HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20120807MEETING AGENDA
August 7, 2012
4 :00pm, City Council Chambers
JOINT WORK SESSION OF CITY COUNCIL & BOCC
4:00 Update on Pro Challenge Bike Race
4:15 West of Maroon Creek Plan
4:30 Centennial Homeowners Association Request
5:10 Housing Summit Agenda and Goals
5:50 Other Discussion Items
6:00 Adjourn
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council and Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Nancy Lesley, Director of Special Events
THRU: Steve Barwick, Manager, City of Aspen
Jon Peacock, Manager, Pitkin County
DATE OF MEMO: July 28, 2012
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2012
RE: Pro Cycling Challenge Update
There is no request of either the City Council or the Board of County Commissioners. This is an
informational update only.
DISCUSSION: We are 14 days out from the Pro Challenge arrival into Aspen. Over these last
few months, the City, County, Sheriff's office, Police Department, Forest Service, lodging
community, restaurant community and the local organizing committee have been working hard to
ensure that Aspen is well prepared for the arrival of the racers, spectators and race staff on
Wednesday, August 22.
Who are we? There are many, many people working on this event in various capacities to ensure
the success. It is too multi- faceted to just be one person; therefore I would like to name the
individuals that have already put in countless hours to create a fun, exciting and safe environment
for this event. The Aspen Organizing committee and lead entity for this event are the following:
Nancy Lesley, Sandy Doebler, Kristin Drake, Jeff Woods, Stephen Ellsperman, Justin Todd,
Ashley Cantrell, Tami Solodnz, Jeff Alden and John Sobieralski, Samantha Ferrara, Lynn
Rumbaugh, Bill Tomcich, Julia Theisen, Toni Case, Eliza Voss, Maureen Poshman, Damien
Williamson, Sara -Jane Johnson, Mitzi Rapkin, Devon Padgett, Mike Morgan, Pam Herr, Barb
Frank, Bill Kight, David Francomb.
The Command and General Staff that will ensure the safety of the community during this event is
comprised of. Joe DiSalvo Pitkin County Sheriff, Richard Pryor Chief of Police, Captain Richard
Duran of the Colorado State Patrol, Tom Grady, Emergency Manager, Gretchen Born, Incident
Commander, Renee Rayton, Incident Commander, Adam Loudon, Grant Jahnke, Parker Lathrop,
Mike Tracey, Vanessa March, Jason Kasper, Bruce Romero, Alice Hackney, Scott Thompson,
Gabe Muething, Blair Weyer.
Page 1 of 3
Lodging: While last year at this time there was few noticeable bookings of spectators, this year
is a very different picture. The night of the Wednesday August 22nd now shows the strongest
advanced bookings of any single room night beyond the end of July for as far in advance for a far
in advance as the occupancy reports project, which is currently the end of December. Plus it is a
Wednesday during what has traditionally been the quietest week of the summer, and now the
entire week is starting to show some signs of strength as well. Great to see that our lodging
communities' investment seems to be paying off for many of them within its second year.
Sponsorship: is contracted at 80% away from our goal. We have seen great enthusiasm for this
event with our partners. They are: Marmot, Shane Aspen Real Estate, Aspen Skiing Company,
Dancing Bear, ESC and NetJets. In addition we are starting a countdown to the race on
Wednesday, August 15th with what we are calling Bike Aspen. Everything about enjoying the
bike and enjoying all Aspen has to offer.
VIP ticket Sales: AVSC is once again selling VIP tickets for the Pro Challenge and they are
beginning to implement their sales plan, which is part email, part phone calls and many face to
face sales. It also includes packages with the lodging community. The Finish VIP tent, located
on Main Street across from Paepcke Park will have unobstructed viewing of the finish. Opening
at noon, it will be serving food and alcohol, have seating and TV coverage of the race until the
action can be viewed live The Start VIP tent will also be on Main Street, but in the same
location as last year's finish, across from the Courthouse. Breakfast will be served and it will be
open for approximately 3 hours from 9am to noon.
Finish Line Festival: The Festival will be based in and around Paepcke Park, utilizing Aspen,
Monarch and Hopkins Avenues. We have been pursuing local vendors to add to the national
vendor that travel town to town with the Pro Challenge. The entertainment stage, beer garden
and a prominent food tent will be located directly in the park with others (utilizing trailers) going
on the streets. The festival will open at approximately 11 am and close at 6pm. Along Monarch
Street, between Hyman and Hopkins we are creating a kid zone that will also include the area
non profits. By extending the finish line to Paepcke Park and adding the Festival there, we feel
we are creating a great energized finish line experience.
Concert: There will be a free concert in Wagner Park on Wednesday, August 22nd starting at
6:30pm. This concert is intended to keep the energy, excitement and people in town. The band is
being secured by Michael Goldberg of Belly Up and production is being handled by Joe Lang of
Tumbleweed Productions.
On the Mall: Last weekend we started our "tent on the mall" for information, ticket sales and
awareness. This tent is manned by Pro Challenge staff and will be on the mall Saturday's and
Sunday's throughout the summer. In addition, staff has created a timeline utilizing letters, emails
and newsletters to be in continual contact with those living in the affected areas.
Community Meetings: Staff held two community meetings last week to review and answer
questions from the attendees. The attendees had some great questions and in general, very
supportive comments for the Pro Challenge.
Page 2 of 3
Emails: Staff has created a email list of local shops and utilizing this list and ACRA's email, has
been sending information out and will continue to do so.
Grassroots and Radio: Starting in August, staff will take to the media to get the word out about
impacts and opportunities that will happen on Wednesday and Thursday, August 22 °d and 23ra
6 Panel Kiosk: On the 6 panel kiosk located across from the Wheeler near the water fountains,
there is a panel completely devoted to creating awareness of this event that went up in early May.
Newspaper Ads: In late June we started our newspaper ads that highlight sponsorship, festival
booths, VIP tickets, volunteering opportunities and impacts and other opportunities.
Brochures, Posters and Locals Guide: In late July brochures and posters were printed and
distributed throughout the business and lodging community. The locals guide will once again
highlight information pertaining to Wednesday and Thursday, August 22 and 23. For example
location of manned street crossings, portalets and information about Independence Pass.
Website: The website, aspenupcc.com also has the latest information and is continually being
updated and things solidify and get finalized.
City and County Employees: City Hall and most County Departments will be closed all day on
Wednesday, August 22 °d and until 1pm on Thursday, August 23`d. Staff is being encouraged to
volunteer for the bike race on both days in lieu of working at their normal jobs.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: We are currently holding at our projected expenditures of
approximately $400,000 which includes the Wednesday night concert.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ZGreen is a strong part of our entire planning process.
Ashley Cantrell from the Environmental Health Department is heading this up, and we are
working to create, or as nearly as we can create, a zero waste event. We are looking into brining
in water buffalo's to supplement the permanent water station that will be in town.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action is required of the City Council or the Board of County
Commissioners at this time.
Page 3 of 3
J [ ! � 11 1 11 `Quarin9F
W FRANCIS ST pNCIS ST c 0
p l
E ~
y
U
W HALLAM ST rn
f. E HALLAM ST �
x ti
o
Z Rip
z GRA,
-u u l i —1-1-1
W BLEEKER ST E BLEEKER ST
U)
z r=z: 6 Z L IBRARY-ALLEYC
Z Z f a1 2, Iw
Z Z
W MAIN ST
Z E MAIN ST =z
N
H N
N
N Z U N
w i W i` `
y N 11 ! U N
wr,u
'E FRA'NC1s��
z:BAY.S7�
a
a { i
E BLEEKERC�STA
�to1
L7 /
I E HYMAN AVE I
'_E HOPKINS AVE
GIBSON:4Vg
k, �w
\ KINGS T
Roarin /grFotk�R^'er�—
�r
N
Z
J
W
IJ
W COOPER AVE E COOPER AVE E COOPER AVE E COOPER AVE OL
LI'ITLEC1OJD�� N -=i�.
u) -
1 N
t T
Z �9_E DURANT AVE E DURANT AVE
• P �I
`r LANDING
DEAN ST C DEAN ST
JUAN STx - - -' /� �W—WATERSAVE
a J
N 0
r cn H
a — GILBERT.ST` E.JUANITAST �*!
co
¢
ti I G
E SNARK ST I € i gSPEN MTNRo
SUMMIT.ST S GALENA SZ
0 200 eet 400 Ski Lifts w Rivers /Streams Parks Map Updated: Mar 15, 2012
V 1 _ -Ar 1 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN FINISH n Road ledae of oavementl Parcel Boundaries
z
W FRANCIS ST l< 90CIS ST
NI .
x
U
W HALLAM ST E HALLAM ST
Z i
a
z
r BLEEKER ST E BLEEKER ST
11 11 F
11j14 N y,
lU
`Qoarin9
E FRANCIS S-'s
I I
N
z:8
AY ST —�
z
rn
GYC'� z I
w U
A
R(� / G
GhANDE PLj2p
E BLEEKER STS
LIBRARYALLEY�, `� T
W MAIN ST
It= E MAIN ST
Z♦♦
� r
r
N
Iy
Yn =
Z O
N
/A Z
V/ W
z
J
II
Q O
c
rn
IN
N N
N
W HYMANAVE E HYMAN
COOPER AVE E COOPER AV
� LIJTLE CI.OJD,��
N,
N
C E DURANT q
N
1
/ P`rLANDING
in
N
4
iii>•yfYf� -� ii 'rn
EC
F] __imp.�.11 r7
DEAN
E HYMAN AVE
l .Loix
MPP� <ti ? oN�000
C
� _J_
GISSON -AVE
KING
zuE sr
4
Roaring,FoRive
EALF. P�L
E HOPKINS AVE
S
I
F Aid io z
V) wry WATERS AVE
AN ST y
LLi
U C9�
a
J 0
I
Feet
0 200 400
I l �4F+tt-I i
O - N
in
Ni
z
Ml
j- GILBERT.ST—N t
ti� E'JUANITA ST G,-
y 9SPENM7NRO
E SNARK ST
j
Il
I SUMMIT.ST SGALENAS� ��pSRO
Sk, 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN START Road —Rivers/Streams arclBounda Par Map Updated: Mar 15, 2012
!—! Roatl (edge of oavement) Parcel Boundaries
W FRANCIS ST ypNCIS ST • 0
It
f-
v1
2
_ U
W HALLM ST E ALAM ST
O
C)
Z f
W MAIN ST
� E MAIN
�y >
N N t.-M ! pf
N
j W HOPKINS AVE E H AVE
W HYMAN AVE E HYMAN AVE
7!Z I� C'
W COOPER AVE E COOPER AVE
LRTLE C� O v~i; 11.E t
H
Z
t;`E DUANT AVE
pq �N
'S LANDING
DEAN ST
_ F
N
i I �
FRANCIS S-.
N
Z: BAY STS
a It
1
LLJ %
P�
E BLEEKER STA
Y( c'
I�I JJ
J
W
F Z
� a
E HYMAN AVE
i -it t
4P t�
o �''- 3HS}ii77
M
AN ST -= F
WATERSAVE�
X ROUTE CRO kANGS
co
W — GILBERT.ST —�
Im
® n PORTMETS N iJUANITAST i -
LM
E SNARK STS gSPEN MTN),O
LSUMMIT.ST SGALENgS� `,a<pSQO: /
0 200 �t
400 Ski Lifts y�.-- Rivers/Streams Parks Map Updated: Mar 15, 2012
nn 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN FINISH r, Rnadlntlnnninavamnntl P.— Rn „n�a�a�
K1
I I SAM r z
f 1T�i C�TT��1
Is ST
W MAIN ST
In
ill mil
i
■
I =,
r
r�
::rte
URANTAVE
q I
E MAIN
4
E R
FANC
DAY sr
rr
E DLEEKER STA
® ® ICI
!fi
Al- not
„•�. • r
1s it- 0 2 - M. 1::;
� =1
��•�� f l to lit � ' ■■ `�
1�� l �,1 I IM1 j
rr
mass
y •i u■ i�' t i _'��� /(►�1 `���
all iii
all u iiiii •
1 CLOSURE
I h - rySPRINGS •- '
AGQ�'Y 'Qoaring•F °���
,SMITH S.r
W FRANCIS ST ��IICIS ST a p . - E FRANCIS
BAY S7 — �
S F
U -
W HALLAM ST E_HALLAM ST j to YC�
z Z R/O GRANDE PLj �'
W BLEEKER ST E BLEEKER ST
w / E BLEEKER ST.
I
it I (
z N ALLEY
z f
®W MAIN ST z E MAIN ST�Z -�
-J
\ 01 /r
rn
�jBSON G'Iv� if
AVE
KNo STS
us'
_V4
�-
rq
Io r
z
w a
w
z
N
z NEALE P� Roaring•Fork -River
z y
a Q
1���yj 9j
�t
N
N
N
r
W HOPKINS AVE
E HOPKINSAVE
W E HOPKINS AVE
j
z
z
,�m❑
W
J�Lj� W
W HYMAN AVE
E HYMAN AVE
E HYMAN'AVE
IrTi
t E COOPER AVER
\` W COOPER AVE
E COOPER AVE
I E COOPER AVE
^��
OUO
LITTLE G,
9
mi
'
rnrow
EDURANTAVE,
u
g �w
LANDING
DEAN'ST
rn �
JUAN ST z
Lu
a
cn
GILBERT.S 'm
E J UANITA STS
I
E SNARK ST,
� Street Closure =e,111122
Feet 2012 ASPEN PCC STREET CLOSURE
0 200 400
—,h = ene per
iii ..■ ills err
t i:: ■�� •oonr■
��a ��■ IIIf11� .
/e Ski Lins ^ Rivers /Streams a Parks Map Updated: July 18, 2012
M Road fedoe of oavementl Parcel Boundaries
L
,W * 4 1 r
1%11
1
dw
�I
d 100
n"'ti A
EXLCUS IVE VIP TICKET EXPEUIEN CO
TALE 3 FINISH TENT
UGUST E3
he finish tent pulses with excitement
s the world's best bikers speed through
awn to a dramatic finish on Main
treet. This is the best viewing of the
nish line & awards ceremony.
500 Tickets Include:
Extensive catered hors d'oeuvres and
open bar
The ONLY in -town parking
TV coverage in the tent
Nothing between you and the riders,
view of the finish line and awards cer-
emony
Reserved bathroom facilities
Viewing tent open from 12pm - Bpm.
$350 tax - deductible - approximately
10% donated to AVSC
Cl
STAGE 4 START TENT
AUGUST E4
The start tent buzzes with excitement
as the racers prepare to kick off anoth-
er grueling trip over Independence Pass
VIP tickets includes private access to ai
tograph alley.
S1 50 Tickets Include:
• Catered Breakfast
• Coffee bar and breakfast celebr
tion cocktails
• Exclusive access to the riders as
they sign in before the race
• Access to in -town parking
• TV coverage in the tents
• Unobstructed view of the start, start
ceremony and interviews
• Reserved bathroom facilities
• $100 tax - deductible - approximately
10% donated to AVSC
MEMO OF INTEREST
WORK SESSION DATE: Joint Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners & Aspen
City Council Meeting
August 7, 2012
TOPIC: Update on West of Maroon Creek Sub -Area Plan
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director
Ellen Sassano, Senior Long Range Planner
ISSUE STATEMENT: The purpose of this memo is to provide an update to the Board of County
Commissioners and City Council (CC) regarding progress towards completion of the West of
Maroon Creek Sub -Area Plan. The item is for informational purposes only. Staff will be available
at the meeting to respond to questions, should there be any.
BACKGROUND: One of the fundamental directives of the West of Castle Creek Chapter in the
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) is to develop a physical sub -area land use plan to
augment the policies in the AACP. Since the AACP was adopted, the name of the sub -area plan has
been changed to "West of Maroon Creek" and the proposed planning area boundary modified to
eliminate the area between the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek bridges along Highway 82. The
modification acknowledges that the area between bridges is unlikely to change over the course of the
next ten years and the life of this Plan. Regardless of the name change and minor boundary
modification, the West of Castle Creek Chapter in the 2012 AACP still provides the fundamental
vision and direction in the West of Maroon Creek Plan (WOMP).
In general this is a pretty simple plan without a lot of dramatic changes to current uses in the area.
However, the plan directs dimensional standards for future design and landscaping guidelines yet to
be established as part of implementation. It also establishes parameters to accomplish the following
AACP vision:
"The West of (Maroon) Creek Corridor area should provide a transition from the rural expanses of Pitkin
County to the urbanized atmosphere of downtown Aspen. The area should feature separate and recognizable
nodes of unique uses and functions, maintaining a land use pattern and scenic quality along the Highway
corridor that creates a distinct series of visual experiences that signal arrival to the Aspen Area. "
County Staff and the County Planning and Zoning Commission have been working on the West of
Maroon Plan since April, 2012, utilizing direction from the AACP, input from public meetings held
in 2008 at the North 40 Fire Station (specifically geared toward land use issues in the West of
Maroon Creek area,) and P &Z site visits to the area.
Schedule: A public hearing for Plan adoption is optimistically scheduled for August 28, 2012.
We have scheduled an open house on August 21, 2012 to provide an opportunity for public review
of the draft plan and future land use map. City Council and BOCC are encouraged to attend the Open
house on Aug 21. City P &Z has been invited to all meetings and will be specifically invited to attend
the open house - and to stay for a one -on -one P &Z discussion to ensure the plan meets the objectives
of the AACP West of Castle Creek Chapter.
Key Topics:
Plan Boundary & Aspen UGB The West of Maroon Creek Plan area boundary has been
established, along with a slightly revised Urban Growth Boundary per the AACP (expanded on the
east side of Highway 82 between the Sardy home property and the Snow Dump parcel - see
Attachment A for graphic.) Land use designations for this specific area are contemplated as open
space with provisions for governmental uses if specific criteria are met.
Future Land Use In general, land use designations are being established for the Plan area.
These in turn will indicate whether or not zoning amendments will be recommended in the
implementation section to accommodate use.
Activity Nodes The Plan defines "Activity Nodes" in order to direct development to coincide
with areas generally developed or planned for development today. The intention is to maintain
scenic views and open corridors between the activity nodes so as to prevent the sprawl of
development as one approaches Aspen.
Scenic Scenic view planes and corridors are being established within the Plan area.
Transportation The Plan identifies transportation improvements contemplated by several
existing access and transit related Plans for the area, trail connections, and safe highway crossings
for pedestrians.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN: The West of Maroon Creek planning effort addresses all aspects
of the County Strategic Plan, including the core focuses of Flourishing Natural and Built
Environment, Livable and Supportive Community and Prosperous Economy.
BUDGETARY IMPACT: None
STAFF ACTION: Staff will relay any comments made by the Boards to the County Planning
& Zoning Commission for their consideration as they move towards completing the West of
Maroon Creek Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A West of Maroon Creek Plan Map
2
0 k WITA Wfi
Us [ :
OMOO
��-�
ilL�T-s
May 17, 2012
Dear Board of County Commissioners,
The homeowners of Centennial wish to congratulate you on your stewardship of our Housing
We are pleased to hear that the program is flush with funds especially after the economic doi
the last few years.
We are sending this letter to express our interest in the sustainability of the Housing Prograrr
there may be other options for the future of the Housing Program under consideration, wefe
community's best interests may be served in preserving the assets we currently have.
As you may be aware, Centennial isfacing some difficult challenges as we move beyond ourfirst quarter
century. It has come to our attention that design flaws and "value engineering" have left us with serious
structural damage, waterleaks, and mold issues. As these problems arose, we took it upon ourselves to
hire experts to investigate these issues so that a thorough assessment could be made. After consulting
with engineers, architects, mold experts, building contractors among others, it is apparent that our
buildings are in need of major repairs in order to be a reliable, habitable, safe and healthy environment
for ourselves, our children, and pets. The estimates we received from these independent professionals
were well beyond what the Housing Program would deem as affordable. This information was brought
to the attention of City staffers who then hired their own experts. The City's estimates for our repairs
were less than one -tenth of the estimates that we were given.
The Housing Program is important for many reasons. Not only does it maintain a sense of community,
but it is the reason that many of us still live and are able to live in this valley. The Housing Program has
allowed many of us to put down roots and establish ourselves as citizens of Aspen and Pitki n County.
Whereas much of our community is transient we have become the backbone of a resort area that
people come to visit time and again because theyfeel a connection to the people that are its
foundation. We provide the laborthat keeps local businesses running year after year. Centennial, being
one of the first projects, was built without the 6 figure subsidies that the current projects, such as
Burlingame, enjoy. It was also built before any environmental initiatives were in place. Centennial enjoys
a favored location in Aspen not in the heart of the city but easily accessible byfoot, bike, or bus. We
have common areas where neighbors can congregate. We are a high density development housing well
over 300 employees and their dependents if we include the rental units. All these people serve the
community in various ways and none of them contribute to the growing trafficjam that plagues the
Highway and Main Street in the mornings and afternoons. Centennial is nearly an ideal project that
would most likely never be built today. The land would be too expensive. The construction would
require enormous subsidies. And most likely the area would be unavailable having been occupied by
multi- million dollar second homes that would sitempty most of the time. Centennial is a community
asset thatwhile occupied by a few hundred people at a time does have turnover and opportunityfor
others in the area to utilize it.
In our current situation, we are collecting and spending significant capital reserves to address the severe
and urgent damage to the buildings. We have engaged the City to assess our situation and provide some
assistance so that Centennial is not lost to the community due to the current owners financial
limitations. While we often meet with resistance when talking to City staff about our situation, we have
complied with all their requests for further study. We live under the rules and guidelines of APCHA, but
are considered to be fully independent, free market homeowners when it comes to addressing the
original construction flaws that are now coming to light. Mayor Ireland has confirmed that Centennial
was built as cheaply as possible using plans purchased from a development in Israel. We are plagued
with buildings designed for a desert region with very little rain and no snow. There is almost no
insulation and no vapor barriers behind our walls and what is there is water - drenched. The roof allows
waterto run down the sides of the building across siding that, for aesthetic reasons, does not overlap
allowing water to leak in. The walkways and outer areas of the buildings draw water towards the
buildings instead of funneling it away. Mold is growing at elevated levels creating a health hazard and
compromising the integrity of the structure that keeps these units standing. Further compounding
problems are our unpredictable and expensive insurance options due to the known issues with the
building. We are required to carry insurance but will never be able to submit a claim to coverthe current
damage. The experts have said that this project is nowhere near today's building codes and was barely
up to code when it was built.
Recent newspaper articles have indicated that demand for new employee housing has slowed especially
in the higher income categories. In fact, downvalleyfree market housing is now competitively priced
with what APCHA can offer as deed - restricted. We agree that this situation may be temporary and the
need forworker housing may again rise. Employee housing that has been developed recently requires
subsidies of $200,000- $400,000 in order to be offered at affordable prices and even then interest is
soft. The BOCC seems to be suggesting that further subsidies are required, as well. Centennial received
no financial aid in its construction and has the benefit of a highly desirable location. Had Centennial
been granted a fraction of the subsidies of current projects, there is no telling how much sturdier, more
durable, quieter, and more energy efficient it could have been. We have the opportunity now to correct
these oversights. In fact, it is imperative since we have limited time to repair the damage or risk losing
the integrity of the building and suffering safety and health risks.
