDED CROSS SECTION: The proposed design includes an 8 ft parking lane similar to existing conditions, 11 ft vehicle travel lane, curb and gutter, and 4 ft sidewalk on the north side of the drive. This cross section was included in the plans that are under contract with Aspen Digger. Advantages · Alleviates drainage issue utilizing curb & gutter as conveyance · Curb & gutter creates a solid raised barrier that significantly reduces risk to structures from flooding · The travel lane is narrowed to reduce vehicle speeds for traffic calming · The travel lane is consistent which creates user predictability · Sidewalk allows for safe pedestrian passage · Sidewalk allows for fire department required drive lane width · Protects underground utilities · Meets City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards · The sidewalk meets the intent of Pedestrian and 2015 Bicycle Masterplan for connectivity Disadvantages · Removes 7 trees for inlet installation & 3 for sidewalk · Modifies the historic character of the street · The neighborhood is split on the need for a sidewalk without a consensus. Page 6 of 9 OPTION C - CROSS SECTION WITHOUT SIDEWALK: The proposed design includes an 8 ft parking lane, 11 ft vehicle travel lane, and curb and gutter. Advantages · Alleviates drainage issue utilizing curb & gutter as conveyance with stormwater capture · Curb & gutter creates a solid barrier that significantly reduces risk to structures from flooding · The travel lane is narrowed to reduce vehicle speeds for traffic calming · Protects underground utilities Disadvantages · The roadway width does not meet the current fire department agreement-Engineering would be required to obtain permission from the fire department to proceed with this design · Removes 7 trees for inlet installation · Curb & gutter can be viewed as an adjustment to the historic character of the roadway · Reduces the safety for pedestrians and increases the interaction between users Page 7 of 9 OPTION D - SWALE CROSS SECTION WITH PARKING: The proposed design includes an 8 ft parking lane, 11 ft vehicle travel lane, and swales on both sides of the road. The southern swale is deeper to provide capacity to protect structures. Advantages · Reduces risk for drainage issue utilizing swales as conveyance · Swales reduce the risk to structures from flooding · The travel lane is narrowed to reduce vehicle speeds for traffic calming · Protects underground utilities · More natural aesthetic Disadvantages · The roadway width does not meet the current fire department agreement-Engineering would be required to obtain permission from the fire department to proceed with this design · Removes 7 trees for inlet installation · Removes an estimated 20 additional trees for swales-This has not been fully vetted through the Parks Department and may not be permitted · Historical character of the neighborhood is modified with the substantial tree removal · Reduces the safety for pedestrians and increases the interaction between users · Prevents sidewalk extensions in the future · Requires further above ground utility relocation Page 8 of 9 OPTION E - SWALE CROSS SECTION WITHOUT PARKING: The proposed design includes an 11 ft vehicle travel lane, and swales on both sides of the road. The southern swale is wide and deeper to provide capacity to protect structures. This section does not include on street parking. Advantages · Alleviates drainage issue utilizing swales as conveyance · Swales protect homes from flooding · The travel lane is narrowed to reduce vehicle speeds for traffic calming · Protects underground utilities · Meets City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards · More natural aesthetic Disadvantages · Removes on street parking · The roadway width does not meet the current fire department agreement-Engineering would be required to obtain permission from the fire department to proceed with this design · Removes 7 trees for inlet installation · Removes an additional 3 trees for swales · Historical character of the neighborhood is modified with the substantial tree removal · Reduces the safety for pedestrians and increases the interaction between users · Prevents sidewalk extensions in the future Page 9 of 9 OPTION F – PERVIOUS PAVERS AT ROADWAY LOW POINT: The proposed design includes an 8 ft parking lane similar to existing conditions, 11 ft vehicle travel lane and permeable pavers for a portion of the roadway. Advantages · Reduces the ponding that occurs at the low point of the roadway · Infiltrates minor storm events and creates positive water quality · Tree removal is not required · Reduces the impact on the character of the neighborhood Disadvantages · Difficult to implement · A higher degree of maintenance is required · Reduces the safety for pedestrians and increases the interaction between users · Snow removal is complicated and often damages streets that change material midblock · A degree of risk in flooding of structures during large storm events · High cost · Winter functionality of system is minimal · No conveyance of stormwater to infiltration area allowing stormwater to flow onto private property · The roadway width does not meet the current fire department agreement-Engineering would be required to obtain permission from the fire department to proceed with this design