While we debate the merits of building more housing downvalley possibly adding to the traffic
congestion or further subsidizing projects that are unaffordable or not in demand even after significant
subsidies, there are committed, loyal, long -term members of our community who are forced to rebuild
their homes in the present so that Centennial will be there for future generations. When any of our
neighbors are forced to sell because the financial burden of re- constructing the buildings has become
too much, they will not re -coop one dime of the money they put in to keep this place standing. Will
Centennial even be desirable to those now seeking housing considering the financial burden, mold, and
structural problems they will encounter as homeowners?
We have been advised by City staff to "band -aid" our problems so that they can live with the fact that
each homeowner only spent a few thousand instead of tens of thousands to keep their home standing.
This is how the problem was created in the first place, by not thinking long -term. Centennial needs to be
repaired so that the same problems do not re -occur in years or months. We should be energy efficient
and environmentally friendly in keeping with the initiatives of the City and County. Centennial has a
huge footprint in Aspen and should be a model, shining example of the effectiveness of the Housing
Program. It should not be a mistake that we sweep under the rug while moving onto new construction
that we can do right this time. We are winners of the Housing lottery. That winning bid is turning into a
loser very quickly as we move from affordable condos into units with possible $90,000 - $100,000
assessments and no added value.
While much more care is taken into the construction of new projects yet with enormous price tags
associated in subsidies and asking price, we ask that some of the funds generated for the Housing
Program be allocated for sustainability. Please let's utilize that money to repair Centennial and not have
it be a blotch on APCHA's and the Aspen community's record. The current unit owners, not the previous
ones and not the future ones, are being asked to bear the entire burden of Centennial's repair. Either
that or move back into the questionable, unstable world of Aspen's rental market or move downvalley
further splintering our community and adding to the line of cars that stretches to Buttermilk in the
morning and well down Main Street in the afternoon. We have agreed to the rules, restrictions, and
limitations that allow us to live at this APCHA project. Please do not turn your backs on this community
asset Please help us to keep our homes standing and safe now and in to the future.
We have complied with the requests of City staff in using our funds to rebuild another set of units.
Considerable capital reserves were spent to rebuild a section in 2009 and to hire experts to assess the
damage. The data regarding the status of these buildings and how they got thisway is readily available
for them to see. The experts have looked at the problems and made recommendations. There is no
mystery. This was not neglect. Previous HOA Boards have followed a standard maintenance schedule.
These buildings would have needed re- construction from Day One in order to have avoided these
problems. As an HOA Board we are not tasked with recognizing major design flaws. We are there to
administer the bylaws and make decisions representing the interests of our neighbors. Right now it is
everyone's best interest that these buildings be repaired and made safe and sustainable. We
respectfully askfor assistance in keeping the current affordable housing affordable and not bankrupting
those individuals who happen to live at Centennial at this pant in time and whose only desire was for a
reliable place to live.
We respectfully request a public or private discussion with you board on these matters. Please contact
the Centennial Homeowners Association board members at centennialhoa @email.com so that we may
schedule a meeting time. Thank you foryour time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Centennial Homeowners
centennialhoa @gmail.com
July 30, 2012
Dear Mr. Peacock,
Per your request, the Centennial Homeowners Association wishes to work with the BOCC and
City Council on the following goals:
review data gathered from completed construction repair projects as requested by
BOCC and Council members
A- find long -term solutions for keeping Centennial and other APCHA housing safe,
structurally- sound, desirable and affordable
A discuss a program of sustainability for the affordable housing program
A obtain the professional estimate for a complete repair and reconstruction of
Centennial through the process agreed upon by the BOCC and City Council
As stated in the letter we submitted in May, we believe that a program of sustainability for our
affordable housing program has become necessary at this time. Homeowners are being forced
into steep assessments and depleting capital reserves to maintain their properties' basic
habitability. As APCHA appears to be well - funded with $10 million even after the downturn in
the housing market, now would be the perfect time to discuss a means to keep our current
housing "desirable and affordable" while continuing to buy and build for the future.
In our specific situation, it has been verified by numerous sources that Centennial was "value -
constructed." The buildings were put up barely to code at the time. Insulation, vapor barriers,
flashing were just some of the items that were minimized or left out altogether. Design flaws
have accelerated aging and exacerbated structural, health and safety issues. Contractors who
worked on the original construction in 1984 and those who have made repairs over the years
have remarked that the buildings were made to last 25 years. In addition, Centennial was built
without the large subsidies that current affordable housing projects require.
The current homeowners of Centennial, not the past or future ones, will be solely responsible for
the financial burden of re- constructing these buildings which a professional team has estimated
to be well beyond what would be expected of a typical HOA's capital reserves and replacement
funds. We have just finished repairing another section of units at our own expense as previously
requested by our City and County officials so that we can generate an accurate estimate of future
repair costs and understand what these buildings require to remain safe and habitable. We wish
to develop a long -term plan and understanding of the costs involved as agreed upon at our last
Joint meeting with the City and County.
An opportunity for a development like Centennial will most likely never come again. We are in
an ideal location within the City on a valuable piece of property. APCHA's stated purpose is
"To assure the existence of a supply of desirable and affordable housing..." With the numerous
structural problems, water leakage, mold, age, high HOA dues, and expensive repairs, Centennial
is less than desirable and increasingly unaffordable. We wish to discuss the possibilities and
opportunities for our housing program to truly serve the needs of its current and future residents.
While it is understood that this one meeting will not accomplish all our goals, we feel it is vital
for the government entities that direct our affordable, employee housing program to consider its
evolution while sustaining and improving its existing stock. We hope that the upcoming housing
summit will also benefit from this discussion.
Sincerely,
Centennial Homeowners Association
centennialhoa @gmail.com
THE CITY OF ASI'r;'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
DATE: August 1, 2012
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2012
RE: Joint Worksession — Centennial
SUMMARY:
The work recommended by City staff is inappropriately characterized by the Centennial HOA as "a
band aid." It is in fact a comprehensive effort to fix the problems with their buildings in a
responsible manner, consistent with any owner's desire to balance fixing the problem for a long
term solution with responsible use of an owner's funds. It is consistent with the approach taken for
years now by the Centennial Rental Project — constructed at the same time and with the same design
features. Results to -date are encouraging and suggest a total project cost much more in keeping with
our original estimates of less than $10,000 per unit. This is an amount that is reasonably within the
ability of the Centennial HOA to finance through assessments and loans from a bank (which loans
banks are ready to make), and can be done over the course of several years.
A repair estimate from Summit Consulting (cost split between the HOA and the governments) will:
review the Building Science Corporation (BSC) report dated 02.21.2012 and solicit feedback from
Athens Builders (the HOA's current Contractor); John Forster (HOA representative); and BSC.
A narrative for the following estimate option will be prepared prior to commencing the estimate
phase.
Once approved, master bid forms will be assembled and quantity surveys will be performed. Select
subcontractor feedback will be solicited to market validate the estimate. The estimate will be
accompanied by a Basis of Budget attachment.
The approach/estimate option that will be the basis for the estimate will be similar to the approach
taken by the Centennial rental project:
• An estimate to replace the exterior wall envelop of the south and west facing aspects based upon
BSC feedback . The north and east facing aspects will be reviewed for water intrusion areas and
particularly for repairs /replacement of flashing details at the roof /wall juncture.
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTION:
Approach and Preliminary Findings:
• In early 2010 the City agreed to provide interim project management services to assist the
HOA/APCHA/City of Aspen/Pitkin County team in expanding the overall evaluation.
• The City requested, received, and executed a proposal from Building Science Corporation
(BSC), a Boston based engineering and architecture firm with extensive experience in
building mechanics, systems, and water management. BSC has conducted numerous
forensic examinations and prepared evaluations and solutions for moisture damaged
buildings. The City has worked with BSC as the liaison for the US Department of Energy
Building America program.
• BSC visited the site on June 30th, 2010. For the investigations the City engaged Rudd
Construction (Rudd) to provide manpower, equipment, tools and materials to assist in
uncovering areas for inspection, and for replacement and waterproofing repair. Also present
on the day of these inspections, at the request of Lee Cassin (City Environmental Health
Director) was industrial hygienist and mold expert, Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health in Denver. He provided visual inspection of mold presence and
extent.
• The final BSC report which was reviewed extensively with, and modified by
recommendations of, REG.
• The primary cause of damage is reported to be inadequate flashing, particularly at roof- to-
wall details, at some windows, and at eave overhangs.
• In addition there are issues with attic air leakage and ventilation. The June 2010 BSC
inspections removed large expanses of siding where the earlier investigation relied on
localized core samples. This more extensive removal showed the water leakage and
resultant water caused deterioration occurring at specific flashing intersections while
adjacent areas were in good condition.
• A further complication top the structural and water intrusion issues at the Centennial
ownership buildings have been owner installed balconies and other additions
• It should be noted and emphasized that according to building science experts, moisture
damage remediation is generally accomplished carefully and deliberately.
• BSC initially recommended a range of options with respect to the attic issues and exterior
walls. This approach was based on their years of experience in the field over decades and is
consistent with generally accepted asset management practices for repair and preservation.
• It is generally accepted that elimination and control of moisture is first necessary and
successful step in retarding further mold growth. It is also generally accepted that mold
N
exists everywhere in the environment, and that testing procedures can quantify and identify
those genus that can be health concerns, after moisture control is established.
• The sequence of these work efforts is logical and straightforward. Moisture must be
mitigated before repair and investigation of damaged materials can begin.
Costs
• The 2009 assessment resulted in estimates from the HOA of repair costs of $100,000 per
unit or $10 million for the entire complex. This estimate was based on observed conditions
at the time of repair of the unit which encountered the waste line break, and a complete
destruction/reconstruction of the outer shell of the buildings — walls and roof
• Based on BSC's site investigation and similar restoration work, a local construction
company took a very broad and very preliminary look at work scope, based on the first level
of recommended repairs.
• The total using that example was estimated at $30,000 per building, or $2,300 per unit, or
$212,336 to restore the complete project. It was recommended to address 1 -2 buildings at a
time. Residents would be able to stay in their home during the work, unless individual
conditions required removal and replacement of wall elements, or penetration to the unit
interior.
On August 3, 2010 City of Aspen Capital Asset Department staff presented a report to a joint
meeting of the City of Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Commissioners. The report was
prepared by Building Science Corporation (BSC), http : / /www.buildingscience.com/, a building
science and consulting firm, with a focus on preventing and resolving problems related to building
design, construction and operation. BSC is internationally recognized for its expertise in moisture
dynamics, indoor air quality, and building failure forensic investigations.
Also presented at that meeting was a three page report from Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health (NJH) in Denver (engaged at the recommendation of the City
Environmental Health Department). He had provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent,
and had reviewed one document from DS Consulting (the Centennial HOA retained mold
assessment firm). The City Asset staff had provided Dr. Van Dyke with the information it had thus
received from the Centennial HOA and management.
The staff presentation was cut short by Ed Cross, HOA president, who highlighted another report
from DS which contained sample evidence of elevated mold levels within living spaces at
Centennial. City Council and The Board of County Commissioners requested staff to resolve the
"dueling experts" reports and return at a later date to complete the report.
We resolved the questions of differing opinions by obtaining joint letters of agreement from the
building experts and from the mold experts. Council and the BOCC asked staff to try and have the
"dueling consultants" of the City and the Centennial HOA agree to some background facts.
3
At a joint worksession on April 5, 2011 the following discussion/direction was provided:
It is clear that moisture intrusion issues have long been known to the Centennial HOA Board
and that studies have been repeatedly done over the past 20 years. Some work has been
done, but much of the recommended repairs have been continuously deferred. Capital
reserve recommendations have been ignored — indeed a rebate was provided to owners in
one year, even though the need to save for repairs was well understood.
As far as the building issues are concerned, in order to deal with moisture and mold the
HOA should:
Moisture and Mold Mitigation (all consultants are in agreement)
• Step 1 - stop the water infiltration
• Step 2 - assess and repair damage at exterior and behind the exterior sheathing
• Steps 3 - (simultaneous with Step 2) conduct tests for mold and mitigate to standards
(such as the New York City protocols).
Mold Assessment
• Mold exists everywhere in the environment
• Mold tests reflect a "moment in time" and can vary from day to day
• None of the tests showed evidence of Stachybotrys (often referred to as "Toxic Black
Mold" which is potentially toxigenic)
• No visible molds in some areas with elevated levels, visible mold in some areas but no
elevated levels
• DS Consulting suggested using a recognized method like the "NYC Protocols" — there
is no national standard
• There is no state or federal established level of "normal ", "safe ", or "unsafe" mold
counts
• Both DS Consulting and National Jewish Health advised distribution of informational
materials on methods to avoid mold growth, and that individual complaints of health or
comfort are addressed through further testing, and/or individual mitigation.
Construction Repairs /Recommendations /Alternatives
• Building Science Corporation (City of Aspen consultant), and Resource Engineering
Group (Centennial consultant) have collaborated and agreed on a general repair strategy.
Note that this revised strategy is more extensive and than that initially recommended by
BSC. It goes beyond normal standards for building repair and allows for the building
owner to install a new and complete building wrap over 100% of the exterior -wall
assemblies (NOTE: this option is not being pursued, rather the repairs will concentrate
on the south and west facing aspects of the buildings, as the Centennial rental property
has done),
Detail a moisture drainage plane, and new cladding.
BSC has noted that if this repair approach is taken, the owner may wish to also replace
windows and doors with more modern and thermally efficient units (an additional cost).
El
• Both the original and the expanded repair strategies will allow moisture damaged areas
to be uncovered and examined for deeper damage and mold. Once uncovered, and only
when uncovered, can any accurate estimate of mold remediation be determined, and
those repairs should be undertaken in that process.
• The HOA elected to follow the example of the rental section and re- cladded the south and west
aspects (3 units), while refining the flashing and moisture intrusion areas of the roofs.
Board and Council Discussion:
• Role should be in assisting the HOA to deal with their problem
• Staff should meet with the HOA and fully brief them on the parts of the presentation
they missed due to the meeting proceeding faster than anticipated
• Not sure about providing the HOA any Funding — but rather emphasis should be on
providing technical assistance
• Proceed with BSC recommendation to start with a few units, a few walls — to see what
you are really dealing with and get a better handle on the projected cost of repairs
Direction:
• Provide technical assistance and help them get started with the BSC recommendation to begin
repairs with a few units or a few walls so you can really see what is going on behind the cladding
and get a better estimate on projected costs.
• Do not continue with cost estimating efforts under RLB nor negotiate with the HOA over
government assistance to pay for the repairs.
TODAY'S DISCUSS ON:
Over the course of the past year:
• Athen Builders, the same contractor who has been working on the Centennial rental
buildings, was selected by the HOA to conduct repairs on three units, on their worst south
and west exposures.
• The HOA and contractor determined it was not possible to remove and restore the existing
siding. Instead new siding was used on those south and west exposures (this is how the
Centennial rental project has proceeded). This had a cost impact.
• The selected sample appears to be costing $7- 10,000 per unit, based on the small quantity.
Athen believes a larger selection of units will increase efficiency and allow for quantity
materials costs.
• A review of deteriorated decks indicates costs for those could be $2,500 to $3,000 per deck.
Conclusions
The inspections reports all corroborate and identify the initial requirement to repair the construction
issues that result in water intrusion. Once the excess moisture intrusion is mitigated mold will not
grow.
5
The costs we can estimate from this investigation are well below the suggested outcomes from the
HOA's 2009 scenario and our original estimates. If the mold mitigation is added, and considering
some contingency for unforeseen conditions the per -unit cost of repairs may be below $7,000.
RECOMMENDATIONS•
➢ Continue with the effort already underway to do a side or two at a time (the south and west
facing aspects) on selected buildings. Let the HOA continue to assess the efficacy of
replacing windows and help them secure outside funds where possible for that effort. Let the
HOA assess their desire to deal with decks and how to deal with the individual deck's
owner's responsibility.
➢ Engage a local consulting firm to evaluate and extrapolate on the work scope undertaken
by the rental property and the HOA in 2012. Get a professional estimate for the entire
project using an approach that emphasizes the effort on the -south and west- facing
aspects of the building (taking off the siding and reviewing what needs to be done) and a
review of the north and east facing aspects for flashing detail repairs, particularly at the
juncture of the roof and wall.
➢ We do not believe it is wise, nor necessary, for government funds to pay for the
responsibilities of home ownership. The repair costs that are underway at Centennial are a
necessary part of being a home owner — and in fact have been somewhat neglected for a
long time (as evidenced in the meeting minutes of the Centennial HOA since the early
`90's). There are opportunities for energy- related grants to be made available to Centennial
owners to defray a portion of their repairs /maintenance costs. Policy discussions have been
underway about some ways of helping an HOA raise capital reserve funds (e.g. a payment
to be assessed and collected at each sale — something already in place for Burlingame
transactions). It is anticipated that this will be a topic for consideration at the upcoming
Housing Summit in September.
FINANCIAL/ BUDGET IMPACTS:
City staff estimates they will spend slightly less than the $75,000 originally authorized for our
participation on this project (consultants, staff time and shared costs with the HOA). This amount is
to be split evenly between city and county.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Memo from April 5, 2011 Joint meeting
R
Exhibit A: Centennial
_._........
August 7, 2012 _
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
Scott Miller, Director, Capital Asset Department
Steve Bossart, Capital Asset Project Manager
DATE: March 31, 2011
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2011
RE: Centennial HOA — Assessment and Recommendations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Beginning in 1987, the Centennial HOA board meeting minutes began to mention issues related
to broken window seals, window issues and possible liability issues with the developer. This was
the beginning of a long- standing understanding around water intrusion issues associated with
their building. In 1991 a consultant was hired to study water damage and water intrusion to the
building. Their report identifies "potentially serious problem" of moisture infiltration behind
siding, "causing deterioration," possible mold, decay, and "extensive moisture damage ". Possible
causes include: lack of roof overhangs, lack of exterior caulking, poor ventilation of baths and
appliances, sprinklers directed at siding, lack of crawl -space and attic ventilation. Possible
remedies were predicted to be "costly and complicated." It recommended increasing fees by 15%
for 1992 in anticipation of capital repairs.
Over the ensuing years the HOA Board meetings reveal:
• They discussed installing dryer vents, repairing water damage, installing prototype roof drip
edges.
• Mentioned that roof overhangs were installed on south side of all buildings for $47,595.50
• Had another Replacement Cost Study done by Wilson Building Consultants, Inc.— it
recommended total funding for repair and replacement of $892,279
• First Choice (property manager) revises total replacement costs from Wilson report down to
$264,834.
• Meeting minutes note "now that replacement study has been completed, the surplus will be
passed on to the owners as a credit" to reduce 1995 assessments.
• Three and one -half years later Board meeting minutes note "not enough money in the reserve
fund ". Reserve assessments will be increased "twofold ", getting assessments back to same level
of "five years ago ".
Exhbit A
1
Exhibit A: Centennial
.....................
August 7, 2012
• In 1999, Wilson Replacement Cost Study recommends Replacement cost funding of $804,700 for
next 5 years.
• In 2009, REG, Inc. prepared study recommending removal of all building exteriors to
repair /replace any and all moisture damaged building components.
It is clear that moisture intrusion issues have long been known to the Centennial HOA Board and
that studies have been repeatedly done over the past 20 years. Some work has been done, but
much of the recommended repairs have been continuously deferred. Capital reserve
recommendations have been ignored — indeed a rebate was provided to owners in one year, even
though the need to save for repairs was well understood.
The latest proposal to deconstruct the entire outer shell of every building (replace all wall
framing, sheet rock and exterior cladding, replacement of all roofs) goes way beyond what is
necessary to reasonably deal with the structural issues and stop water intrusion — which stops
mold growth and any deterioration to support structures. The HOA's proposal of a "$10 million
fix that must be accompanied by the lifting of deed restrictions" is unnecessary to the problems
that exist with the buildings — that is the inevitable conclusion one would draw by a review of the
experts hired by the City and whose findings have been agreed to by the HOA's consultants.
As far as the building issues are concerned, in order to deal with moisture and mold the HOA
should:
Moisture and Mold Miti ation (all consultants are in agreement)
• Step 1 - stop the water infiltration
Step 2 - assess and repair damage at exterior and behind the exterior sheathing
Steps 3 - (simultaneous with Step 2) conduct tests for mold and mitigate to standards (such as the
New York City protocols).
Mold Assessment
• Mold exists everywhere in the environment
• Mold tests reflect a "moment in time" and can vary from day to day
• Centennial 2009 tests (DS Consulting, September 29, 2009) were "10.8 times greater than the
outdoor sample" in two tested units and 23.7 times greater and 17.7 greater than the outdoor
sample in the two other tested units.
The unit tests genus was of the smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes group, a type that "generally
pose no health concerns to humans or animals" and is found in soil, and living and decaying
plants (DS Consulting, Appendix A, Description of Common Mold Types)
Attic tests (Unit 321 Free Silver) identified smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes
Penicillium/Aspergillus (Aspergillus colonizes on continuously damp materials and Penicillium is
common bread mold in one species — both are allergenic to some individuals), and Basidiospores
(commonly found in gardens, forests, woodlands, and outdoor air samples. Can be allergenic but
not potentially toxigenic.) NOTE: Attics were not originally accessible. In some units access
Exhbit A
2
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
stairs wrere installed by owners. Recommendations are offered to address these situations and
attics in general.)
• None of the tests showed evidence of Stachybotrys (often referred to as "Toxic Black Mold"
which is potentially toxigenic)
• No visible molds in some areas with elevated levels, visible mold in some areas but no elevated
levels
• DS Consulting suggested using a recognized method like the "NYC Protocols" — there is no
national standard
• There is no state or federal established level of "normal ", "safe ", or "unsafe" mold counts
• Both DS Consulting and National Jewish Health advised distribution of informational materials
on methods to avoid mold growth, and that individual complaints of health or comfort are
addressed through further testing, and /or individual mitigation.
Construction Repairs /Recommendation - /Alternatives
• Building Science Corporation (City of Aspen consultant), and Resource Engineering Group
(Centennial consultant) have collaborated and agreed on a general repair strategy. Note that this
revised strategy is more extensive and than that initially recommended by BSC. It goes beyond
normal standards for building repair and allows for the building owner to install a new and
complete building wrap over 100% of the exterior wall assemblies,
• detail a moisture drainage plane, and new cladding.
• BSC has noted that if this repair approach is taken, the owner may wish to also replace windows
and doors with more modern and thermally efficient units (an additional cost).
• Both the original and the expanded repair strategies will allow moisture damaged areas to be
uncovered and examined for deeper damage and mold. Once uncovered, and only when
uncovered, can any accurate estimate of mold remediation be determined, and those repairs
should be undertaken in that process.
The "sister buildings" at the Centennial rental property were constructed at the same time, using
the same designs and the same contractors. They have been dutifully dealing with the same
problems over the years with a relentless capital improvement program and do not face the same
issues as a result of their diligence at repairing and fixing their water intrusion problems.
It is the staff conclusion that the building's repairs have been well understood for 20 years and
that fixing the moisture intrusion problems can be undertaken at a cost well within the means of
the property owners at Centennial.
REQUEST OF COUNCILBOCC•
Accept the consultants' reports and staff recommendations to let the HOA deal with their
ownership issues without further public assistance, or modification of the affordable housing
program's deed restrictions.
Exhbit A
3
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012 -
Staff must recommend a careful approach, similar to what any prudent home or building owner
would do with such an asset. That is implement strategies immediately, consistent with the BSC
recommendations, to stop and mitigate the moisture issues in every building. Failure to do so or
continuing the debate merely increases the damage and financial problem. Then begin work on a
strategic approach to each building to uncover and repair the damage. This could be done on a
schedule that allows moderate assessments to the owners over time. If additional improvements
such as new windows were desired those could be handled unit by unit or through an HOA
arrange finance mechanism.
PREVIOUS COUNCILBOCC ACTION:
On August 3, 2010 City of Aspen Capital Asset Department staff presented a report to a joint
meeting of the City of Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Commissioners. The report was
prepared by Building Science Corporation (BSC), http:/ /www.buildingscience.co , a building
science and consulting firm, with a focus on preventing and resolving problems related to
building design, construction and operation. BSC is internationally recognized for its expertise in
moisture dynamics, indoor air quality, and building failure forensic investigations.
Also presented at that meeting was a three page report from Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health (NJH) in Denver (engaged at the recommendation of the City
Environmental Health Department). He had provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent,
and had reviewed one document from DS Consulting (the Centennial HOA retained mold
assessment firm). The City Asset staff had provided Dr. Van Dyke with the information it had thus
received from the Centennial HOA and management.
The staff presentation was cut short by Ed Cross, HOA president, who highlighted another report
from DS which contained sample evidence of elevated mold levels within living spaces at
Centennial. City Council and The Board of County Commissioners requested staff to resolve the
"dueling experts" reports and return at a later date to complete the report.
We have resolved the questions of differing opinions by obtaining joint letters of agreement from
the building experts and from the mold experts.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has since worked extensively with the combined resources of BSC and Resource Engineering
Group (REG), and with NJH and DS to present joint reports of the conditions and
recommendations. These are referenced in this memo and attached to this report.
Centennial
The Centennial ownership complex consists of 92 category -four, deed restricted ownership units.
They were constructed in 1985 and are located at the base of Smuggler Mountain. There is also
Exhbit A
4
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
a Centennial rental complex at the same location consisting of 148 category three restricted
rental units. Both complexes are frame construction with sloped standing seam metal roofing,
and painted ship -lap rabbet redwood siding. Roofing ends nearly flush to building gable ends and
at eaves.
Early moisture damage was noted at one window on the southeast several years after
construction. There are examples of retrofit sheet metal overhang assemblies and kick -out metal
flashings at lower eaves. In August of 2009 a wastepipe break in a party wall required repairs
and other infiltration moisture damage was discovered. Investigation uncovered other areas of
concern and further investigations were commissioned by the HOA.
On August 8t", 2009 selected city staff members and then Centennial HOA president, Ed Cross
and HOA attorney Fred Pierce sat down to go over what was then known about the scope of the
problems at Centennial. Recent water and mold problems at units #314 and #316 increased the
HOA urgency. For its part the HOA had hired an engineering firm, Resource Engineering Group
(REG), to examine the problem and issue a report and recommendations - REG recommended
extensive demolition and reconstruction.
The HOA hired DS Consulting to conduct an inspection of mold as well as sampling reports of
interior air quality.
It was clear that more information and evaluation was needed to fully understand the scope of the
problems and the approach to a solution.
Approach and Preliminary Findings
In early 2010 the City agreed to provide interim project management services to assist the
HOA/APCHA/City of Aspen/Pitkin County team in expanding the overall evaluation. The City
requested, received, and executed a proposal from Building Science Corporation (BSC), a Boston
based engineering and architecture firm with extensive experience in building mechanics, systems,
and water management. BSC has conducted numerous forensic examinations and prepared
evaluations and solutions for moisture damaged buildings. The City has worked with BSC as the
liaison for the US Department of Energy Building America program.
BSC visited the site on June 30th' 2010. For the investigations the City engaged Rudd Construction
(Rudd) to provide manpower, equipment, tools and materials to assist in uncovering areas for
inspection, and for replacement and waterproofing repair. Also present on the day of these
inspections, at the request of Lee Cassin (City Environmental Health Director) was industrial
hygienist and mold expert, Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from National Jewish Health in Denver. He
provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent.
Attached is the final BSC report which was reviewed extensively with, and modified by
recommendations of, REG. The primary cause of damage is reported to be inadequate flashing,
Exhbit A
5
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
Scott Miller, Director, Capital Asset Department
Steve Bossart, Capital Asset Project Manager
DATE: March 31, 2011
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2011
RE: Centennial HOA — Assessment and Recommendations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Beginning in 1987, the Centennial HOA board meeting minutes began to mention issues related
to broken window seals, window issues and possible liability issues with the developer. This was
the beginning of a long - standing understanding around water intrusion issues associated with
their building. In 1991 a consultant was hired to study water damage and water intrusion to the
building. Their report identifies "potentially serious problem" of moisture infiltration behind
siding, "causing deterioration," possible mold, decay, and "extensive moisture damage ". Possible
causes include: lack of roof overhangs, lack of exterior caulking, poor ventilation of baths and
appliances, sprinklers directed at siding, lack of crawl -space and attic ventilation. Possible
remedies were predicted to be "costly and complicated." It recommended increasing fees by 15%
for 1992 in anticipation of capital repairs.
Over the ensuing years the HOA Board meetings reveal:
• They discussed installing dryer vents, repairing water damage, installing prototype roof drip
edges.
• Mentioned that roof overhangs were installed on south side of all buildings for $47,595.50
• Had another Replacement Cost Study done by Wilson Building Consultants, Inc.— it
recommended total funding for repair and replacement of $892,279
• First Choice (property manager) revises total replacement costs from Wilson report down to
$264,834.
• Meeting minutes note "now that replacement study has been completed, the surplus will be
passed on to the owners as a credit" to reduce 1995 assessments.
• Three and one -half years later Board meeting minutes note "not enough money in the reserve
fund ". Reserve assessments will be increased "twofold ", getting assessments back to same level
of "five years ago".
Exhbit A
I
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
In 1999, Wilson Replacement Cost Study recommends Replacement cost funding of $804,700 for
next 5 years.
In 2009, REG, Inc. prepared study recommending removal of all building exteriors to
repair /replace any and all moisture damaged building components.
It is clear that moisture intrusion issues have long been known to the Centennial HOA Board and
that studies have been repeatedly done over the past 20 years. Some work has been done, but
much of the recommended repairs have been continuously deferred. Capital reserve
recommendations have been ignored — indeed a rebate was provided to owners in one year, even
though the need to save for repairs was well understood.
The latest proposal to deconstruct the entire outer shell of every building (replace all wall
framing, sheet rock and exterior cladding, replacement of all roofs) goes way beyond what is
necessary to reasonably deal with the structural issues and stop water intrusion — which stops
mold growth and any deterioration to support structures. The HOA's proposal of a "$10 million
fix that must be accompanied by the lifting of deed restrictions" is unnecessary to the problems
that exist with the buildings — that is the inevitable conclusion one would draw by a review of the
experts hired by the City and whose findings have been agreed to by the HOA's consultants.
As far as the building issues are concerned, in order to deal with moisture and mold the HOA
should:
Moisture and Mold MILation all consultants are in agreement)
• Step 1 - stop the water infiltration
• Step 2 - assess and repair damage at exterior and behind the exterior sheathing
• Steps 3 - (simultaneous with Step 2) conduct tests for mold and mitigate to standards (such as the
New York City protocols).
Mold Assessment
• Mold exists everywhere in the environment
• Mold tests reflect a "moment in time" and can vary from day to day
• Centennial 2009 tests (DS Consulting, September 29, 2009) were "10.8 rimes greater than the
outdoor sample" in two tested units and 23.7 times greater and 17.7 greater than the outdoor
sample in the two other tested units.
• The unit tests genus was of the smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes group, a type that "generally
pose no health concerns to humans or animals" and is found in soil, and living and decaying
plants (DS Consulting, Appendix A, Description of Common Mold Types)
• Attic tests (Unit 321 Free Silver) identified smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes ,
Penicillium/Aspergillus (Aspergillus colonizes on continuously damp materials and Penicillium is
common bread mold in one species — both are allergenic to some individuals), and Basidiospores
(commonly found in gardens, forests, woodlands, and outdoor air samples. Can be allergenic but
not potentially toxigenic.) NOTE: Attics were not originally accessible. In some units access
Exhbit A
2
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
stairs wrere installed by owners. Recommendations are offered to address these situations and
attics in general.)
• None of the tests showed evidence of Stachybotrys (often referred to as "Toxic Black Mold"
which is potentially toxigenic)
• No visible molds in some areas with elevated levels, visible mold in some areas but no elevated
levels
• DS Consulting suggested using a recognized method like the "NYC Protocols" — there is no
national standard
• There is no state or federal established level of "normal ", "safe ", or "unsafe" mold counts
• Both DS Consulting and National Jewish Health advised distribution of informational materials
on methods to avoid mold growth, and that individual complaints of health or comfort are
addressed through further testing, and/or individual mitigation.
Construction RepairvRecommendations /Alternatives
• Building Science Corporation (City of Aspen consultant), and Resource Engineering Group
(Centennial consultant) have collaborated and agreed on a general repair strategy. Note that this
revised strategy is more extensive and than that initially recommended by BSC. It goes beyond
normal standards for building repair and allows for the building owner to install a new and
complete building wrap over 100% of the exterior wall assemblies,
• detail a moisture drainage plane, and new cladding.
• BSC has noted that if this repair approach is taken, the owner may wish to also replace windows
and doors with more modern and thermally efficient units (an additional cost).
• Both the original and the expanded repair strategies will allow moisture damaged areas to be
uncovered and examined for deeper damage and mold. Once uncovered, and only when
uncovered, can any accurate estimate of mold remediation be determined, and those repairs
should be undertaken in that process.
The "sister buildings" at the Centennial rental property were constructed at the same time, using
the same designs and the same contractors. They have been dutifully dealing with the same
problems over the years with a relentless capital improvement program and do not face the same
issues as a result of their diligence at repairing and fixing their water intrusion problems.
It is the staff conclusion that the building's repairs have been well understood for 20 years and
that fixing the moisture intrusion problems can be undertaken at a cost well within the means of
the property owners at Centennial.
REQUEST OF COUNCILBOCC:
Accept the consultants' reports and staff recommendations to let the HOA deal with their
ownership issues without further public assistance, or modification of the affordable housing
program's deed restrictions.
Exhbit A
3
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
Staff must recommend a careful approach, similar to what any prudent home or building owner
would do with such an asset. That is implement strategies immediately, consistent with the BSC
recommendations, to stop and mitigate the moisture issues in every building. Failure to do so or
continuing the debate merely increases the damage and financial problem. Then begin work on a
strategic approach to each building to uncover and repair the damage. This could be done on a
schedule that allows moderate assessments to the owners over time. If additional improvements
such as new windows were desired those could be handled unit by unit or through an HOA
arrange finance mechanism.
PREVIOUS COUNCILBOCC ACTION:
On August 3, 2010 City of Aspen Capital Asset Department staff presented a report to a joint
meeting of the City of Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Commissioners. The report was
prepared by Building Science Corporation (BSC), http: / /www.buildingscience.com/, a building
science and consulting firm, with a focus on preventing and resolving problems related to
building design, construction and operation. BSC is internationally recognized for its expertise in
moisture dynamics, indoor air quality, and building failure forensic investigations.
Also presented at that meeting was a three page report from Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health (NJH) in Denver (engaged at the recommendation of the City
Environmental Health Department). He had provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent,
and had reviewed one document from DS Consulting (the Centennial HOA retained mold
assessment firm). The City Asset staff had provided Dr. Van Dyke with the information it had thus
received from the Centennial HOA and management.
The staff presentation was cut short by Ed Cross, HOA president, who highlighted another report
from DS which contained sample evidence of elevated mold levels within living spaces at
Centennial. City Council and The Board of County Commissioners requested staff to resolve the
"dueling experts" reports and return at a later date to complete the report.
We have resolved the questions of differing opinions by obtaining joint letters of agreement from
the building experts and from the mold experts.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has since worked extensively with the combined resources of BSC and Resource Engineering
Group (REG), and with NJH and DS to present joint reports of the conditions and
recommendations. These are referenced in this memo and attached to this report.
Centennial
The Centennial ownership complex consists of 92 category -four, deed restricted ownership units.
They were constructed in 1985 and are located at the base of Smuggler Mountain. There is also
Exhbit A
4
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
a Centennial rental complex at the same location consisting of 148 category three restricted
rental units. Both complexes are frame construction with sloped standing seam metal roofing,
and painted ship -lap rabbet redwood siding. Roofing ends nearly flush to building gable ends and
at eaves.
Early moisture damage was noted at one window on the southeast several years after
construction. There are examples of retrofit sheet metal overhang assemblies and kick -out metal
flashings at lower eaves. In August of 2009 a wastepipe break in a party wall required repairs
and other infiltration moisture damage was discovered. Investigation uncovered other areas of
concern and further investigations were commissioned by the HOA.
On August 8'h, 2009 selected city staff members and then Centennial HOA president, Ed Cross
and HOA attorney Fred Pierce sat down to go over what was then known about the scope of the
problems at Centennial. Recent water and mold problems at units #314 and #316 increased the
HOA urgency. For its part the HOA had hired an engineering firm, Resource Engineering Group
(REG), to examine the problem and issue a report and recommendations - REG recommended
extensive demolition and reconstruction.
The HOA hired DS Consulting to conduct an inspection of mold as well as sampling reports of
interior air quality.
It was clear that more information and evaluation was needed to fully understand the scope of the
problems and the approach to a solution.
Approach and Preliminary Findinjes
In early 2010 the City agreed to provide interim project management services to assist the
HOA/APCHA/City of Aspen/Pitkin County team in expanding the overall evaluation. The City
requested, received, and executed a proposal from Building Science Corporation (BSC), a Boston
based engineering and architecture firm with extensive experience in building mechanics, systems,
and water management. BSC has conducted numerous forensic examinations and prepared
evaluations and solutions for moisture damaged buildings. The City has worked with BSC as the
liaison.for the US Department of Energy Building America program.
BSC visited the site on June 30`" 2010. For the investigations the City engaged Rudd Construction
(Rudd) to provide manpower, equipment, tools and materials to assist in uncovering areas for
inspection, and for replacement and waterproofing repair. Also present on the day of these
inspections, at the request of Lee Cassin (City Environmental Health Director) was industrial
hygienist and mold expert, Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from National Jewish Health in Denver. He
provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent.
Attached is the final BSC report which was reviewed extensively with, and modified by
recommendations of, REG. The primary cause of damage is reported to be inadequate flashing,
Exhbit A
5
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
particularly at roof- to -wall details, at some windows, and at eave overhangs. In addition there are
issues with attic air leakage and ventilation. The June 2010 BSC inspections removed large
expanses of siding where the earlier investigation relied on localized core samples. This more
extensive removal showed the water leakage and resultant water caused deterioration occurring at
specific flashing intersections while adjacent areas were in good condition.
The windows do not have any head flashings installed nor is there a membrane flashing seal
between the flange and the wall. In addition, the flanges are installed in front of the gypsum.
Building Science has recommended a dual benefit by replacing the windows with contemporary
units. If the HOA wished to retain existing windows, flashing recommendations have been
provided.
A further complication top the structural and water intrusion issues at the Centennial ownership
buildings have been owner installed balconies and other additions. It appeared that in many cases
appropriate detailing and flashing wasn't implemented resulting in additional water access to
building structural elements.
After last June's BSC investigation staff asked Rudd for their assessment of the work required to
effect repairs and corrections to the building enclosure. Rudd indicated they observed areas where
wall studs and plates would require replacement, while other areas needed siding removal, flashing
enhancement, and re- siding. The redwood siding is apparently of high quality .and is generally in
very good shape — it may be considered for reuse if it can be safely removed without excess
marring.
Dr. Van Dyke issued a three page report dated July 19, 2010 (attached with a cover memo from Lee
Cassin) addressing his observations of conditions on the same day of inspection. He included five
recommendations for repairing the water intrusion issues, cleaning mold where identified, educating
residents, and further inspections. Lee Cassin noted that not having ductwork or forced air furnace
systems is a fortunate situation in that mold spores have not been circulated. Dr Van Dyke and
Steve Shurtliff (DS) have met via telephone conference and have released a joint letter statement of
agreement regarding the observations and tests occurring at Centennial. The City of Aspen
Environmental Health Department has provided staff with information from the Colorado
Environmental Health Association ("The Top 10 Mold Myths, Replacing Hysteria with Science "),
the Colorado Department of Public Health ("Mold Information Sheet" August 2002), and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency ( "Mold Remediation — Key Steps ").
It should be noted and emphasized that according to building science experts, moisture damage
remediation is generally accomplished carefully and deliberately. BSC initially recommended a
range of options with respect to the attic issues and exterior walls. This approach was based on their
years of experience in the field over decades and is consistent with generally accepted asset
management practices for repair and preservation. It is generally accepted that elimination and
control of moisture is first necessary and successful step in retarding further mold growth. It is also
Exhbit A
6
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
generally accepted that mold exists everywhere in the environment, and that testing procedures can
quantify and identify those genus that can be health concerns, after moisture control is established.
The sequence of these work efforts is logical and straightforward. Moisture must be mitigated
before repair and investigation of damaged materials can begin. Once the moisture is managed,
mold growth ceases and sampling can be reliably completed, and an action plan can be designed
and priced. The HOA and their consultant REG have understandably emphasized a comprehensive
repair estimate including mold mitigation. At this time we can make broad educated judgments and
attempt to bracket potential costs.
Costs
The 2009 assessment resulted in estimates from the HOA of repair costs of $100,000 per unit or $10
million for the entire complex. This estimate was based on observed conditions at the time of repair
of the unit which encountered the waste line break. Based on BSC's site investigation and similar
restoration work, a local construction company took a very broad and very preliminary look at work
scope, based on the first level of recommended repairs. The total using that example would be
$30,000 per building, or $2,300 per unit, or $212,336 to restore the complete project. It was
recommended to address 1 -2 buildings at a time. Residents would be able to stay in their home
during the work, unless individual conditions required removal and replacement of wall elements,
or penetration to the unit interior.
Mold mediation techniques and recommendations are varied. It is generally accepted that mold is in
the environment and creates health effects only when in excess amounts in living spaces. Existing
mold spores, if encapsulated or isolated, do not pose a health hazard. Dr. Van Dyke recommends
eliminating excess moisture is the first and most important step. He suggests following the New
York City Department of Health's "Guidelines on Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor
Environments" to clean the existing mold in crawlspaces and attics (see Attachment 12 — the
recommendations are straightforward depending on the extent of observed damage)..
Cleanup costs haven't been estimated as of this date. We have spoken with the mold inspection
consultant and the mold testing firm used in 2009. We were able to get a "very worst" case number
of $10,000 per building attic. For our present discussions we might extrapolate $20,000 total per
building or $1,500 per unit.
The HOA and their consultant REG have emphasized a comprehensive repair approach calling for a
complete de -clad and re-clad of the building exterior, with a complete building wrap and new
drainage space with lx4 wood furring. This is the way we would build in 2011 but it is not the way
the exterior was assembled when new. Originally BSC presented options starting with a patch and
repair strategy; an intermediate approach calling for de -clad and re -clad and repair of walls adjacent
to deteriorated areas; followed by the de -clad and re -clad of all walls. Prudent facility preservation
management attempts a reasonable balance of repair cost and life -cycle /operations analysis. The
Exhbit A
7
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
original BSC program addressed this in a way that provided the HOA several options. The revised
BSC analysis begins with the complete de -clad and attempts to provide bracketed ranges of damage
to be repaired.
The rental section of Centennial has pursued a mitigation and repair program similar to these
recommendations for a number of years and it has reportedly been successful in stopping moisture
intrusion and damage.
Process
The decision team members must carefully review the report from BSC, and - resolve any questions.
The HOA must weigh project objectives against the BSC cost options. BSC has provided specific
details for window flashing, roof to wall section flashing, and balcony railing intersections.
A general construction firm would provide estimates based on the believed scope of work, with
general fee schedules, as well as specific fee schedules for predicted work components. Contracts
would by necessity be on a time and materials basis (T &M). As work commences and actual
conditions are fully understood the rates and scope would be correlated and confirmed .against
estimates, and the overall budget totals would be recalculated.
The HOA would be advised to obtain project management services with special attention to finance
and contractual conditions. While recognizing the nature of unforeseen conditions in remodel and
repair work, we believe the repairs can be completed within a reasonable time frame, together with
a budget consistent with typical building maintenance and repair expectations. The HOA reports
that the owner improvements made to balconies, deck, and other appurtenances are limited common
elements and thus the responsibility of the HOA in common. These repairs should be concurrent
with the other design and construction activities.
History of moisture issues at Centennial — what did then know and when did thev know it?
In August of 2010, city staff requested that the Centennial HOA board provide copies of any and all
available meeting minutes, financial reports, or anything else that would help staff understand the
history of moisture intrusion issues, the HOA's finances, and what has been done to mitigate the
moisture problems. The HOA's management company, First Choice Properties & Management,
Inc., immediately provided electronic copies of meeting minutes, budgets, and financial statements
from 2007 through 2010. However, staff was told that all other records were stored in an office in
Glenwood Springs and would be difficult to produce. In December, 2010 some records dating back
to 1986 were scanned and e- mailed to staff. While these records were by no means a complete
record, many years' records are still missing; they provided a good snapshot of discovery of the
moisture problems, HOA board discussion of those problems and attempts to remedy the problems.
The following bullet points document some of the more important events in a timeline from 1986 to
the present. This is by no means a comprehensive study of all the facts:
Exhbit A
8
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
• 11/24/86- Capital reserve study considered replacement of exterior stain, parking lot paving
and roofs only. Beginning fund balance was $12,000, out year contributions started at
$16,000, inflated each year by 3.5 %, anticipated a capital reserve balance of $409,010 by
year 2010.
• 5/19/87- board meeting minutes mention broken window seals throughout complex..
• 6/17/87 - board meeting minutes mention window problems and possible developer liability.
• 8/12/91- James J. Wilson Building Consultants, Inc. / Code Analysis and Design hired to
study water damage.
• 10/17/91- Wilson hired to perform comprehensive study of moisture damage and
recommend remedial measures.
• 11/20/91- Board letter to all homeowners identifies "potentially serious problem" of
moisture infiltration behind siding, "causing deterioration ". Possible causes include; lack of
roof overhangs, lack of exterior caulking, poor ventilation of baths and appliances,
sprinklers directed at siding, lack of crawl -space and attic ventilation. Possible remedies
predicted to be "costly and complicated". Increases fees by 15% for 1992.
• 1/7/92- Wilson progress report discusses possible mold, decay, and "extensive moisture
damage ".
• 3/9/92- Wilson progress report discusses latent defects and possibility of legal action.
• 11/23/92- Letter to all homeowners further discusses water infiltration, Wilson report, and
15% fees increase to study problem, install dryer vents, repair water damage, install
prototype roof drip edges.
• 11/17/93- Minutes of annual meeting reports that roof overhangs were installed on south
side of all buildings for $47,595.50. No increase in fees for 1994.
• 11/30/94- Minutes of annual meeting anticipates a surplus at year end of $40,000- $45,000.
• 1/24/95- Replacement Cost Study by Wilson Building Consultants, Inc. recommends total
funding for repair and replacement of $892,279.
• 2/1/95- First Choice revises total replacement costs from Wilson report down to $264,834.
• 2/8/95- Board meeting minutes note "now that replacement study has been completed, the
surplus will be passed on to the owners as a credit" to reduce 1995 assessments.
• 12/9/98- Board meeting minutes note "not enough money in the reserve fund ". Reserve
assessments will be increased "twofold ", getting assessments back to same level of "five
years ago ".
• 4/19/99- Wilson Replacement Cost Study recommends Replacement cost funding of
$804,700 for next 5 years.
• 9/1/99- Board meeting minutes state that reserve account is not sufficient. Will likely need
to increase both operating and replacement assessments for next year.
• 10/20/99- Board meeting minutes state that association finances are under budget.
• 12/1/99- Annual meeting minutes state assessments will increase no mention of amounts.
• 6/16/09- REG, Inc. prepared study recommending removal of all building exteriors to
repair /replace any and all moisture damaged building components.
Exhbit A
9
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
The capital reserve studies and expert reports as early as 1991 pointed to a large problem with
moisture intrusion and potential damage to all buildings if a comprehensive program of repairs
funded by a large increase in capital assessments was not undertaken immediately. While some
repairs were done, and assessments were increased slightly, by and large the expert's
recommendations were not heeded. Wilson Building Consultants has published a study undertaken
in 1991 and completed in 1992 that explains the scope and the urgency of the problem. This report
was the basis of updated reports by Wilson in 1995 and 1999 which repeated the scope of the
problem and recommended very large increases in the HOA's capital reserves to pay for the needed
repairs. These recommendations were not followed.
After a ten -year period of very little discussion or action on the problem, the HOA hired REG to
perform another study of the moisture problems in 2009. In this report the study's author August
Hasz, recommends wholesale removal of all building cladding, roofing, windows and doors and
removal of all damaged members. This report is the basis for the HOA's seeking approximately
$10,000,000 for repairs to their buildings.
Staffs conclusion is that if the HOA had acted sooner on the recommendations of several experts, it
could have mitigated most of its problems rather painlessly. However, even today the problem is not
a $10,000,000 problem and if a sensible program of capital repairs is undertaken, the HOA can fund
this program with an increase in capital assessments and doing repairs over a several year period,
making the most serious repairs a high priority.
Conclusions
The inspections reports all corroborate and identify the initial requirement to repair the construction
issues that result in water intrusion. Once the excess moisture intrusion is mitigated mold will not
grow.
The costs we can estimate from this investigation are well below the suggested outcomes from
2009. If the mold mitigation is added, and considering some contingency for unforeseen conditions
the per -unit cost of repairs may be below $7,000.
Buildings depreciate. Regularly scheduled repair and maintenance are necessary to avoid
deterioration, correct deficiencies, and maintain function and value. Homeowners routinely incur
periodic repair expenses with any structure. In the case of multifamily homeownership, those repair
costs are shared, typically through reserves, special assessments, or other financing.
FINANCUL/BUDGET IWACTS:
The 2009 extrapolation of costs based on what was experience and projected by the HOA was
$100,000 per unit but involved, as best we could discern, a comprehensive redesign and
reconstruction of the buildings, inside and out.
Exhbit A
10
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
This redesign and rebuilding approach is potentially attractive in some respects (essentially a
"new building ") but it is well beyond what most building owners would prudently consider,
unless there was expectation of an outside funding mechanism or other value windfall. The HOA
has suggested equity increase and borrowing potential by removal of the affordable housing
program deed restrictions. That discussion is beyond a Staff level purview. However, home
ownership and building ownership requires owner responsibility for regular maintenance and
preservation of the depreciable elements. It would be highly unusual for an original builder or a
mortgagor to carry maintenance as an outside responsibility while granting fee ownership, and
forced removal of agreed -upon terms and conditions is unknown.
The 2010 BSC investigation was accompanied by a local construction firm which provided
manpower and equipment. They have performed similar work locally. Based on their
observations and discussions with BSC they felt considerably less work would be required than
was suggested in 2009. We spoke with DS about mold work and received "very worst" case
numbers for attic mold clean -up. Together the total per unit cost was less than $7,000. Again, the
building science experts and mold experts have agreed that the prudent approach is to stop the
moisture intrusion, and then identify and repair damaged areas. The record indicates the HOA
had similar information and recommendations for as much as 20 years.
The revised scope proposed by the HOA may be attractive to the owners to use the provided
opportunity to enhance improvements to a point. But it would have per unit financial
implications.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Building reuse and preservation is one the most sustainable and environmentally effective
method of resource management. For this reason reuse of existing materials and reduction of
demolition is recommended. As the areas of de- cladding are expanded beyond those areas
needing repair increase material, transportation, and landfill deposits are increased.
On the other hand, a complete de -clad would allow for installation of a complete building wrap,
and perhaps additional insulation and more efficient windows.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff must recommend a careful approach, similar to what any prudent home or building owner
would do with such an asset. That is, implement strategies immediately and incrementally,
consistent with the BSC recommendations, to stop and mitigate the moisture issues in every
building. Failure to do so or continuing the debate merely prolongs and increases the damage and
financial problem. The HOA should then begin work on a strategic approach to each building to
uncover and repair the damage. This could be done on a schedule that allows moderate
assessments to the owners over time. If additional improvements such as new windows were
desired, those could be handled unit by unit or through an HOA arranged finance mechanism.
Exhbit A
11
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
This same work program has been recommended in one form or another to the HOA for over 20
years. The rental portion of Centennial has been gradually dealing with the design/construction
problems that bring on moisture /mold problems on an ongoing basis and claims not to have the
same issues that the ownership group now faces. Had the HOA accepted the recommendations of
their consultants and property managers over the years, they would not now be facing the work
that is in front of them. The magnitude of the recommended work is within the capability of the
HOA and homeowners.
In addition, the HOA must plan for approval and inspection of any owner initiated additions to
the buildings to ensure they are correctly constructed and installed, to avoid a repetition of water
intrusion due to inadequate flashing. Penetrations into attics must be monitored to maintain
moisture barriers, if the HOA continues to allow attic access into Limited Common Elements
(which should also be properly documented in the association documents).
ALTERNATIVES:
The HOA has understandably been concerned about how to fund a project scope as was
discussed in 2009. Removal of the affordable housing program deed restrictions was suggested
as a possible funding mechanism/equity increase that might allow debt.
The BSC suggested strategies are significantly less expensive and are consistent with HOA and
homeowner responsibilities, and environmentally sound policies.
If City Council authorized funding, capital asset staff could assist the HOA with project
management tasks
PROPOSED MOTION:
NA at this time
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Exhbit A
12
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
ATTACHMENTS:
• BSC /REG joint letter
• National Jewish Health /DS Consulting joint letter
• BSC Investigation and Recommendation report
• BSC Architectural Details
• DS Consulting Mold Inspection and Sampling Report
• Resource Engineering Group, 8.20.2009, Centennial Site Report
Resource Engineering Group, 8.20.2009, Centennial Housing Unit 314 & 316 Site
Observations
• Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, " Mold Information Sheet"
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "Mold Remediation in Schools and
Commercial Buildings "; also addressing residential.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Mold Remediation - Key Steps"
• New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; Guidelines on
Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor Environments, November 2008
• Colorado Environmental Health Association, "The Top 10 Mold Myths — Replacing
hysteria with science"
• DS Consulting/National Jewish Health— conference call minutes— August 2010
• August 16, 2010, Lee Cassin, City of Aspen Environmental Health Director — notes
on the DS/National Jewish Heath conference call
Exhbit A
13
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
WORK SESSION DATE: August 7, 2012
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Housing Summit Discussion
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Jon Peacock, County Manager
ISSUE STATEMENT: The City of Aspen has taken the lead in planning a Housing Summit to
be held on September 19th and 20th. The County has been invited to participate in planning a
developing an agenda for the Summit. At the Board's July 24th meeting, Commissioners had an
opportunity to discuss the goal and key issues they would like to see addressed during the
summit in preparation for a joint meeting with City Council on August 7`h to discuss the same.
This memo is a brief summary of the outcomes of the Board's discussion.
BACKGROUND: On July 24th the Board reviewed a draft agenda developed by City Staff for
the Housing Summit; with a specific emphasis on the Summit goal and key issues for discussion
(the specific items discussed at the July 24th meeting are included at the end of this memo for
reference).
Summary of Board Discussion on Goal:
Generally the Board agreed with the proposed goal for the summit, but recommend that the final
goal include multiple income levels, and that all references to "class" be removed.
Summary of Board Discussion on Key Issues:
The Board generally agreed that all of the key issues identified in the draft agenda are important
items to be addressed. However, there was also concern that nine key issues are too many to
adequately address in a two day summit. The Board identified five key issues they would like to
propose be addressed during the Housing Summit:
1. The role of the housing program in addressing housing needs beyond workforce housing,
e.g.: 1) Aging population issues — income and employment problems for those not yet at
retirement age; 2) Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in
housing; 3) Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities.
2. Retirement role in demand question... do we change the current approach? ... are there
other options that we should explore?
3. What is current and projected demand for different unit categories? How do we define
livability for these different categories?
4. Mitigation — what is the current. requirement/current approach? ... what is the purpose of
mitigation? What is the role of mitigation?
5. What is the role of APCHA?
Other Issues Discussed:
The Board was concerned about the proposed participant list which included over 70
participants, and suggested reducing the number to around 50. The Board also agreed that the
discussions should be more strategic in nature with more detailed tactical work being done and
discussed in subsequent workshops.
Draft Summit Goal Discussed at July 24th meeting:
"What are the appropriate policies that provide for housing that strengthens and maintains
Aspen's middle class now and in the future ?"
Draft Key Issues Discussed at July 24th meeting
• What is the purpose of the program?
• The role of the housing program in:
• Aging population issues — income and employment problems for those not yet at
retirement age.
• Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in housing.
• Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities.
• Oversight and make -up of the APCHA Board
• Retirement role in demand question... do we change the current approach? ... are there
other options that we should explore?
• Current demand for units /mix? Future demand for the same?
• Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of government in
doing that? Role of government money?
• What does "livability" mean? What is the target for the housing stock to be produced?
Current?
• Mitigation — what is the current requirement/current approach? ... what is the purpose of
mitigation? What is the role of mitigation?
• Future vision of the affordable housing program— what do we look like in 2035?
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Livable and Supportive Community and Flourishing Natural and Built Environment
BUDGETARY IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDED BOCC ACTION: information only
2
C�
THE CITY OF ASPEN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
DATE: August 1, 2012
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2012
RE: Joint Worksession — Housing Summit Discussion
SUMMARY:
The Housing Summit is recommended to be held on Wednesday and Thursday, September 19d' and
2e from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM both days. A facilitator will be selected to facilitate the summit
which would be attended by approximately 60 elected officials, staff and stakeholder
representatives. The general format of the summit would be one of two approaches provided for
your consideration:
(1) Alternative 1: Exhibit A
This approach seeks to balance participation from the non - elected participants and their input with
the need to allocate sufficient time for the elected officials to hold substantive conversations about
the policy issues before them and to give them the time necessary to formulate policy direction to
staff. As such there is time for:
• presentation of background material,
• discussion of the issues among City Council/BOCC /APCHA Board and stakeholders,
• policy direction from COuncil/BOCC and identification of next steps (to include specific
worksessions as needed).
• Two breakout sessions
(2) Alternative 2: Exhibit B
This approach allows for more emphasis during the first day on the role of all invitees to the
summit. It would consist of:
• Day One is composed of
✓ Background presentations on all nine policy areas and a prioritization of each nine in a
matrix of (a) how important is the area and (b) how well do we do as a community in each
area
✓ This prioritization effort will reduce the list to a Top Five, and breakout sessions will allow
for self selection by attendees into the issue area that most interests each participant.
Discussion on what worked, what didn't work, why and areas for improvement will produce
a report back to the large group.
✓ The elected officials will select which three issue areas they wish to focus their Day Two
discussion on.
• Day Two then focuses on the elected officials and their discussion of their Top Three issue areas:
✓ presentation of background material,
✓ discussion of the issues among City CounciVBOCC /APCHA Board,
✓ policy direction from Council/BOCC and identification of next steps (to include specific
follow -up worksessions as needed).
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTION:
One of the Council's adopted Top Ten Goals for the 2011 -12 Best Year Yet "year" was to
"Complete an employee housing strategic review." During the Council goal - setting retreat there
were various conversations about conducting a strategic review of employee housing, including
various topics for Council to review and consider either affirming current policy direction or setting
new direction. The Council also contemplated holding another "housing summit" in conjunction
with this strategic review.
Previous Council directions regarding the summit meeting were:
➢ Issues to be covered
• What is the purpose of the program?
• Current demand for units/mix? Future demand for same?
• Retirement role in demand question ... do we change the current approach? ... are
there options that we should explore?
• Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of government
in doing that? Role of government money?
• What does "Livability" mean? What is the target for the housing stock to be
produced? Current?
• Oversight and make -up of the APCHA Board
• Social Services and Housing:
✓ Aging population issues — incomes and employment problems for those not
yet at retirement age
✓ Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in
housing
✓ Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
• Mitigation — what is the current requirement/current approach? ... what is the
purpose of mitigation? ... what is the role of mitigation?
• Future vision of the affordable housing program — what do we look like in 2035?
2
➢ Data and information to help inform discussion of those issues (in a briefing book with
some of it to be presented during the summit as well):
• Community income distribution
• Existing housing inventory by category, unit size for both rental and ownership
properties to compare to the community income distribution
• Job numbers now and projected over the next 10 -20 years ... and how many units
those numbers imply at some various levels of "percent of workers housed in the
community" targets ... factoring into the equation the number of housing units
unavailable due to retired workers living in them
• population in units numbers now and over the next 10 -20 years
• Chris Everson work on housing affordability and incomes
• Draw some demand numbers for unit sizes and income categories relative to current
conditions and make some assumptions about the future to see what kinds of
size /category mix you might need in the future
• Analysis of the capital reserve studies to assess the condition of today's housing
stock and what kinds of investment are needed over the next 10 -20 years to maintain
that stock.
• Then some analysis of what has to happen to finance that investment
• Analysis of the "time bound" deed restrictions on properties in our system — some
estimates of when those might cease to operate and the cost of replacing those units
• Definition of "livability" and how that definition relates to the existing and
contemplated additions to the housing inventory ... perhaps a estimate of what it
might take to bring the inventory up to that standard.
• Review of housing system — city, county and APCHA — funding streams and
projections over the next 10 -20 years for same
• Some guesses of the projected expenditures of that "system" as compared to the
revenues listed above ... to identify gaps if any or excess funds available to meet
any other needs (contributions to HOAs for instance).
• Retiree profile — who is retiring? How long have they been a worker in the
community? Etc.
• Consideration of policy level directives that exist — do they still meet elected
officials' needs and expectations?
• Review of Housing Guidelines ... consistency, efficacy, purpose (being conducted
by City Manager's Office /County Manager's Office, the APCHA Board, and
Housing Frontiers Group)
• Look at free market contribution to "affordable workforce housing" both upvalley
and downvalley
• Assessment of Eagle and Garfield Counties' plans for affordable housing in the
Roaring Fork Valley (or nearby so that it could house workers) and how it impacts
provisions of affordable housing for our workforce.
• Social Services and Community Housing issues (Added by Council at joint
worksession 5 -1 -12)
• Aging population issues — incomes and employment problems for those not
yet at retirement age
• Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in
housing
✓ Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
✓ Data and narrative that provides briefing material for the social service issues
added by the BOCC and City Council at joint worksession on May 1st
(County to prepare).
• Regarding the Role of APCHA in providing social services:
• Mission/purpose of APCHA as currently defined
• What do other housing authorities in Colorado do in these areas?
• Is this an Aspen/Pitkin County issue or is it a regional (valley -wide) issue?
• What entity should be responsible for dealing with these issues?
✓ Assets and funding stream issues — current funding/assets for workforce
housing, what might be needed to deal with these issues and where that
funding might come from (to include information on APCHA's statutory
authority to levy a tax and how it might be used for these purposes)
• AH foreclosure experience data
➢ Who to invite to the summit (and therefore, how big it should be)
• Smaller than last one — under 50 if possible
• We will craft a list of stakeholders and see how small we can get the list and still be
comprehensive
➢ When to hold the summit and how long should it be?
• Tue/Wed or Wed/Thur — but NOT on a Friday
• 2 days
• Mid September — week of Sept. 10 -14? (The BOCC meets on Wed. Sept. 12'', so the
following week is being targeted as the summit dates)
➢ What does it look like?
• We will craft a draft agenda that incorporates the suggestions and attempts to reflect
how to incorporate stakeholders into the conversation
• We will bring back suggestions as to facilitation (Colin Laird — who facilitated the
2007 Summit — has been asked about his interest and availability. He is interested
and he is available, I have asked him to pencil in the dates of Sept. 19'h and 20th;
other names are being discussed and their interest and availability is being vetted.
• Opening statements from Mayor, Chair of BOCC and perhaps the APCHA Board
Chair
• Review of background, discussion of participants/stakeholders and direction
provided
• Visioning effort —what does this look like in 2035
4
DISCUSSION:
Questions for you to resolve as you develop your ideas for the Summit:
• What issues do you want to cover that are not on this list?
• What is the general format/approach you want to take with the Summit agenda?
• How long of a summit do you wish to hold?
• How many issues can you tackle in that timeframe (remember to hold some time available
for background briefings from staff j? Which issues are deferred to later?
• What issues then are best addressed by special analysis and discussion, rather that at the
summit?
• Which issues would you like to focus on and how long for each issue?
• Given the issues you have chosen to focus on, what information do you want provided to
you?
• What information do you want for background purposes, but not for presentation at the
Summit?
• What information do you want presented at the Summit?
• How big of a group would you like to convene?
• What kind of representation do you desire and from which stakeholder groups?
• How far downvalley do you wish this representation to come from?
• What kind of structure for the summit do you envision?
• Would you like us to plan to use the keypad voting devices to poll the room about questions
you raise and/or policy options under consideration?
• Do you envision actually making policy decisions at the Summit or deferring those
decisions to later meetings (this was the case in 2007, where the Summit helped to narrow
the range of choices and to define the environment for those choices)?
RECOMMENDATIONS:
We have provided two visions for the summit for your consideration, please review the attached
Exhibits.
✓ Exhibit A: Draft 1
• Day 1: State of the program/demand AND Social Services /Housing
• Day 2: Capital Reserves, Governance, and Vision for the Future
✓ Exhibit B: Draft 2
Day 1: Background briefing, prioritization, breakout groups and further prioritization
Day 2: Elected Officials discuss issues selected on Day 1
5
NEXT STEPS:
1. Finalize the agenda and format for the summit
2. Finalize the list of invitees
3. Agree on facilitator or at least provide direction
4. Finalize the dates and times
FINANCIAL/ BUDGET IMPACTS:
The summit is estimated to cost approximately $30,000 — including the consultant work already
done or nearly complete, room rental, facilitation, printing, meals and refreshments.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Draft Version One of Summit Agenda
Exhibit B: Draft Version Two of Summit Agenda
2
Summit Goal:
Exhibit A: Summit Agenda 1
August 7, 2012
City of Aspen — Pitkin County
Housing Summit
Alternative I
September 19th — 8:30 AM — 5:00 PM
September 20th — 9:00 AM — 5:30 PM
The Gant Conference Center /Aspen Institute ??
"What are the appropriate policies that provide for housing
that strengthens and maintains community sustainability
for our lower and middle income employees
now and in the future?"
Key Issues•
➢ What is the purpose of the program?
➢ Social Services and Housing — What is the role of the housing program in:
✓ Aging population issues – incomes and employment problems for those not yet at retirement
age
✓ Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in housing
✓ Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
➢ Oversight, make -up and role of the APCHA Board
➢ Retirement role in demand question ... do we change the current approach? ... are there options that
we should explore? ... implications for changing the current approach?
➢ Current demand for units /mix? Future demand for same?
➢ Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of government in doing that?
Role of government money?
➢ What does "Livability" mean? What is the target for the housing stock to be produced? Current?
➢ Mitigation – what is the current requirement/current approach? ... what is the purpose of mitigation?
... what is the role of mitigation?
➢ Future vision of the affordable housing program – what do we look like in 2035?
Wednesday, Sept. 19'
8:30 AM INTRODUCTION OF SUMMIT
✓ Purpose
✓ Invitees
✓ Agenda Review
✓ Ground Rules for Participation and Breakout Groups
9:00 AM OPENING REMARKS
✓ Mayor
✓ BOCC Chair
✓ APCHA Board Chair
9:30 AM BREAKOUT SESSION 1: Select a small group for the issue you care about
and in that breakout, discuss as a group: (1) around this issue, what works and
Page 1
Exhibit A: Summit Agenda 1
August 7, 2012
why? (2) what doesn't work and why? (3) what are the areas for improvement?
(4) Rank (1 -9, 9 high) in importance of the issue to the community, and how
well the community does regarding this issue.
➢ What is the purpose of the program?
➢ Social Services and Housing — What is the role of the housing
program in:
• Aging population issues – incomes and employment problems
for those not yet at retirement age
• Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis
stay in housing
• Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
➢ Oversight, make -up and role of the APCHA Board
➢ Retirement role in demand question ... do we change the current
approach? ... are there options that we should explore? ...
implications for changing the current approach?
➢ Current demand for units /mix? Future demand for same?
➢ Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of
government in doing that? Role of government money?
➢ What does "Livability" mean? What is the target for the housing stock
to be produced? Current?
10:45 AM SMALL GROUP REPORT OUT
Noon ---- - - - - -- Lunch Break
1:00 PM POLICY DETERMINATION BY OFFICIALS:
What is the right approach to mitigation?
Should policy approach in re: retirement be revisited?
What is the demand for housing going forward?
2.30 PM ------- - - - - -- Break
2:50 PM BACKGROUND: SOCIAL SERVICES AND COMMUNITY HOUSING
ISSUES
✓ Mission/purpose of APCHA as currently defined
✓ Aging population issues – incomes and employment problems for
those not yet at retirement age
✓ Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in
housing
✓ Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
✓ What do other housing authorities in Colorado do in these areas?
✓ Is this an Aspen/Pitkin County issue or is it a regional (valley -wide)
issue?
✓ What entity should be responsible for dealing with these issues?
✓ Assets and funding stream issues – current funding/assets for
workforce housing, what might be needed to deal with these issues and
where that funding might come from (to include information on
APCHA's statutory authority to levy a tax and how it might be used for
Page 2
Exhibit A: Summit Agenda 1
August 7, 2012
these purposes)
3:45 PM POLICY DETERMINATION:
What is the role for APCHA in dealing with social services issues?
5:00 PM ADJOURN
Thursday, Sept. 20t
9:00 AM RECAP AND REFLECTION FROM YESTERDAY
9:30 AM BACKGROUND: CAPITAL RESERVE STUDY AND STATE OF
EXISTING INVENTORY
10:00 AM DISCUSSION: How is the maintenance of the existing housing stock to be
maintained? Whose job is it? What is the role of government and government
money?
11:00 AM POLICY DETERMINATION:
Does the existing approach need changing? If so, how?
Noon: ---- - - - - -- Lunch Break --- - - - - --
1:00 PM BACKGROUND: GOVERNANCE OF THE HOUSING EFFORTS
✓ APCHA and the IGA
✓ Oversight and make -up of the APCHA Board
✓ Housing Guidelines and difficulties in making changes
✓ Housing Frontiers
✓ Housing Office as a City Department
1:30 PM DISCUSSION: What are the issues with the current governance approach?
What needs "fixing ?" What are the outlines for any changes?
2:30 PM POLICY DETERMINATION:
How to proceed with making those changes?
3:00 PM ------- - - - - -- Break ------- - - - - --
3:15 PM SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS: Future vision of the affordable housing
program — what do we look like in 2035?
4:00 PM SMALL GROUP REPORT: What is your group's vision for the program in
2035?
4:45 PM WRAP UP — WHAT'S NEXT?
Closing Comments
Page 3
Exhibit A: Summit Agenda 1
August 7, 2012
Invitees / Stakeholders
1.
Aspen Mayor
2.
Aspen City Councilman
3.
Aspen City Councilman
4.
Aspen City Councilman
5.
Aspen City Councilman
6.
BOCC Chair
7.
BOCC Commissioner
8.
BOCC Commissioner
9.
BOCC Commissioner
10. BOCC Commissioner
11. APCHA Board Chair
12. APCHA Board member
13. APCHA Board member
14. APCHA Board member
15. APCHA Board member
16. Housing Frontiers member
17. Housing Frontiers member
18. Aspen City Manager
19. Aspen Asst. City Manager
20. Aspen Asst. City Manager
21. Aspen City Attorney
22. Aspen Affordable Housing Program Manager
23. Aspen Asset Dept. Director
24. Aspen Finance Director
25. Aspen Asst. Finance Director
26. APCHA Director
27. APCHA Asst. Director
28. APCHA Property Manager Supervisor
29. APCHA Attorney
30. PitCo County Manager
31. PitCo County Asst. Manager
32. PitCo County Attorney
33. PitCo Finance Director
34. PitCo Health and Human Services Director
35. Aspen Community Development Director
36. Aspen Long Range Planner
37. PitCo Community Development Director
38. PitCo Long Range Planner
39. TOSV Mayor
40. TOSV Councilmember
41. TOSV Town Manager
42. Regional Homeless Coalition representative
43. Aspen School District representative
44. Employer Representative - SkiCo
45. Employer Representative - AVH
46. Employer Representative - Lodging
Page 4
Exhibit A: Summit Agenda 1
August 7, 2012
47. Employer Representative — Retail./Restaurant/Professional
48. Real Estate Representative
49. Lending Community Representative
50. Construction Representative
51. Developer Representative — Housing Mitigation Credit Developer
52.20 -40 Year Old Representative
53. ACRA Staff
54. AH HOA representative
55. AH renter
56. AH Rental Owner representative
57. Lottery Applicant
58. Lottery Applicant
59. Lottery Applicant
60. Lottery Applicant
Page 5
Exhibit B: Summit Agenda 2
August 7, 2012
City of Aspen — Pitkin County
Housing Summit
Alternative 2
September 19th — 8:30 AM — 5:00 PM
September 201h — 9:00 AM — 5:30 PM
The Gant Conference Center /Aspen Institute ??
Summit Goal:
"What are the appropriate policies that provide for housing
that strengthens and maintains community sustainability
for our lower and middle income employees
now and in the future ?"
Key Issues•
✓ What is the purpose of the program?
✓ Social Services and Housing — What is the role of the housing program in:
✓ Aging population issues – incomes and employment problems for those not yet at retirement
age
✓ Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in housing
✓ Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities
✓ Oversight, make -up and role of the APCHA Board
✓ Retirement role in demand question ... do we change the current approach? ... are there options that
we should explore? ... implications for changing the current approach?
✓ Current demand for units /mix? Future demand for same?
✓ Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of government in doing that?
Role of government money?
✓ What does "Livability" mean? What is the target for the housing stock to be produced? Current?
➢ Mitigation – what is the current requirement/current approach? ... what is the purpose of mitigation?
... what is the role of mitigation?
➢ Future vision of the affordable housing program – what do we look like in 2035?
Wednesday, Sept. 19th I
8:30 AM INTRODUCTION OF SUMMIT
✓ Purpose
✓ Invitees
• Agenda Review
• Ground Rules for Participation and Breakout Groups
9:00 AM OPENING REMARKS
✓ Mayor
✓ BOCC Chair
✓ APCHA Board Chair
9:30 AM PRESENTATION: Background material
✓ IGA, Governance and focus of AH program
Page 1
Exhibit B: Summit Agenda 2
August 7, 2012
✓ Demographics, employment forecast, housing inventory and demand
for housing
✓ Mitigation
✓ Livability
✓ Retirement
✓ Social Services and Housing
✓ Cost of Ownership, maintenance and incentives, role of government in
capital reserves
✓ Demand for unit category /size mix
✓ Future vision of the AH program
11:30 AM PRIORITIZATION OF NINE ISSUE AREAS
➢ How important is each area?
➢ How well are we doing in each area?
➢ Review of Matrix and reduction of list to Top Five Issue Areas
12:00 PM ---- - - - - -- Lunch Break --- - - - - --
1:00 PM BREAKOUT SESSIONS: Select one of the five small groups for the issue you
care about and in that breakout, discuss as a group: (1) around this issue, what
works and why? (2) what doesn't work and why? (3) what are the areas for
improvement?
2:45 PM
Break ------- - - - - --
3:00 PM SMALL GROUPS REPORT OUT
4:30 PM RANKING OF ISSUE AREAS: Look at the ranking of issues and determine
which three issue areas the Elected Officials will take up tomorrow
5:00 PM ADJOURN
9:00 AM RECAP AND REFLECTION FROM YESTERDAY
9:30 AM BACKGROUND: Issue Area #1
10:00 AM DISCUSSION: Issue Area #1
11:00 AM POLICY DETERMINATION: Issue Area #1
Does the existing approach need changing? If so, how?
Noon:
Lunch Break --- - - - - --
1:00 PM BACKGROUND: Issue Area #2
Page 2
Exhibit B: Summit Agenda 2
August 7, 2012
1:30 PM DISCUSSION: Issue Area 42
2:15 PM POLICY DETERMINATION: Issue Area 42
Does the existing approach need changing? If so, how?
3:00 PM ------- - - - - -- Break
3:15 PM BACKGROUND: Issue Area 43
3:45 PM DISCUSSION: Issue Area #3
4:30 PM POLICY DETERMINATION: Issue Area #3
Does the existing approach need changing? If so, how?
5:30 PM WRAP UP — WHAT'S NEXT?
Closing Comments
Page 3
Exhibit B: Summit Agenda 2
August 7, 2012
Invitees / Stakeholders
1. Aspen Mayor
2. Aspen City Councilman
3. Aspen City Councilman
4. Aspen City Councilman
5. Aspen City Councilman
6. BOCC Chair
7. BOCC Commissioner
8. BOCC Commissioner
9. BOCC Commissioner
10. BOCC Commissioner
11. APCHA Board Chair
12. APCHA Board member
13. APCHA Board member
14. APCHA Board member
15. APCHA Board member
16. Housing Frontiers member
17. Housing Frontiers member
18. Aspen City Manager
19. Aspen Asst. City Manager
20. Aspen Asst. City Manager
21. Aspen City Attorney
22. Aspen Affordable Housing Program Manager
23. Aspen Asset Dept. Director
24. Aspen Finance Director
25. Aspen Asst. Finance Director
26. APCHA Director
27. APCHA Asst. Director
28. APCHA Property Manager Supervisor
29. APCHA Attorney
30. Aspen Community Development Director
31. Aspen Long Range Planner
32. PitCo County Manager
33. PitCo County Asst. Manager
34. PitCo County Attorney
35. PitCo Finance Director
36. PitCo Health and Human Services Director
37. PitCo Community Development Director
38. PitCo Long Range Planner
39. TOSV Mayor
40. TOSV Councilmember
41. TOSV Town Manager
42. Regional Homeless Coalition representative
43. Aspen School District representative
44. Employer Representative - SkiCo
45. Employer Representative - AVH
46. Employer Representative - Lodging
Page 4
Exhibit B: Summit Agenda 2
August 7, 2012
47. Employer Representative — Retail/Restaurant/Professional
48. Real Estate Representative
49. Lending Community Representative
50. Construction Representative
51. Developer Representative — Housing Mitigation Credit Developer
52.20 -40 Year Old Representative
53. ACRA Staff
54. AH HOA representative
55. AH renter
56. AH Rental Owner representative
57. Lottery Applicant
58. Lottery Applicant
59. Lottery Applicant
60. Lottery Applicant
Page 5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Taylor, Director of Finance
THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager
DATE OF MEMO: August 10th,2012
MEETING DATE: August 14th,2012
RE: Review of Proposed Franchise with Source Gas
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Review the terms of the proposed franchise agreement with
Source Gas, provide feedback and give direction to set ballot question.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved a ballot question approving a
franchise agreement with a natural gas provider that was subsequently assigned to, or acquired
by, Source Gas. This franchise expired in 2007 but has been continued annually by mutual
agreement.
BACKGROUND: . The City charter provides that public utilities that wish to utilize the City
rights of way to deliver their services to citizens and property owners in the City must first enter
into a franchise agreement. The franchise agreement provides the terms and conditions that the
public utility must follow and the consideration that is to be paid to the City. The City charter,
provides that all franchise agreements be approved by the voters.
DISCUSSION: Most of the conditions of the franchise were readily agreed to and are standard
provisions for utilization of the right of way. Compensation for use of the franchise took some
negotiation to settle. Source gas was offering to pay the City either 2% of each of their retail
customers' total bill or to charge all their customers based on a dollar amount per therm
delivered. The difference is that the per therm basis picked up their transport only customers
which have expanded in recent years. Changing to a per therm basis picks up these customers
but it locks the city into a low franchise fee rate that can be changed only once every five year.
Gas prices are really low right now and the city was reluctant to lock into a low rate. We were
able to convince them that they should bifurcate the franchise fee methodology into a percentage
rate for the retail customers and a per therm rate for the transport customers. This makes the
franchise fee charge, which is passed on to customers, equitable regardless of who they are
buying the actual commodity from. The amount of the franchise fee stipulated to in the
agreement is 2% of the amount charged.
Page 1 of 2
The other area of disagreement has to do with Section 6 of the agreement regarding the relocation
of the facilities. Source gas readily agrees to pay for relocation of their facilities when city
projects require that they be moved if the City agrees to meet and confer with them prior to the
project being initiated do that they may explore methods for managing their costs. This is
typically what happens. However they have inserted a provision that if the City does not meet
and confer prior to the initiation of the project that the expense shall be borne by the City. City
staff is concerned about either emergency situations or just plain oversight. We are still
exchanging agreement language on this particular matter.
FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The source gas franchise generates approximately
$200,000 per year for the City.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: If agreement is reached on outstanding items, first reading on
August 27th
ALTERNATIVES: Postpone until the May election
PROPOSED MOTION:
I move that the franchise agreement ordinance be brought to City Council for first reading on
August 27th, 2012.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft franchise agreement
Page 2 of 2
ORDINANCE NO.
Series of 2012
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO SOURCEGAS
DISTRIBUTION LLC, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, TO LOCATE, BUILD,
CONSTRUCT, ACQUIRE, PURCHASE, EXTEND, MAINTAIN AND OPERATE INTO,
WITHIN AND THROUGH THE PRESENT AND FUTURE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, A GAS SYSTEM AND WORKS FOR
THE PURCHASE, PROCESSING, TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION OF GAS,
EITHER NATURAL, ARTIFICIAL OR MIXED, AND TO FURNISH, SELL AND
DISTRIBUTE SAID GAS TO THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE INHABITANTS THEREOF,
FOR HEATING, COOKING OR OTHER PURPOSES, BY MEANS OF PIPES, MAINS,
CONDUITS, SERVICES OR OTHERWISE, OVER, UNDER, ALONG, ACROSS AND
THROUGH ANY AND ALL STREETS, OTHER PUBLIC WAYS AND PLACES IN SAID
CITY OF ASPEN, FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF AND REPEALING
ORDINANCE NO. 14, SERIES OF 1986.
WHEREAS, the City staff and SourceGas Distribution LLC have negotiated an agreement
providing for a grant of franchise subject to approval by the City Council of the City of Aspen
and the electors of the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the grant of franchise is in the best interests of
the citizens of the City of Aspen.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the
SourceGas Distribution LLC Franchise Ordinance.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this Ordinance,the following terms
shall have the meaning given herein:
"City" is the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado,the grantor of rights under this
franchise.
"Grantee" is SourceGas Distribution LLC, its successors and assigns,the grantee of rights
under this franchise.
1
"Council" is the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado.
"Person" is any person, firm,partnership, association, corporation, company or
organization of any kind.
SECTION 3. GRANT OF AUTHORITY.
A. There is hereby granted to the Grantee the right, privilege and authority to locate, build,
construct, acquire, purchase, extend, maintain and operate into, within and through said City as
the same now exists or may hereafter be extended, a gas system and works, for the purchase,
processing,transmission and distribution of gas, either natural, artificial or mixed, and, for the
period and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter specified, to furnish, sell and distribute said
gas to the City and the inhabitants thereof, for heating, cooking or other purposes, by means of
pipes, mains, conduits, services or otherwise, over, under, along, across and through any and all
streets, alleys, viaducts, bridges, roads, lanes and gas easements in said City and over, under,
along, across and through any extension, connection with or continuation of the same and/or
over, under, along, across and through any and all such new streets, alleys, viaducts, bridges,
roads, lanes and gas easements as may be hereafter laid out, opened, located or constructed
within the territory now or hereafter included in the boundaries of said City.
B. This franchise and the right to use and occupy said streets, alleys, public ways and places
shall not be exclusive, and the City reserves the right to grant the use of said streets, alleys,
public ways and places, to any person during the period of this franchise.
C. This franchise constitutes a valid and binding contract between the Grantee and the City.
The City has exercised its proprietary authority in granting this franchise. In the event that a
franchise fee specified herein is declared illegal, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by any court
of competent jurisdiction,the Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in modifying the
franchise to assure that the Grantee collects and the City receives an amount in franchise fees or
some other form that is the same amount of franchise fees collected by the Grantee and paid to
the City as of the date of such declaration, to the extent permitted by law.
SECTION 4. GENERAL CONDITIONS. The Grantee is further granted the right,
privilege and authority to excavate in, occupy and use any and all streets, alleys, viaducts,
bridges, roads, lanes, and other public ways and places under the supervision of the properly
constituted authority for the purpose of bringing gas into, within and through the City, and
supplying gas to said City and the inhabitants thereof and in the territory adjacent thereto,
provided however,that the Grantee shall so locate its works, transmission and distribution
structures, equipment, mains, pipes, conduits, services or other appurtenances within said City in
a manner to meet with the approval of the City and further in locating said facilities shall do so in
such manner as to cause minimum interference with the proper use of streets, alleys and other
public ways and places and to cause minimum interference with the rights or reasonable
2
convenience of property owners whose property adjoins any of the said streets, alleys, or other
public ways and places. Should it become necessary for the Grantee, in exercising its rights and
performing its duties hereunder, to interfere with any sidewalk, graveled or paved streets, roads
or alleys, or any other public or private improvement, the Grantee shall repair at its own expense
in a workmanlike manner subject to the approval by the City and in accordance with the
provisions of the City Municipal Code, such sidewalk, graveled or paved street, road, alley, or
other improvement after the installation of its pipes or other structures. The Grantee shall use
due care not to interfere with or damage any water mains, sewers, or other structures now in
place or which may hereafter be placed in said streets, alleys, or other public places, and said
Grantee shall, at its own expense, repair in a workmanlike manner subject to the approval of the
City and in accordance with the provisions of the City Municipal Code, any such water mains,
sewers, or other structures which are damaged through the action of Grantee, provided, however,
that the City may make such repairs and charge the reasonable cost thereof to the Grantee.
SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION,INSURANCE and BONDS or OTHER
SURETY.
A. General Indemnification. The Grantee agrees to indemnify, save and hold
harmless, and defend the City, its officers, elected or appointed officials, employees, agents,
boards and employees, from any action or claim, including third party claims, for injury,
damage, loss, liability, cost or expense, including administrative hearing, court and appeal costs
and attorneys' and expert witness fees and expenses, arising from any casualty, accident, injury
or loss to person or property, including, without limitation, copyright infringement and
defamation, and all other damages in any way arising out of, or by reason of, any construction,
excavation, operation, maintenance, or reconstruction of the Grantee within the City and the
securing of and exercise by the Grantee of the rights granted in this franchise, or any act done
under or in connection with this franchise by or for the Grantee, its agents, or its employees by
reason of any negligence or other fault of the Grantee.
B. Additional Circumstances. The Grantee shall also indemnify, defend and hold
the City harmless for any claim for injury, damage, loss, liability, cost or expense, including
court and appeal costs and attorneys' and expert witness fees or expenses in any way arising out
of:
(i) The action of the City in granting this franchise;
(ii) Damages arising out of any failure by the Grantee to secure consents from the
owners, authorized distributors or licensees, licensors of programs to be delivered
by Grantee, whether or not any act or omission complained of is authorized,
allowed or prohibited by this franchise.
C. Procedures and Defense. The City may participate in the defense of a claim.
The Grantee may settle any claims affecting the City without the City's approval, or the Grantee
may relieve itself of all duty to defend and indemnify the City by paying to the City that sum
which the claimant has offered to accept and which the Grantee would have paid but for the
3
City's objection, but in any such case, only if such settlement or payment would fully discharge
and satisfy all claims against the City arising from or related to such claim.
D. Non-Waiver. The fact that the Grantee carries out any activities under this
franchise through independent contractors shall not constitute an avoidance of or defense to the
Grantee's duty to defend and indemnify under this section.
E. Notice to Grantee. The City shall provide prompt written notice to the Grantee
of the pendency of any claim or action against the City arising out of the exercise by the Grantee
of its franchise rights. The Grantee shall be permitted, at its own expense, to appear and defend
or to assist in defense of such claim.
F. The obligations under Paragraphs 5A-D shall not extend to any injury, loss or
damages to the extent it is caused by the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake,
negligence, or other fault of the City, elected or appointed officials, its officers, agents, boards or
its employees.
G. Insurance. The Grantee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its own cost
and expense, during the term of this franchise, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance in the
amount of not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury, and property damage
for the City, its officers, employees and insurers. The insurance shall provide coverage at all
times for not less than the amounts set forth at Section 24-10-114, C.R.S., as limitations on
judgments, as amended from time to time. Said insurance shall designate the City as an
additional insured and loss payee, as applicable. Such insurance shall be non-cancellable except
upon thirty (30) days' notice to the City. Grantee, upon request, shall furnish a certificate of
insurance to the City for said insurance. Grantee shall procure and maintain the minimum
insurance coverages identified or referenced above. The insurance limits hereunder shall be
revised upward in the event the statutory maximums applicable to local governments in
Colorado, as provided in the Governmental Immunity Act, are raised during the term of this
franchise, upon sixty (60) days advance written notice to the Grantee by the City. The Grantee
shall have had notice of the pendency of any action against the City arising out of such exercise
by the Grantee of said rights and privileges and be permitted at its own expense to appear and
defend or assist in the defense of the same.
H. Bonds or Other Surety. Except as expressly provided herein, the Grantee shall
not be required to obtain or maintain bonds or other surety as a condition of being awarded the
franchise or continuing its existence. The City acknowledges that the legal, financial, and
technical qualifications of the Grantee are currently sufficient to afford compliance with the
terms of the franchise and the enforcement thereof. The Grantee and the City recognize that the
costs associated with bonds and other surety may ultimately be borne by Grantee's customers in
the form of increased rates. In order to minimize such costs, the City agrees to require bonds and
other surety in accordance with the provisions of the City Municipal Code and only in such
amounts and during such times as there is a reasonably demonstrated need therefore. Initially,
no bond or other surety will be required. In the event that one is required in the future, the City
agrees to give the Grantee at least sixty (60) days prior written notice thereof stating the reason
4
for the requirement. Such reason must demonstrate a change in technical, legal or financial
qualifications which would materially prohibit or impair Grantee's ability to comply with the
terms of the franchise or afford compliance therewith, or may be based upon the Grantee's
demonstrated failure to comply with the terms of this franchise in a timely manner or in a
manner that poses a substantial risk to the health, safety and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
I. Grantee hereby waives any claim for damages to its property within streets,
alleys and gas easements against the City, its officers and employees, except for damages caused
by the negligence, recklessness, or the specific intent of the City, elected or appointed officials,
its officers, agents, boards or its employees.
SECTION 6. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES.
A. The City may undertake municipal projects including, but not limited to, the change of
grade, new construction, installation or repair of sewers, storm sewers, drainages, waterlines,
power lines or any government-owned communication system, public work or improvement, or
any government-owned utility or public right-of-way vacation. If at any time it shall be
necessary for Grantee to change the position of any gas main or service connection to permit the
City to undertake such a municipal project, the Grantee shall do so at its own expense. During
the preliminary stages of planning and engineering of any City project which may require the
Grantee to relocate its facilities and at any time at which the City determines that it may
materially modify such City project,the City shall provide notice to Grantee of such City project
or material modification of such City project and offer to meet and confer with Grantee on
date(s) and at time(s) and location(s)that are mutually acceptable to the City and Grantee. The
purpose of such meeting(s) is to seek Grantee's input and explore means of reducing the costs to
the Grantee and to provide the City with a timetable within which the involved Grantee facilities
will be relocated, including anticipated start date, so as to facilitate coordination with the
timetable to be established by the City for completion of the City project. The City shall make
reasonable efforts to mitigate the financial impact of any such project on the Grantee. If the
City does not meet and confer with the Grantee, •• -• . - •• o -• o •••• - • - •• • •= -, prior to
finalizing the planning and engineering of any City project which may require the Grantee to
relocate its facilities, and such failure to meet and confer is a material breach of this agreement,
the such Grantee relocation expenses shall be paid by the City. The City will not be required to
pay relocation costs in those circumstances where the City could not have reasonably known that
there was an impact to Sourcegas facilities.
B. If the City and the Grantee meet and confer and agree on a facilities relocation plan, the
Grantee shall complete such relocations by the deadline agreed upon in the facilities
relocation plan; except that the Grantee may be granted an extension of time for
completion equivalent to any delay caused by conditions not under its control. However,
if the City and the Grantee meet and confer but do not agree on a facilities relocation
plan, the Grantee may request a review by the Aspen City Manager. Upon review, the
decision by the Aspen City Manager shall be final and subject to judicial review, and
Grantee shall fully comply with the conditions set forth in the final facilities relocation
plan absent judicial review.
5
C. Following relocation that has been deemed to be Grantee's expense, all property
identified in the facilities relocation plan shall be restored by the Grantee to substantially
its former condition, in accordance with the then existing City municipal ordinances,
laws, and regulations. Such restoration work shall be performed at the Grantee's expense
D. Relocation of underground facilities shall be undergrounded in similar fashion and in
accordance with the provisions of the City Municipal Code, unless otherwise agreed to by
the City and the Grantee in a facilities relocation plan. Relocated above ground facilities
shall be above ground in similar fashion and in accordance with the provisions of the
City Municipal Code, unless otherwise agreed to by the City and the Grantee in a
facilities relocation plan.
E. There is no requirement that the City intervene in proceedings before the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of Colorado ("PUC") in which the Grantee requests recovery of
costs that the Grantee has incurred in complying herewith. If the City is considering
whether to intervene in any such proceeding, it first shall meet and discuss its interests
with the Grantee prior to filing any request to intervene.
SECTION 7. SERVICE STANDARDS.
A. Reliability.
1. The Grantee shall maintain and operate its structures, apparatus, mains, pipe and
other equipment and render efficient service in accordance with the rules and regulations
of the PUC and the terms and conditions of City codes and State Statutes as revised from
time to time.
2. Grantee shall provide to the City telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of the
Grantee's management personnel responsible for utility service in the City and shall,
upon request, provide the City with status reports on a twenty-four hour basis concerning
interruptions of the supply of utility service in any portion of the City.
B. Inspections and As-Built of Work.
1. Work performed by Grantee may be subject to municipal ordinances requiring
inspections of work to ensure that the work has been performed in accordance with
the requirements of the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the City. Such inspection
may include, but not be limited to, the following matters: location of facilities in
streets; cutting and trimming of trees and shrubs; disturbance of pavements,
sidewalks, and surfaces of streets. Grantee shall promptly perform reasonable
remedial action required by the City pursuant to said inspections.
2. It shall be a condition of the City's approval that, for any major facility installed,
renovated, or replaced after the effective date of this franchise, Grantee shall provide
the City with as-built drawings of each such facility in such formats and providing
such details as reasonably requested by the City.
6
C. Maps.
Grantee shall prepare and submit to the City a map showing the location of its
distribution system, showing location and size, as applicable, of lines, valves, gates and
all appurtenances incident to the distribution system, so far as the location of such
facilities can reasonably be projected. The map shall be kept current and filed with the
City Clerk's office by May 1 of each year.
D. Installation, Extension,Relocation, or Modification of Grantee Facilities.
Before commencement of the installation, extension, relocation or modification of
Grantee facilities in City streets and alleys, the Grantee shall prepare and submit to the
City for review and approval by the Aspen City Manager or designee a map showing the
location and size, as applicable, of lines, valves, gates and all appurtenances incident to
the distribution system, so far as the location of such facilities can reasonably be
projected, as well as show the location of other pertinent facilities and surface features as
deemed necessary by the Aspen City Manager to evaluate such plan. The Aspen City
Manager may require Grantee to pothole location of identified facilities to confirm depth,
clearance, or other information in the due course of review prior to approval. In addition,
the Grantee shall submit a construction plan indicating a construction schedule, showing
the streets and alleys where excavations will be simultaneously open at any given time,
making provision for traffic routing in the event of interruption, setting forth the places
where pavement cuts are expected, and where underground boring will occur for pipe
installation. Construction may then proceed upon timely review and approval of said
map and plan by the Aspen City Manager.
E. Access to Premises.
To the extent allowed by law, Grantee shall have the right to enter the premises of its
customers at reasonable times for the purpose of reading meters, inspecting gas
appliances, pipes and equipment and for the purpose of ascertaining loads, making
necessary tests and installing, disconnecting or removing meters.
F. Permits.
Grantee shall be responsible for obtaining all applicable permits, including any
excavation or tree cut permits, in the manner required by the laws, ordinances, and
regulations of the City, except as expressly stated in Section 9 of this Ordinance.
G. Extensions of Service.
Grantee shall make such reasonable extensions of its mains from time to time as may be
required to furnish service within the City to consumer(s) making application therefor;
but Grantee shall not be required to make any extension for the purpose of serving any
7
consumer(s) if Grantee is, for any reason, unable to obtain an adequate supply of gas to
warrant the construction of said extension or if such extension would be inconsistent with
its tariff approved by the PUC. Service to such consumer(s) shall be in accordance with
the terms of this franchise, including payment of franchise fees.
SECTION 8. SUPPLY OF GAS. If during the term of this franchise,there occurs a
failure or partial failure of the supply of natural gas available to the Grantee because of depletion
of such supply,the Grantee shall take all reasonable steps to obtain an additional natural gas
supply from other sources to be delivered to the Grantee, and if unable to procure same, it is
hereby authorized to supply artificial or mixed gas for the unexpired term of this franchise. If
Grantee, within a reasonable period after failure of the supply of natural gas, shall fail to supply
to its customers artificial and/or mixed gas, the franchise rights granted herein shall terminate.
SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEES. In consideration of the rights and privileges herein
granted, the Grantee shall assess, effective the first billing cycle after this franchise becomes
effective, to residential and commercial customers of Grantee within the City of Aspen,
Colorado, a franchise fee or fee equivalent to 2 percent(%) of annual gross revenue derived from
gas sales service within the corporate limits of the City that is billed by the Grantee, including
the revenue received from the sale of industrial gas, and a franchise fee equivalent to $0.0174 per
therm for gas transportation service within the corporate limits of the City that is billed by the
Grantee, and excluding the amount received from the City itself for gas service furnished it and
after adjustment for the net write-off of uncollectable amounts and corrections of bills
theretofore rendered. Payments to the City shall be made quarterly within 60 days of each
calendar quarter and each such payment shall be accompanied by a statement supporting the
payment. The City may on each five (5) year anniversary of this franchise request review and
adjustment of the franchise fees consistent with the amounts charged to other utilities that have a
franchise with the City or with the amounts charged to Grantee by other Colorado municipalities
with which Grantee has a franchise. The City must provide 60 days' written notice to the
Grantee prior to any such anniversary of such request for review and adjustment. If 60-days'
written notice is not provided by the City to Grantee, the franchise fees in effect shall continue.
Such payment shall be in lieu of any and all other fees, charges, licenses, taxes or
assessments which said City may impose for the rights and privileges herein granted or for the
privilege of doing business within said City and, for the use of the rights of way, and in the event
any such fee, charge, license, tax or assessment shall be imposed by said City, the payment to be
made in accordance with the provisions of this section shall be refunded in an amount equal to
the annual burden of such fee, charge, license tax or assessment imposed upon the Grantee. Ad
Valorem property taxes imposed generally upon all real and personal property within said City
shall not be deemed to affect the obligation of the Grantee under this section.
If at any time during the term of this franchise the manner in which a franchise fee
specified herein is calculated, collected or paid is changed, whether by action of the Grantee, the
PUC, or any entity having jurisdiction thereof, the Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in
modifying the franchise to assure that the Grantee collects and the City receives an amount in
franchise fees or some other form that is the same amount of franchise fees collected by the
8
Grantee and paid to the City as of the date of such change and required modification, to the
extent permitted by law.
SECTION 10. PURCHASE OF SYSTEM. The City's rights and privilege of
purchasing or condemning the Grantee's system subject to this franchise shall be governed by the
laws of the State of Colorado.
SECTION 11. TERM. This franchise and the rights,privileges, and franchises hereby
granted shall be and remain in full force and effect for a period of twenty (20)years from the
effective date of this franchise as set forth below.
SECTION 12. TERMINATION OF FRANCHISE. Upon the termination of this
franchise if the Grantee shall not have acquired an extension or renewal thereof and accepted
same, Grantee may have and is hereby granted the right to enter upon the streets, alleys, bridges,
viaducts, roads, lanes and other public places of the City, for the purpose of removing there from
any or all of its plants, structures, pipes, mains or equipment pertaining thereto, at any time after
the City has had ample time and opportunity to purchase, condemn or replace them. In so
removing said pipes, mains or other property, the Grantee shall, at its own expense and in a
workmanlike manner, refill any excavations that shall be made by it in the graveled or paved
streets, alleys, bridges, viaducts, roads, lanes and other public places after the removal of its
mains, pipes or other structures, and repair all surfaces to the condition prior to such removal.
SECTION 13. ASSIGNMENT. The Grantee may assign this franchise, or the rights
granted hereunder by providing prior written notice to the City Manager, but without first
obtaining the written consent of the City, except in the circumstance the Grantee offers to sell or
enters into a contract to sell only the system subject to this franchise. The City's consent to such
an assignment shall not be unreasonably withheld, and this section shall not be construed to
restrict or prevent the issuance of bonds, debentures, or other evidence of indebtedness, needed
or useful for the purpose of financing the system or any portion thereof.
SECTION 14. FORFEITURE.
The City reserves the right to declare a forfeiture of this franchise for the breach of a substantial
and material provision thereof. In the event that the City believes that the Grantee has not
complied with any term of the franchise, it shall notify the Grantee in writing in reasonable detail
of the nature of the alleged noncompliance. No forfeiture shall be declared until the Grantee
shall have had an opportunity to be heard and to correct the alleged breach. Upon failure of the
Grantee to exercise reasonable diligence to correct such condition, or to demonstrate that
remedying the breach is legally proscribed,the City may take action to correct such condition,
the cost of which the Grantee shall promptly reimburse, or may declare this franchise forfeited
and notify Grantee in writing. In the event that this franchise is forfeited, then the Grantee
agrees to continue to render service as theretofore until the City makes alternative arrangements
for such service. In addition to the remedies set forth above in this section, if the City prevails in
any judicial action to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this franchise, the City shall be
9
entitled to recover all of its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in
such action; provided, however, if the City does not prevail in any such judicial action,the
Grantee shall be entitled to recover from the City all of the Grantee's costs and expenses,
including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in such action.
SECTION 15. ORDINANCE REPEALED. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1986, passed
under date of April 28, 1986, is hereby repealed and of no further force or effect.
SECTION 16. RESERVED RIGHTS. The right is hereby reserved by the City to
adopt, from time to time, in addition to the provisions herein contained, such ordinances as may
be deemed necessary in the exercise of its police power, provided that such regulations shall be
reasonable and not destructive of the rights and benefits herein granted, and not in conflict with
the laws of the State of Colorado, or with orders of other authorities having jurisdiction in the
premises, except, if applicable, as permitted in the exercise of the City's home rule powers
granted by Article XX of the Colorado Constitution. The Grantee shall comply with the
requirements of all municipal building and zoning codes, and requirements regarding curb and
pavement cuts, excavating, digging, and other construction activities, except as expressly stated
in Section 9 of this Ordinance. This franchise shall be subject to all valid and effective
provisions of the City Charter whether enumerated herein or not.
SECTION 17. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. No Waiver of GIA. Nothing herein shall be in any way construed as a waiver on
behalf of the City of any of the protections or provisions of the Colorado Governmental
Immunity Act.
B. Consent Not Unreasonably Withheld. In any action by the City or authorized
representative thereof mandated or permitted under the terms hereof, such party shall act in a
reasonable, expeditious, and timely manner. Furthermore, in any instance where approval or
consent is required under the terms hereof, such approval or consent shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
C. Captions. The captions to Sections contained herein are intended solely to facilitate
the reading hereof. Such captions shall not affect the meaning or interpretation of the text herein.
D. Continuing Jurisdiction. This franchise and the ordinance approving the same and
the respective rights and obligations of the parties hereunder are subject to all present and future
valid governmental legislation or regulation, whether federal or state, of duly constituted
authorities which have jurisdiction over this franchise, one or both of the parties, or any
transaction hereunder.
E. Venue. Venue for all judicial actions shall be in Pitkin County, Colorado.
F. No Waiver. Neither the City nor Grantee shall be excused from complying with
any of the terms and conditions of this franchise by any failure of the other, or any of its officers,
10
employees, or agents, upon one or more occasions, to insist upon or to seek compliance with any
terms and conditions.
G. Representatives. Both parties shall designate from time to time in writing
representatives for the Grantee and the City who will be persons to whom notices shall be sent
regarding any action to be taken under this franchise. Notices shall be in writing and forwarded
by certified mail or hand delivered to the person and address stated, unless the person and
address are changed at the written request of either party, delivered in person or by certified mail.
Until such change shall hereafter be made, notices shall be sent as follows:
To the City:
The City of Aspen
City Manager
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
To the Grantee:
Manager—Division Operations
0096 County Rd 160
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
H. Severability. Should any one or more provisions of this franchise be held to be
illegal or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the
validity of all other provisions; provided, however,the parties shall forthwith enter into good
faith negotiations and proceed with due diligence to draft a substitute term for each such
provision held to be illegal or unenforceable that will achieve the original intent of the parties
hereunder.
I. Payment of Expenses Incurred by City in relation to Voter Approval
Election of this Franchise Agreement. At the City's option, Grantee shall pay in advance or
reimburse the City for expenses incurred in voter approval election, publication of notices,
publication of ordinances, photocopying of documents, and staff and consulting expenses arising
for the negotiations, voter approval and implementation of this franchise agreement.
SECTION 18. EFFECTIVE DATE. This franchise shall become effective and be in
full force and effect from and after final passage of the ordinance approving the same by the
Aspen City Council, the ordinance's publication as by law required, upon written acceptance and
ratification by Grantee and voter approval as set forth herein below.
SECTION 19. APPROVALS.
11
A. City Approval. This grant of franchise shall not become effective unless approved by a
majority of the electors of the City of Aspen voting thereon in accordance with Section 11.4 of
the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter.
B. Grantee Approval. Grantee shall file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen its
written support of this franchise and all of its terms and conditions prior to public hearings set for
consideration of the franchise by the City of Aspen City Council. Within sixty (60) days of the
approval of the ordinance by the Aspen City Council, Grantee shall file a written acceptance and
ratification of the franchise with the City Clerk. The acceptance and ratification shall, in the form
and content, be approved by the City Attorney. This franchise shall not become effective for any
purpose until written acceptance and ratification has been filed.
INTRODUCED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on first reading this day of
, 2012.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
PASSED,ADOPTED AND APPROVED on second and final reading this day of
, 2012.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
12
ACCEPTED AND EXECUTED by SourceGas Distribution LLC this day of
, 2012.
SOURCEGAS DISTRIBUTION LLC
Title:
ATTEST:
Secretary
13
CERTIFICATE
State of Colorado )
)
City of Aspen ) ss
)
County of Pitkin )
I, , City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado do hereby
certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Ordinance No. of said City,
granting a franchise by the City of Aspen, Colorado, to SourceGas Distribution LLC, duly
passed and published in the manner provided by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of
the City of Aspen, Colorado, this day of , 2012.
City Clerk
(SEAL)
14
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council and Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Nancy Lesley,Director of Special Events
THRU: Steve Barwick, Manager, City of Aspen
Jon Peacock, Manager, Pitkin County
DATE OF MEMO: July 28,2012
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2012
RE: Pro Cycling Challenge Update
There is no request of either the City Council or the Board of County Commissioners. This is an
informational update only.
DISCUSSION: We are 14 days out from the Pro Challenge arrival into Aspen. Over these last
few months, the City, County, Sheriff's office, Police Department, Forest Service, lodging
community, restaurant community and the local organizing committee have been working hard to
ensure that Aspen is well prepared for the arrival of the racers, spectators and race staff on
Wednesday, August 22.
Who are we? There are many, many people working on this event in various capacities to ensure
the success. It is too multi-faceted to just be one person; therefore I would like to name the
individuals that have already put in countless hours to create a fun, exciting and safe environment
for this event. The Aspen Organizing committee and lead entity for this event are the following:
Nancy Lesley, Sandy Doebler, Kristin Drake, Jeff Woods, Stephen Ellsperman, Justin Todd,
Ashley Cantrell, Tami Solodnz, Jeff Alden and John Sobieralski, Samantha Ferrara, Lynn
Rumbaugh, Bill Tomcich, Julia Theisen, Toni Case, Eliza Voss, Maureen Poshman, Damien
Williamson, Sara-Jane Johnson, Mitzi Rapkin, Devon Padgett, Mike Morgan, Pam Herr, Barb
Frank, Bill Kight, David Francomb.
The Command and General Staff that will ensure the safety of the community during this event is
comprised of: Joe DiSalvo Pitkin County Sheriff, Richard Pryor Chief of Police, Captain Richard
Duran of the Colorado State Patrol, Tom Grady, Emergency Manager, Gretchen Born, Incident
Commander, Renee Rayton, Incident Commander, Adam Loudon, Grant Jahnke, Parker Lathrop,
Mike Tracey, Vanessa March, Jason Kasper, Bruce Romero, Alice Hackney, Scott Thompson,
Gabe Muething, Blair Weyer.
Page 1 of 3
Lodging: While last year at this time there was few noticeable bookings of spectators, this year
is a very different picture. The night of the Wednesday August 22"d now shows the strongest
advanced bookings of any single room night beyond the end of July for as far in advance for a far
in advance as the occupancy reports project, which is currently the end of December. Plus it is a
Wednesday during what has traditionally been the quietest week of the summer, and now the
entire week is starting to show some signs of strength as well. Great to see that our lodging
communities' investment seems to be paying off for many of them within its second year.
Sponsorship: is contracted at 80% away from our goal. We have seen great enthusiasm for this
event with our partners. They are: Marmot, Shane Aspen Real Estate, Aspen Skiing Company,
Dancing Bear, ESC and NetJets. In addition we are starting a countdown to the race on
Wednesday, August 15th with what we are calling Bike Aspen. Everything about enjoying the
bike and enjoying all Aspen has to offer.
VIP ticket Sales: AVSC is once again selling VIP tickets for the Pro Challenge and they are
beginning to implement their sales plan, which is part email, part phone calls and many face to
face sales. It also includes packages with the lodging community. The Finish VIP tent, located
on Main Street across from Paepcke Park will have unobstructed viewing of the finish. Opening
at noon, it will be serving food and alcohol, have seating and TV coverage of the race until the
action can be viewed live The Start VIP tent will also be on Main Street, but in the same
location as last year's finish, across from the Courthouse. Breakfast will be served and it will be
open for approximately 3 hours from 9am to noon.
Finish Line Festival: The Festival will be based in and around Paepcke Park, utilizing Aspen,
Monarch and Hopkins Avenues. We have been pursuing local vendors to add to the national
vendor that travel town to town with the Pro Challenge. The entertainment stage, beer garden
and a prominent food tent will be located directly in the park with others (utilizing trailers) going
on the streets. The festival will open at approximately 11 am and close at 6pm. Along Monarch
Street, between Hyman and Hopkins we are creating a kid zone that will also include the area
non profits. By extending the finish line to Paepcke Park and adding the Festival there, we feel
we are creating a great energized finish line experience.
Concert: There will be a free concert in Wagner Park on Wednesday, August 22"d starting at
6:30pm. This concert is intended to keep the energy, excitement and people in town. The band is
being secured by Michael Goldberg of Belly Up and production is being handled by Joe Lang of
Tumbleweed Productions.
On the Mall: Last weekend we started our "tent on the mall" for information, ticket sales and
awareness. This tent is manned by Pro Challenge staff and will be on the mall Saturday's and
Sunday's throughout the summer. In addition, staff has created a timeline utilizing letters, emails
and newsletters to be in continual contact with those living in the affected areas.
Community Meetings: Staff held two community meetings last week to review and answer
questions from the attendees. The attendees had some great questions and in general, very
supportive comments for the Pro Challenge.
Page 2 of 3
Emails: Staff has created a email list of local shops and utilizing this list and ACRA's email, has
been sending information out and will continue to do so.
Grassroots and Radio: Starting in August, staff will take to the media to get the word out about
impacts and opportunities that will happen on Wednesday and Thursday, August 22°d and 23rd
6 Panel Kiosk: On the 6 panel kiosk located across from the Wheeler near the water fountains,
there is a panel completely devoted to creating awareness of this event that went up in early May.
Newspaper Ads: In late June we started our newspaper ads that highlight sponsorship, festival
booths, VIP tickets, volunteering opportunities and impacts and other opportunities.
Brochures, Posters and Locals Guide: In late July brochures and posters were printed and
distributed throughout the business and lodging community. The locals guide will once again
highlight information pertaining to Wednesday and Thursday, August 22 and 23. For example
location of manned street crossings,portalets and information about Independence Pass.
Website: The website, aspenupcc.com also has the latest information and is continually being
updated and things solidify and get finalized.
City and County Employees: City Hall and most County Departments will be closed all day on
Wednesday, August 22nd and until 1pm on Thursday, August 23rd. Staff is being encouraged to
volunteer for the bike race on both days in lieu of working at their normal jobs.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: We are currently holding at our projected expenditures of
approximately $400,000 which includes the Wednesday night concert.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ZGreen is a strong part of our entire planning process.
Ashley Cantrell from the Environmental Health Department is heading this up, and we are
working to create, or as nearly as we can create, a zero waste event. We are looking into brining
in water buffalo's to supplement the permanent water station that will be in town.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action is required of the City Council or the Board of County
Commissioners at this time.
Page 3 of 3
•
7
„.. _...,,, ;or- 1 um '
) 7,__)- / /, .. i
I
3 R N. ^ rrusr • i.ii1
al
1 l't r /...........:
? O ,.I 1SUNVl3A3io , 9 w one r ■f�
'may �ill", LL-. •m■
O O yC. ,,/ `'^�(p ce 3 .. iii• on V / E 1w ao\�•■ °ei
so
o.
ce
I w a
w 15 0N3 IS-FM-S �,•,/'
N
z y
2
Q I I, ,
I C: -.. S ORIGINAL'ST
lac • / k A
��n F w b^,t0 u'"i mo
r • a /Os
TM F. Wes, Co al'�' z :.g a°
z I Q
¢ w �1�/� •�j1� �� O
m J
u'-1S ONI N — CO ♦ JJJ
w 1S ONI JdS S I I /f� f 'CO
,,
G w �iS P
•
O\R - �z J
6. .....
._._
= 0
321 I. ,` � 1S 2i31NI1H S w,
MEP FOVNOfc�� - ,
LI-
`,� C:illllll _
a BM
re _Z
W •i••i,e111 1,
Q lV'J N 1S YN31VO S I \ /pr.ff y;..,„...
•c O� A ` ' � T1S itrrt to p Z
o/ �u III
8 ,e a z f_. Cl.co
1 I W
w 1 1!!11_= —.11:="0 ` w a
oc I __ "-r Ja w
�a
C7
1S7lIWN 1SllIWS �L r1Sll1{yS N
Z
rt.
i y W
Ihr
!.:t H� J
t r � o z cc,
7 a N
II..___, ,
IS HO2IVNOW N 1S HONVNOW S 1S H02IVNOW.S w w�� V
ri
1/6,_. 0 k-ig i t • Z
J
r
li
,-41.1/
mW
'".....---\\i
/ ig _ 1S N3dSH N IS N3dSV S f 1S 3dSV g , 0
/ S i. Iw ,wl IWl i( O
w ¢ a a a re
x ;'2 a' w z N a
_ h ¢
co ,�_ W OUj 'w jHsINId :
i ...-----IS NO tl9 N 1S HAS W,Nb N
/ Os�i
F W
N
in �Q_ Q
.J
I- Ill f I o` ,` NOR51 I t Ix
F 13 31 t
1S ISl N z ^1SISIS `
1 Q o °v
N rC 1 ��(f. N t
y 3 J r
Z
r-------r-
a� Ou
w W
3 ,r _o
_ [ J \ ......„...........c.....„....."'-.....4
1S ONZ N 1S ONZ S
),W14,717r4e ,„„,' ,--,. -, :li: -&-., - n 4=41 i - . ,
ativitibit ilif , rip i _ III
.--..,,,-- ,_,,
..
mr 2 •. �1S QNtll3A3lj1 co wa f-
....... ••
---s•
' p '� / o: ® ^r A � ili
• •• id W. ,w Iw- ••ii
re- lir 41.7 cp,/ iningalai 1. .c ,ce< ...
_� 1 O O
;im
w
lU
`3, _ 1S ON31S3�
w
At. i ♦ , N � -� III a.
4.//' ''. I' W W 1 //./P�/!
I • Z /
��4 ` S ORIGINAL ST • .
N H I_(J ]ate ;•
Q S
1 to IIF C Hit . .
K <. W G f
LL ro , --ii w �A Iii' fl���A F� (�`i
w-1S ONINdS N= 1 w _ I tot
1S'JNINdSS f -4, / E
suZ
1 w \I �.i P a�
�,\R� .Z u�i a°c
v3a •t\, ` 1S 2131N O N S iw \
Q
FO JNp� a '.�J
Et
gt, -•, • , Wl IVI VJLV V •ff\It eat/���
o J, m. •anuuul ��
U)
R ail -ive N 1S VN3ltl9-S -
III
us • f1'.
0 .. 1 W
c ? J z
V 11111J�= ...Ili
•Pir 1 w a w •� I OC I CO _ _1S� 1eii i i W� 01S 7lIWN 1SliIWS .--------'S Sco
o - iirm r , ,.,
Z if
y W
Z N F H L 1 - . _ :< .:E. Ch
ol-• ' 1. 1S HONVNOW NS HOaVNOW S ! 1S_HOUVNOWS w w U
�� 0
4,117 - *p. ce
w J
�` ��
1 g 1S N3 ISV N 1S N3dtl.S IS N3dS'tl g, V
J
iv 1- W 7 1 O
wI w co
Ip - lQ Q Q F.. ai cc
Q, I z Q.
co w IW W: �8; o -Q' N
U II ' T
L _ ,_.1 _ l W 1'I'I�JJ/' C
—1S HOSIWayJ N 1S HO_ 0
'� ,� I' r `JS-Z
0/ �wI �W �W O
re a > a- z
•;: a o`, eJNO LL o
_ 1SISlN ' z ' 1S1SlS -
co IF °
N t
QQz �0
' LL ___,.....„.„..c...........................t.
-J U
�+ -O
/ J
1S ONZ N 1S ONZ S J f
1[ (� 1I II 1 ' 1( - II I 1f . i \ .
@;
COMING TO YOUR
NEIGHBORIWOY
USA PRO CHALLENGE
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 22
8:30am I Street Painting (Main/Galena) `40111/10.'
11am I Citizen Criterium Race (Main/Galena) • •
11:45am I Kids Race (Main/Galena)
Noon I Citizen Criterium Awards and Kids Awards
(on awards stage/Paepcke Park) ASPE 12:30pm I Women on Course for warm up
1:00pm I Women's Race (Main Street)
2:00-2:15pm I Aspen City Council vs. -•
I
Pi
tkin County Commissioners (Main Street) i LV E R
2:15pm I Stunt Bike show (in front of paepcke Park)
4:00pm I USA Pro Challenge racers finish QUEEN
6:30pm I Free Concert in Wagner Park
• •
THURSDAY, AUGUST 23
11:30am I National Anthem
11:35am I Race Begins
ROAD CLOSURES AND
WANT TO VOLUNTEER?
INDEPENDENCE PASS VISIT WWW.ASPENUPCC.COM TO HELP
VOLUNTEER WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 22 OR
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 22 110:30AM — 6:00PM THURSDAY, AUGUST 23 TO HELP WITH THE
THURSDAY, AUGUST 23 I 9:00AM —2:30PM EXCITING AND FUN EVENT!
FOR UP TO DATE INFORMATION ABOUT ROAD
CLOSURES THROUGHOUT THE
PRO CHALLENGE: WWW.COTRIP.ORG
a JAi
usia pqo
WWW.ASPENUPCC.COM
---------77
RACE MAPS
AUGUST 22, 1
w r cND
..N55 0,04140.4 ST . . I
I L, 1 It.E,.
It
Milli wgpifir-Er , ,IL .�� U 4,
BEN
J 1 „'Ai
T.ERERST E SCLENEFST h \
TESLEEKEN ETA hry4
1 x .a �*
wR.�N 51 : / GISEX Si\
—Q' .. I . , .T ` 4 NE.EE0 Et
i
` WNpRM15 AVE ENOPRINS wvF. MI -� LHOfNWS.VF . .0.
� i ,
Li
-'-- - - f MY.,K
��p��w COWERiwE ECIIMER AVf� F COOPER.VE ( "pf[00�FEe.VEJ r
IL�C l!VIE t`P 9' ` ^`
°T.,NUMO \
�` 1 _ DUN ST - OE.X St^ ^ •
Ill` wST= y ,S- - .VAR
`1Y MS mums: ” —r r„ //^-eREV MiN n ;'Fa ai
t
Uf � - N , d
SUvli sr Sc<it,44
_
!'1 aW 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN FINISH 0`'I'
RACE MAP _
AUGUST 23, ` ",f�`c • ifi.,.....t. .,I(y 44 c
u.
I I N.0 5
li r• mIS°N.1
rNE..T I.ffRFN st 1===,k E IMAMS ETE +,c Er
w
=` .5 . d 0 to ht.-71—T11 %\
'.1 0. I�j —s' - Q: �, Yt`.f art 3.le ;..,■•■■, r.-.... ..., ...-......---,
J
Is I
` 41f ed' E_J'^
,
f' k44.4 2 TZ7‘ •- - - _
T
.j.‘
11J1 �.N.0 S
av— ST j 54.41x•5"' 'VW.Q
( ) °�~'" 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN START p ' _
ROUTS CROSSINGS
AUGUST22, [ flit .��,C �y—s a„GS! f� • ERap59�a M°PLFIM "OlII
.-....f fhilt�6 \ M
A..„LE;
i0 'r'� \\`` 01190„1,!
- � C:,kDl Vtj�
M11LEE[Epl1 teL..N311 'L'
• !4!!4!R lTi f^sa Rt
.....
JQ ,' [1 fi `•—
rd MIN ST
s r
=-1 =war—� ; 1`. ..1 MIKE Ff1 —
X41°IONtM�H �[_NOncwa AVE�w ) MifiMMIy l MOr+.w64YE 99
r i v I
.44 L Z
'4 MWeidE ^ENM.Kt. E„s'SST a : 't' D
\ J
OD•E114WE^ EOOOVERiVe 1
-'p�)`w•-t=— '-. [COWEN AN EE00[n avE
■
r
L Lf WAa„f AK.. �EOLUIaIrt a VF` !\I
.4oMaC ) cl
I R49L, 1 #y/, a w.E•l.vf
i _ —d � .
---"i s,—" M4TA S, ivy?1 C j]
�E.4„,R,_,s�.,E„a�, ( ;:
CCU
• I6 a ,,, w
`” 2012 PRO CYCLING CHALLENGE ASPEN FINISH , '
START/FINISH
A
la
VIP TENT
BLEACHERS
II
a miltt 1 ...cirje
riIGE V
ANNOUNCER STAGE -9. Z I- .
10%10 UM TE
TWO GREENRCGM
z I.
„ UN Iii∎e•,.,.'1 • •TENT �*+
W N
SIG
TA
SCREEN
:EER w
SEER t •RDE)' Q
0 am
ENTERTAINMENT STAGE I
i ~
CC I
E HOPKINS AVE `o
11 III
SHADED AREA � 111
I
DENOTES FESTIVAL AREA I'
ROAD CLOSURES
AUGUST 22, ` J c .. ...\.t I
-LariE0S6 7,00E0,r . • f • vey
i="r".:Wkst
:W. a °
we - o AO ;i
�r w
dm MEEKER i ;el!E Et 14 ill
n 7j, 11,, 'j [! !1 I
1 ENS,
EE-FYAINA EYAN AI■E / 0, `•.iaeG- I: ,g cif�A[f 4,n YY wO.pxd'AK ENOFKNdM Nimiti ____
'� K -�wt ii E�OV
I _-_,1� . w .IMF •
K r MINK'A - u�
:LI ___ _ . ,
sW GdOP AK E O 00•24VE -
=1.1i/EE09 s. fyI/
)' �3�E gr2W.-0VE ENMANT AVE
' !\
r
ce.x A� Cyr
k
ill 't
7.
euAx Ei—� x 'Fi F aAiewsn
kT,s
'IAVANK 51 w9eEF"ALTO�C s�C O
Street Closure Wed••"sr22 I (E� I J \
0�110.4 2012 ASPEN PCC STREET CLOSURE
ROAD CLOSURES \,. J .EEAE
AUGUST 23, ?�QIA '�r� YA fx�• t�4�
1 �- I i
'Jx +I FAr sl�
Y'INti--II• EMiau^r it
r c*�("Y�� Q r■_ I i� _ WF_
Tr•12226lf :f YEflQE Er: Z -
EEEgx[w mA
yYr C1 a .2O m`,
�� ci - I — .AA,AE AYr�.
yJ
YYrwm i EYUY Er i Ei Er`
•WMOXIUNi MR I F NowjKn AYE • • w _E v. NE AVE ^� ^�'-------- .7.1.---.■•01 = ,-.. ,,1 Mill li.ENIYMN0.K_,
lal
'E NYYAE AK 3
�p t�Ai=_CAOFE � FCOO1rEx AY[: FCOOKE AK
mErc)tEO�jD r,i , • _
,OOMIRArc rE 04.10:021•02E T
l/mon 1 ��� OEA4 m r • //� )�,OeAN m�4 �.J A `� wE*[p MIE
r—TOIEEEOl Si :A�
I IN: ;
GETTING AROUND (PARKING AND TRANSIT:
ROAD CLOSURES:
• PLEASE EXPECT DOWNTOWN STREET CLOSURES STARTING AT 6AM ON WEDNESDAY 8/22 AND
THURSDAY 8/23.
• INDEPENDENCE PASS WILL BE CLOSED ON WEDNESDAY 8/22 FROM APPROXIMATELY
10:30AM-6:OOPM AND THURSDAY 8/23 FROM APPROXIMATELY 8:OOAM-2:30PM. PLEASE CHECK
WWW.COTRIP.ORG FOR UPDATED INFORMATION ABOUT INDEPENDENCE PASS CLOSURES.
BIKE CORRALS:
• SECURE BIKE STORAGE WILL BE PROVIDED AT WAGNER PARK FOR A SMALL FEE BENEFITTING
THE ASPEN VALLEY SKI AND SNOWBOARD CLUB.
PARKING AND TRANSIT:
• PARK FOR FREE AND RIDE RFTA FOR THE QUICKEST AND EASIEST WAY TO THE EVENT. FREE
PARKING IS AVAILABLE AT THE BRUSH CREEK INTERCEPT LOT, WITH FREE AND FREQUENT SERVICE
BETWEEN THE LOT AND THE EVENT.
MODIFIED BUS ROUTES:
• MOST RFTA ROUTES WILL TRAVEL INTO AND OUT OF ASPEN VIA HOPKINS AVENUE (JULY 4
DETOUR) FROM TUESDAY EVENING 8/21 THROUGH THURSDAY AFTERNOON 8/23.
• ON WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY 8/22 AND 8/23, THE HUNTER CREEK ROUTE WILL OPERATE
BETWEEN GALENA PLAZA AND PARK CIRCLE VIA MILL STREET. THERE WILL BE NO SERVICE TO HWY
82, RUBEY PARK OR WHEELER OPERA HOUSE STOPS ON THOSE DATES. LOOK FOR MORE
INFORMATION AT YOUR BUS STOP AND ON BOARD BUSES.
BUS SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS:
• THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY DIAL-A-RIDE WILL CEASE SERVICE FROM APPROXIMATELY 9:30AM-6:OOPM
ON WEDNESDAY 8/22 DUE TO ROAD CLOSURES.
• THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY DIAL-A-RIDE WILL CEASE SERVICE FROM APPROXIMATELY 8:30AM-1:OOPM
ON THURSDAY 8/23 DUE TO ROAD CLOSURES.
RIO GRANDE PARKING PLAZA: THE RIO GRANDE PARKING PLAZA WILL HAVE LIMITED PUBLIC
PARKING AVAILABLE ON WEDNESDAY 8/23 AND THURSDAY 8/24.
CALL 970-925-8484 FOR TRANSIT
ROUTE AND SCHEDULE INFORMATION.
MEMO OF INTEREST
WORK SESSION DATE: Joint Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners & Aspen
City Council Meeting
August 7, 2012
TOPIC: Update on West of Maroon Creek Sub-Area Plan
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director
Ellen Sassano, Senior Long Range Planner
ISSUE STATEMENT: The purpose of this memo is to provide an update to the Board of County
Commissioners and City Council (CC) regarding progress towards completion of the West of
Maroon Creek Sub-Area Plan. The item is for informational purposes only. Staff will be available
at the meeting to respond to questions, should there be any.
BACKGROUND: One of the fundamental directives of the West of Castle Creek Chapter in the
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) is to develop a physical sub-area land use plan to
augment the policies in the AACP. Since the AACP was adopted, the name of the sub-area plan has
been changed to "West of Maroon Creek" and the proposed planning area boundary modified to
eliminate the area between the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek bridges along Highway 82. The
modification acknowledges that the area between bridges is unlikely to change over the course of the
next ten years and the life of this Plan. Regardless of the name change and minor boundary
modification, the West of Castle Creek Chapter in the 2012 AACP still provides the fundamental
vision and direction in the West of Maroon Creek Plan(WOMP).
In general this is a pretty simple plan without a lot of dramatic changes to current uses in the area.
However,the plan directs dimensional standards for future design and landscaping guidelines yet to
be established as part of implementation. It also establishes parameters to accomplish the following
AACP vision:
"The West of(Maroon) Creek Corridor area should provide a transition from the rural expanses of Pitkin
County to the urbanized atmosphere of downtown Aspen. The area should feature separate and recognizable
nodes of unique uses and functions, maintaining a land use pattern and scenic quality along the Highway
corridor that creates a distinct series of visual experiences that signal arrival to the Aspen Area. "
County Staff and the County Planning and Zoning Commission have been working on the West of
Maroon Plan since April, 2012, utilizing direction from the AACP, input from public meetings held
in 2008 at the North 40 Fire Station (specifically geared toward land use issues in the West of
Maroon Creek area,) and P&Z site visits to the area.
Schedule: A public hearing for Plan adoption is optimistically scheduled for August 28, 2012.
We have scheduled an open house on August 21, 2012 to provide an opportunity for public review
of the draft plan and future land use map. City Council and BOCC are encouraged to attend the Open
1
house on Aug 21. City P&Z has been invited to all meetings and will be specifically invited to attend
the open house - and to stay for a one-on-one P&Z discussion to ensure the plan meets the objectives
of the AACP West of Castle Creek Chapter.
Key Topics:
Plan Boundary&Aspen UGB The West of Maroon Creek Plan area boundary has been
established, along with a slightly revised Urban Growth Boundary per the AACP (expanded on the
east side of Highway 82 between the Sardy home property and the Snow Dump parcel - see
Attachment A for graphic.) Land use designations for this specific area are contemplated as open
space with provisions for governmental uses if specific criteria are met.
Future Land Use In general, land use designations are being established for the Plan area.
These in turn will indicate whether or not zoning amendments will be recommended in the
implementation section to accommodate use.
Activity Nodes The Plan defines "Activity Nodes" in order to direct development to coincide
with areas generally developed or planned for development today. The intention is to maintain
scenic views and open corridors between the activity nodes so as to prevent the sprawl of
development as one approaches Aspen.
Scenic Scenic view planes and corridors are being established within the Plan area.
Transportation The Plan identifies transportation improvements contemplated by several
existing access and transit related Plans for the area, trail connections, and safe highway crossings
for pedestrians.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN: The West of Maroon Creek planning effort addresses all aspects
of the County Strategic Plan, including the core focuses of Flourishing Natural and Built
Environment, Livable and Supportive Community and Prosperous Economy.
BUDGETARY IMPACT: None
STAFF ACTION: Staff will relay any comments made by the Boards to the County Planning
&Zoning Commission for their consideration as they move towards completing the West of
Maroon Creek Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A West of Maroon Creek Plan Map
2
• , \ �/
I
„ O
LI4/t alkor. -Alt, 1/4.
,(-. iso\ liwiplio, IV
•1'
roposed UGB
E
71131 PkIPP
xtension lo
1,03,./ . a la 101,
A 5 i‘ F4 v
$.. 0, ifi■4 ti _41,
sys $06 _ .4i • .
• /
/ �W��/01‘ ABC Activity Node 0,4497 _ C
xisting
� Aspen UGB 0 • � � Plan Area
Boundary► ® - \Z4
0-
Airport Activity
/j, Node _ � �
A - W ° -.We
1:adflio ,
1 a it •
f,!�/, / yip ,
®1% ,.■ \
law Aspen grip.
r 111,01r$L,T#8
tor v._ _.:, iskaic* 1. •
• .1
p t qt. t mon. ilit4
., ml P 0
r ve-
. .. 4
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
WORK SESSION DATE: August 7, 2012
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Housing Summit Discussion
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Jon Peacock, County Manager
ISSUE STATEMENT: The City of Aspen has taken the lead in planning a Housing Summit to
be held on September 19th and 20th. The County has been invited to participate in planning a
developing an agenda for the Summit. At the Board's July 24th meeting, Commissioners had an
opportunity to discuss the goal and key issues they would like to see addressed during the
summit in preparation for a joint meeting with City Council on August 7th to discuss the same.
This memo is a brief summary of the outcomes of the Board's discussion.
BACKGROUND: On July 24th the Board reviewed a draft agenda developed by City Staff for
the Housing Summit; with a specific emphasis on the Summit goal and key issues for discussion
(the specific items discussed at the July 24th meeting are included at the end of this memo for
reference).
Summary of Board Discussion on Goal:
Generally the Board agreed with the proposed goal for the summit, but recommend that the final
goal include multiple income levels, and that all references to "class" be removed.
Summary of Board Discussion on Key Issues:
The Board generally agreed that all of the key issues identified in the draft agenda are important
items to be addressed. However, there was also concern that nine key issues are too many to
adequately address in a two day summit. The Board identified five key issues they would like to
propose be addressed during the Housing Summit:
1. The role of the housing program in addressing housing needs beyond workforce housing,
e.g.: 1) Aging population issues—income and employment problems for those not yet at
retirement age; 2) Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in
housing; 3) Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities.
2. Retirement role in demand question... do we change the current approach?...are there
other options that we should explore?
3. What is current and projected demand for different unit categories? How do we define
livability for these different categories?
4. Mitigation—what is the current requirement/current approach?...what is the purpose of
mitigation? What is the role of mitigation?
5. What is the role of APCHA?
1
Other Issues Discussed:
The Board was concerned about the proposed participant list which included over 70
participants, and suggested reducing the number to around 50. The Board also agreed that the
discussions should be more strategic in nature with more detailed tactical work being done and
discussed in subsequent workshops.
Draft Summit Goal Discussed at July 24th meeting:
"What are the appropriate policies that provide for housing that strengthens and maintains
Aspen's middle class now and in the future?"
Draft Key Issues Discussed at July 24th meeting:
• What is the purpose of the program?
• The role of the housing program in:
o Aging population issues—income and employment problems for those not yet at
retirement age.
o Lack of comprehensive support services to help people in crisis stay in housing.
o Accessibility and accommodation of people with disabilities.
• Oversight and make-up of the APCHA Board
• Retirement role in demand question... do we change the current approach?...are there
other options that we should explore?
• Current demand for units/mix? Future demand for the same?
• Maintenance of existing housing stock? How do we ensure it? Role of government in
doing that? Role of government money?
• What does "livability"mean? What is the target for the housing stock to be produced?
Current?
• Mitigation—what is the current requirement/current approach?...what is the purpose of
mitigation? What is the role of mitigation?
• Future vision of the affordable housing program—what do we look like in 2035?
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Livable and Supportive Community and Flourishing Natural and Built Environment
BUDGETARY IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDED BOCC ACTION: information only
2
14k
THE CITY OF ASPEN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
DATE: August 1, 2012
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2012
RE: Joint Worksession— Centennial
SUMMARY:
The work recommended by City staff is inappropriately characterized by the Centennial HOA as "a
band aid." It is in fact a comprehensive effort to fix the problems with their buildings in a
responsible manner, consistent with any owner's desire to balance fixing the problem for a long
term solution with responsible use of an owner's funds. It is consistent with the approach taken for
years now by the Centennial Rental Project—constructed at the same time and with the same design
features. Results to-date are encouraging and suggest a total project cost much more in keeping with
our original estimates of less than $10,000 per unit. This is an amount that is reasonably within the
ability of the Centennial HOA to finance through assessments and loans from a bank (which loans
banks are ready to make),and can be done over the course of several years.
A repair estimate from Summit Consulting(cost split between the HOA and the governments)will:
• review the Building Science Corporation (BSC) report dated 02.21.2012 and solicit feedback from
Athens Builders(the HOA's current Contractor);John Forster(HOA representative);and BSC.
• A narrative for the following estimate option will be prepared prior to commencing the estimate
phase.
• Once approved, master bid forms will be assembled and quantity surveys will be performed. Select
subcontractor feedback will be solicited to market validate the estimate. The estimate will be
accompanied by a Basis of Budget attachment.
1
The approach/estimate option that will be the basis for the estimate will be similar to the approach
taken by the Centennial rental project:
• An estimate to replace the exterior wall envelop of the south and west facing aspects based upon
BSC feedback . The north and east facing aspects will be reviewed for water intrusion areas and
particularly for repairs/replacement of flashing details at the roof/wall juncture.
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTION:
Approach and Preliminary Findings:
• In early 2010 the City agreed to provide interim project management services to assist the
HOA/APCHA/City of Aspen/Pitkin County team in expanding the overall evaluation.
• The City requested, received, and executed a proposal from Building Science Corporation
(BSC), a Boston based engineering and architecture firm with extensive experience in
building mechanics, systems, and water management. BSC has conducted numerous
forensic examinations and prepared evaluations and solutions for moisture damaged
buildings. The City has worked with BSC as the liaison for the US Department of Energy
Building America program.
• BSC visited the site on June 30th, 2010. For the investigations the City engaged Rudd
Construction (Rudd) to provide manpower, equipment, tools and materials to assist in
uncovering areas for inspection, and for replacement and waterproofing repair. Also present
on the day of these inspections, at the request of Lee Cassin (City Environmental Health
Director) was industrial hygienist and mold expert, Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health in Denver. He provided visual inspection of mold presence and
extent.
• The final BSC report which was reviewed extensively with, and modified by
recommendations of,REG.
• The primary cause of damage is reported to be inadequate flashing, particularly at roof- to-
wall details, at some windows,and at eave overhangs.
• In addition there are issues with attic air leakage and ventilation. The June 2010 BSC
inspections removed large expanses of siding where the earlier investigation relied on
localized core samples. This more extensive removal showed the water leakage and
resultant water caused deterioration occurring at specific flashing intersections while
adjacent areas were in good condition.
• A further complication top the structural and water intrusion issues at the Centennial
ownership buildings have been owner installed balconies and other additions
• It should be noted and emphasized that according to building science experts, moisture
damage remediation is generally accomplished carefully and deliberately.
• BSC initially recommended a range of options with respect to the attic issues and exterior
walls. This approach was based on their years of experience in the field over decades and is
consistent with generally accepted asset management practices for repair and preservation.
• It is generally accepted that elimination and control of moisture is first necessary and
successful step in retarding further mold growth. It is also generally accepted that mold
2
exists everywhere in the environment, and that testing procedures can quantify and identify
those genus that can be health concerns,after moisture control is established.
• The sequence of these work efforts is logical and straightforward. Moisture must be
mitigated before repair and investigation of damaged materials can begin.
Costs
• The 2009 assessment resulted in estimates from the HOA of repair costs of$100,000 per
unit or $10 million for the entire complex. This estimate was based on observed conditions
at the time of repair of the unit which encountered the waste line break, and a complete
destruction/reconstruction of the outer shell of the buildings—walls and roof.
• Based on BSC's site investigation and similar restoration work, a local construction
company took a very broad and very preliminary look at work scope, based on the first level
of recommended repairs.
• The total using that example was estimated at $30,000 per building, or $2,300 per unit, or
$212,336 to restore the complete project. It was recommended to address 1-2 buildings at a
time. Residents would be able to stay in their home during the work, unless individual
conditions required removal and replacement of wall elements, or penetration to the unit
interior.
On August 3, 2010 City of Aspen Capital Asset Department staff presented a report to a joint
meeting of the City of Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Commissioners. The report was
prepared by Building Science Corporation (BSC), http://www.buildingscience.com/, a building
science and consulting firm, with a focus on preventing and resolving problems related to building
design, construction and operation. BSC is internationally recognized for its expertise in moisture
dynamics, indoor air quality, and building failure forensic investigations.
Also presented at that meeting was a three page report from Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health (NJH) in Denver (engaged at the recommendation of the City
Environmental Health Department). He had provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent,
and had reviewed one document from DS Consulting (the Centennial HOA retained mold
assessment firm). The City Asset staff had provided Dr. Van Dyke with the information it had thus
received from the Centennial HOA and management.
The staff presentation was cut short by Ed Cross, HOA president, who highlighted another report
from DS which contained sample evidence of elevated mold levels within living spaces at
Centennial. City Council and The Board of County Commissioners requested staff to resolve the
"dueling experts"reports and return at a later date to complete the report.
We resolved the questions of differing opinions by obtaining joint letters of agreement from the
building experts and from the mold experts. Council and the BOCC asked staff to try and have the
"dueling consultants"of the City and the Centennial HOA agree to some background facts.
3
At a joint worksession on April 5,2011 the following discussion/direction was provided:
It is clear that moisture intrusion issues have long been known to the Centennial HOA Board
and that studies have been repeatedly done over the past 20 years. Some work has been
done, but much of the recommended repairs have been continuously deferred. Capital
reserve recommendations have been ignored — indeed a rebate was provided to owners in
one year, even though the need to save for repairs was well understood.
As far as the building issues are concerned, in order to deal with moisture and mold the
HOA should:
Moisture and Mold Mitigation(all consultants are in agreement)
• Step 1 - stop the water infiltration
• Step 2 -assess and repair damage at exterior and behind the exterior sheathing
• Steps 3 - (simultaneous with Step 2) conduct tests for mold and mitigate to standards
(such as the New York City protocols).
Mold Assessment
• Mold exists everywhere in the environment
• Mold tests reflect a"moment in time"and can vary from day to day
• None of the tests showed evidence of Stachybotrys (often referred to as "Toxic Black
Mold"which is potentially toxigenic)
• No visible molds in some areas with elevated levels, visible mold in some areas but no
elevated levels
• DS Consulting suggested using a recognized method like the "NYC Protocols" —there
is no national standard
• There is no state or federal established level of "normal", "safe", or "unsafe" mold
counts
• Both DS Consulting and National Jewish Health advised distribution of informational
materials on methods to avoid mold growth, and that individual complaints of health or
comfort are addressed through further testing, and/or individual mitigation.
Construction Repairs/Recommendations/Alternatives
• Building Science Corporation (City of Aspen consultant), and Resource Engineering
Group (Centennial consultant)have collaborated and agreed on a general repair strategy.
Note that this revised strategy is more extensive and than that initially recommended by
BSC. It goes beyond normal standards for building repair and allows for the building
owner to install a new and complete building wrap over 100% of the exterior wall
assemblies (NOTE: this option is not being pursued, rather the repairs will concentrate
on the south and west facing aspects of the buildings, as the Centennial rental property
has done),
• Detail a moisture drainage plane, and new cladding.
• BSC has noted that if this repair approach is taken, the owner may wish to also replace
windows and doors with more modern and thermally efficient units (an additional cost).
4
• Both the original and the expanded repair strategies will allow moisture damaged areas
to be uncovered and examined for deeper damage and mold. Once uncovered, and only
when uncovered, can any accurate estimate of mold remediation be determined, and
those repairs should be undertaken in that process.
• The HOA elected to follow the example of the rental section and re-cladded the south and west
aspects(3 units),while refining the flashing and moisture intrusion areas of the roofs.
Board and Council Discussion:
• Role should be in assisting the HOA to deal with their problem
• Staff should meet with the HOA and fully brief them on the parts of the presentation
they missed due to the meeting proceeding faster than anticipated
• Not sure about providing the HOA any funding — but rather emphasis should be on
providing technical assistance
• Proceed with BSC recommendation to start with a few units, a few walls—to see what
you are really dealing with and get a better handle on the projected cost of repairs
Direction:
• Provide technical assistance and help them get started with the BSC recommendation to begin
repairs with a few units or a few walls so you can really see what is going on behind the cladding
and get a better estimate on projected costs.
• Do not continue with cost estimating efforts under RLB nor negotiate with the HOA over
government assistance to pay for the repairs.
TODAY'S DISCUSSION:
Over the course of the past year:
• Athen Builders, the same contractor who has been working on the Centennial rental
buildings, was selected by the HOA to conduct repairs on three units, on their worst south
and west exposures.
• The HOA and contractor determined it was not possible to remove and restore the existing
siding. Instead new siding was used on those south and west exposures (this is how the
Centennial rental project has proceeded).This had a cost impact.
• The selected sample appears to be costing $7-10,000 per unit, based on the small quantity.
Athen believes a larger selection of units will increase efficiency and allow for quantity
materials costs.
• A review of deteriorated decks indicates costs for those could be $2,500 to $3,000 per deck.
Conclusions
The inspections reports all corroborate and identify the initial requirement to repair the construction
issues that result in water intrusion. Once the excess moisture intrusion is mitigated mold will not
grow.
5
The costs we can estimate from this investigation are well below the suggested outcomes from the
HOA's 2009 scenario and our original estimates. If the mold mitigation is added, and considering
some contingency for unforeseen conditions the per-unit cost of repairs may be below$7,000.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
➢ Continue with the effort already underway to do a side or two at a time (the south and west
facing aspects) on selected buildings. Let the HOA continue to assess the efficacy of
replacing windows and help them secure outside funds where possible for that effort. Let the
HOA assess their desire to deal with decks and how to deal with the individual deck's
owner's responsibility.
➢ Engage a local consulting firm to evaluate and extrapolate on the work scope undertaken
by the rental property and the HOA in 2012. Get a professional estimate for the entire
project using an approach that emphasizes the effort on the south and west facing
aspects of the building(taking off the siding and reviewing what needs to be done) and a
review of the north and east facing aspects for flashing detail repairs, particularly at the
juncture of the roof and wall.
➢ We do not believe it is wise, nor necessary, for government funds to pay for the
responsibilities of home ownership. The repair costs that are underway at Centennial are a
necessary part of being a home owner — and in fact have been somewhat neglected for a
long time (as evidenced in the meeting minutes of the Centennial HOA since the early
'90's). There are opportunities for energy-related grants to be made available to Centennial
owners to defray a portion of their repairs/maintenance costs. Policy discussions have been
underway about some ways of helping an HOA raise capital reserve funds (e.g. a payment
to be assessed and collected at each sale — something already in place for Burlingame
transactions). It is anticipated that this will be a topic for consideration at the upcoming
Housing Summit in September.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS:
City staff estimates they will spend slightly less than the $75,000 originally authorized for our
participation on this project(consultants, staff time and shared costs with the HOA). This amount is
to be split evenly between city and county.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Memo from April 5, 2011 Joint meeting
6
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager
Scott Miller, Director, Capital Asset Department
Steve Bossart, Capital Asset Project Manager
DATE: March 31, 2011
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2011
RE: Centennial HOA —Assessment and Recommendations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Beginning in 1987, the Centennial HOA board meeting minutes began to mention issues related
to broken window seals, window issues and possible liability issues with the developer. This was
the beginning of a long-standing understanding around water intrusion issues associated with
their building. In 1991 a consultant was hired to study water damage and water intrusion to the
building. Their report identifies "potentially serious problem" of moisture infiltration behind
siding, "causing deterioration,"possible mold, decay, and "extensive moisture damage". Possible
causes include: lack of roof overhangs, lack of exterior caulking, poor ventilation of baths and
appliances, sprinklers directed at siding, lack of crawl-space and attic ventilation. Possible
remedies were predicted to be "costly and complicated." It recommended increasing fees by 15%
for 1992 in anticipation of capital repairs.
Over the ensuing years the HOA Board meetings reveal:
• They discussed installing dryer vents, repairing water damage, installing prototype roof drip
edges.
• Mentioned that roof overhangs were installed on south side of all buildings for$47,595.50
• Had another Replacement Cost Study done by Wilson Building Consultants, Inc.— it
recommended total funding for repair and replacement of$892,279
• First Choice (property manager) revises total replacement costs from Wilson report down to
$264,834.
• Meeting minutes note "now that replacement study has been completed, the surplus will be
passed on to the owners as a credit"to reduce 1995 assessments.
• Three and one-half years later Board meeting minutes note "not enough money in the reserve
fund". Reserve assessments will be increased "twofold", getting assessments back to same level
of"five years ago".
Exhbit A
1
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
• In 1999, Wilson Replacement Cost Study recommends Replacement cost funding of$804,700 for
next 5 years.
• In 2009, REG, Inc. prepared study recommending removal of all building exteriors to
repair/replace any and all moisture damaged building components.
It is clear that moisture intrusion issues have long been known to the Centennial HOA Board and
that studies have been repeatedly done over the past 20 years. Some work has been done, but
much of the recommended repairs have been continuously deferred. Capital reserve
recommendations have been ignored— indeed a rebate was provided to owners in one year, even
though the need to save for repairs was well understood.
The latest proposal to deconstruct the entire outer shell of every building (replace all wall
framing, sheet rock and exterior cladding, replacement of all roofs) goes way beyond what is
necessary to reasonably deal with the structural issues and stop water intrusion — which stops
mold growth and any deterioration to support structures. The HOA's proposal of a "$10 million
fix that must be accompanied by the lifting of deed restrictions" is unnecessary to the problems
that exist with the buildings—that is the inevitable conclusion one would draw by a review of the
experts hired by the City and whose findings have been agreed to by the HOA's consultants.
As far as the building issues are concerned, in order to deal with moisture and mold the HOA
should:
Moisture and Mold Mitigation (all consultants are in agreement)
• Step 1 -stop the water infiltration
• Step 2-assess and repair damage at exterior and behind the exterior sheathing
• Steps 3 -(simultaneous with Step 2)conduct tests for mold and mitigate to standards (such as the
New York City protocols).
Mold Assessment
• Mold exists everywhere in the environment
• Mold tests reflect a"moment in time"and can vary from day to day
• Centennial 2009 tests (DS Consulting, September 29, 2009) were "10.8 times greater than the
outdoor sample" in two tested units and 23.7 times greater and 17.7 greater than the outdoor
sample in the two other tested units.
• The unit tests genus was of the smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes group, a type that "generally
pose no health concerns to humans or animals" and is found in soil, and living and decaying
plants(DS Consulting,Appendix A,Description of Common Mold Types)
• Attic tests (Unit 321 Free Silver) identified smuts, Pericconia, Myxomycetes ,
Penicillium/Aspergillus(Aspergillus colonizes on continuously damp materials and Penicillium is
common bread mold in one species—both are allergenic to some individuals), and Basidiospores
(commonly found in gardens, forests, woodlands, and outdoor air samples. Can be allergenic but
not potentially toxigenic.) NOTE: Attics were not originally accessible. In some units access
Exhbit A
2
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
stairs wrere installed by owners. Recommendations are offered to address these situations and
attics in general.)
• None of the tests showed evidence of Stachybotrys (often referred to as "Toxic Black Mold"
which is potentially toxigenic)
• No visible molds in some areas with elevated levels, visible mold in some areas but no elevated
levels
• DS Consulting suggested using a recognized method like the "NYC Protocols" — there is no
national standard
• There is no state or federal established level of"normal", "safe", or"unsafe" mold counts
• Both DS Consulting and National Jewish Health advised distribution of informational materials
on methods to avoid mold growth, and that individual complaints of health or comfort are
addressed through further testing,and/or individual mitigation.
Construction Repairs/Recommendations/Alternatives
• Building Science Corporation (City of Aspen consultant), and Resource Engineering Group
(Centennial consultant) have collaborated and agreed on a general repair strategy. Note that this
revised strategy is more extensive and than that initially recommended by BSC. It goes beyond
normal standards for building repair and allows for the building owner to install a new and
complete building wrap over 100%of the exterior wall assemblies,
• detail a moisture drainage plane, and new cladding.
• BSC has noted that if this repair approach is taken, the owner may wish to also replace windows
and doors with more modern and thermally efficient units(an additional cost).
• Both the original and the expanded repair strategies will allow moisture damaged areas to be
uncovered and examined for deeper damage and mold. Once uncovered, and only when
uncovered, can any accurate estimate of mold remediation be determined, and those repairs
should be undertaken in that process.
The "sister buildings" at the Centennial rental property were constructed at the same time, using
the same designs and the same contractors. They have been dutifully dealing with the same
problems over the years with a relentless capital improvement program and do not face the same
issues as a result of their diligence at repairing and fixing their water intrusion problems.
It is the staff conclusion that the building's repairs have been well understood for 20 years and
that fixing the moisture intrusion problems can be undertaken at a cost well within the means of
the property owners at Centennial.
REQUEST OF COUNCIL/BOCC:
Accept the consultants' reports and staff recommendations to let the HOA deal with their
ownership issues without further public assistance, or modification of the affordable housing
program's deed restrictions.
Exhbit A
3
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
Staff must recommend a careful approach, similar to what any prudent home or building owner
would do with such an asset. That is implement strategies immediately, consistent with the BSC
recommendations, to stop and mitigate the moisture issues in every building. Failure to do so or
continuing the debate merely increases the damage and financial problem. Then begin work on a
strategic approach to each building to uncover and repair the damage. This could be done on a
schedule that allows moderate assessments to the owners over time. If additional improvements
such as new windows were desired those could be handled unit by unit or through an HOA
arrange finance mechanism.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL/BOCC ACTION:
On August 3, 2010 City of Aspen Capital Asset Department staff presented a report to a joint
meeting of the City of Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Commissioners. The report was
prepared by Building Science Corporation (BSC), http://www.buildingscience.com/, a building
science and consulting firm, with a focus on preventing and resolving problems related to
building design, construction and operation. BSC is internationally recognized for its expertise in
moisture dynamics, indoor air quality, and building failure forensic investigations.
Also presented at that meeting was a three page report from Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from
National Jewish Health (NJH) in Denver (engaged at the recommendation of the City
Environmental Health Department). He had provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent,
and had reviewed one document from DS Consulting (the Centennial HOA retained mold
assessment firm). The City Asset staff had provided Dr. Van Dyke with the information it had thus
received from the Centennial HOA and management.
The staff presentation was cut short by Ed Cross, HOA president, who highlighted another report
from DS which contained sample evidence of elevated mold levels within living spaces at
Centennial. City Council and The Board of County Commissioners requested staff to resolve the
"dueling experts"reports and return at a later date to complete the report.
We have resolved the questions of differing opinions by obtaining joint letters of agreement from
the building experts and from the mold experts.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has since worked extensively with the combined resources of BSC and Resource Engineering
Group (REG), and with NJH and DS to present joint reports of the conditions and
recommendations. These are referenced in this memo and attached to this report.
Centennial
The Centennial ownership complex consists of 92 category-four, deed restricted ownership units.
They were constructed in 1985 and are located at the base of Smuggler Mountain. There is also
Exhbit A
4
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
a Centennial rental complex at the same location consisting of 148 category three restricted
rental units. Both complexes are frame construction with sloped standing seam metal roofing,
and painted ship-lap rabbet redwood siding. Roofing ends nearly flush to building gable ends and
at eaves.
Early moisture damage was noted at one window on the southeast several years after
construction. There are examples of retrofit sheet metal overhang assemblies and kick-out metal
flashings at lower eaves. In August of 2009 a wastepipe break in a party wall required repairs
and other infiltration moisture damage was discovered. Investigation uncovered other areas of
concern and further investigations were commissioned by the HOA.
On August 8th, 2009 selected city staff members and then Centennial HOA president, Ed Cross
and HOA attorney Fred Pierce sat down to go over what was then known about the scope of the
problems at Centennial. Recent water and mold problems at units #314 and #316 increased the
HOA urgency. For its part the HOA had hired an engineering firm, Resource Engineering Group
(REG), to examine the problem and issue a report and recommendations - REG recommended
extensive demolition and reconstruction.
The HOA hired DS Consulting to conduct an inspection of mold as well as sampling reports of
interior air quality.
It was clear that more information and evaluation was needed to fully understand the scope of the
problems and the approach to a solution.
Approach and Preliminary Findings
In early 2010 the City agreed to provide interim project management services to assist the
HOA/APCHA/City of Aspen/Pitkin County team in expanding the overall evaluation. The City
requested, received, and executed a proposal from Building Science Corporation (BSC), a Boston
based engineering and architecture firm with extensive experience in building mechanics, systems,
and water management. BSC has conducted numerous forensic examinations and prepared
evaluations and solutions for moisture damaged buildings. The City has worked with BSC as the
liaison for the US Department of Energy Building America program.
BSC visited the site on June 30th'2010. For the investigations the City engaged Rudd Construction
(Rudd) to provide manpower, equipment, tools and materials to assist in uncovering areas for
inspection, and for replacement and waterproofing repair. Also present on the day of these
inspections, at the request of Lee Cassin (City Environmental Health Director) was industrial
hygienist and mold expert, Michael V. Van Dyke, PhD, from National Jewish Health in Denver. He
provided visual inspection of mold presence and extent.
Attached is the final BSC report which was reviewed extensively with, and modified by
recommendations of, REG. The primary cause of damage is reported to be inadequate flashing,
Exhbit A
5
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
particularly at roof- to-wall details, at some windows, and at eave overhangs. In addition there are
issues with attic air leakage and ventilation. The June 2010 BSC inspections removed large
expanses of siding where the earlier investigation relied on localized core samples. This more
extensive removal showed the water leakage and resultant water caused deterioration occurring at
specific flashing intersections while adjacent areas were in good condition.
The windows do not have any head flashings installed nor is there a membrane flashing seal
between the flange and the wall. In addition, the flanges are installed in front of the gypsum.
Building Science has recommended a dual benefit by replacing the windows with contemporary
units. If the HOA wished to retain existing windows, flashing recommendations have been
provided.
A further complication top the structural and water intrusion issues at the Centennial ownership
buildings have been owner installed balconies and other additions. It appeared that in many cases
appropriate detailing and flashing wasn't implemented resulting in additional water access to
building structural elements.
After last June's BSC investigation staff asked Rudd for their assessment of the work required to
effect repairs and corrections to the building enclosure. Rudd indicated they observed areas where
wall studs and plates would require replacement, while other areas needed siding removal, flashing
enhancement, and re-siding. The redwood siding is apparently of high quality and is generally in
very good shape — it may be considered for reuse if it can be safely removed without excess
marring.
Dr. Van Dyke issued a three page report dated July 19, 2010 (attached with a cover memo from Lee
Cassin) addressing his observations of conditions on the same day of inspection. He included five
recommendations for repairing the water intrusion issues,cleaning mold where identified, educating
residents, and further inspections. Lee Cassin noted that not having ductwork or forced air furnace
systems is a fortunate situation in that mold spores have not been circulated. Dr Van Dyke and
Steve Shurtliff(DS) have met via telephone conference and have released a joint letter statement of
agreement regarding the observations and tests occurring at Centennial. The City of Aspen
Environmental Health Department has provided staff with information from the Colorado
Environmental Health Association ("The Top 10 Mold Myths, Replacing Hysteria with Science"),
the Colorado Department of Public Health ("Mold Information Sheet" August 2002), and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency("Mold Remediation—Key Steps").
It should be noted and emphasized that according to building science experts, moisture damage
remediation is generally accomplished carefully and deliberately. BSC initially recommended a
range of options with respect to the attic issues and exterior walls. This approach was based on their
years of experience in the field over decades and is consistent with generally accepted asset
management practices for repair and preservation. It is generally accepted that elimination and
control of moisture is first necessary and successful step in retarding further mold growth. It is also
Exhbit A
6
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
generally accepted that mold exists everywhere in the environment, and that testing procedures can
quantify and identify those genus that can be health concerns, after moisture control is established.
The sequence of these work efforts is logical and straightforward. Moisture must be mitigated
before repair and investigation of damaged materials can begin. Once the moisture is managed,
mold growth ceases and sampling can be reliably completed, and an action plan can be designed
and priced. The HOA and their consultant REG have understandably emphasized a comprehensive
repair estimate including mold mitigation. At this time we can make broad educated judgments and
attempt to bracket potential costs.
Costs
The 2009 assessment resulted in estimates from the HOA of repair costs of$100,000 per unit or$10
million for the entire complex. This estimate was based on observed conditions at the time of repair
of the unit which encountered the waste line break. Based on BSC's site investigation and similar
restoration work, a local construction company took a very broad and very preliminary look at work
scope, based on the first level of recommended repairs. The total using that example would be
$30,000 per building, or $2,300 per unit, or $212,336 to restore the complete project. It was
recommended to address 1-2 buildings at a time. Residents would be able to stay in their home
during the work, unless individual conditions required removal and replacement of wall elements,
or penetration to the unit interior.
Mold mediation techniques and recommendations are varied. It is generally accepted that mold is in
the environment and creates health effects only when in excess amounts in living spaces. Existing
mold spores, if encapsulated or isolated, do not pose a health hazard. Dr. Van Dyke recommends
eliminating excess moisture is the first and most important step. He suggests following the New
York City Department of Health's "Guidelines on Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor
Environments" to clean the existing mold in crawlspaces and attics (see Attachment 12 — the
recommendations are straightforward depending on the extent of observed damage)..
Cleanup costs haven't been estimated as of this date. We have spoken with the mold inspection
consultant and the mold testing firm used in 2009. We were able to get a "very worst" case number
of$10,000 per building attic. For our present discussions we might extrapolate $20,000 total per
building or$1,500 per unit.
The HOA and their consultant REG have emphasized a comprehensive repair approach calling for a
complete de-clad and re-clad of the building exterior, with a complete building wrap and new
drainage space with 1x4 wood furring. This is the way we would build in 2011 but it is not the way
the exterior was assembled when new. Originally BSC presented options starting with a patch and
repair strategy; an intermediate approach calling for de-clad and re-clad and repair of walls adjacent
to deteriorated areas; followed by the de-clad and re-clad of all walls. Prudent facility preservation
management attempts a reasonable balance of repair cost and life-cycle/operations analysis. The
Exhbit A
7
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
original BSC program addressed this in a way that provided the HOA several options. The revised
BSC analysis begins with the complete de-clad and attempts to provide bracketed ranges of damage
to be repaired.
The rental section of Centennial has pursued a mitigation and repair program similar to these
recommendations for a number of years and it has reportedly been successful in stopping moisture
intrusion and damage.
Process
The decision team members must carefully review the report from BSC, and resolve any questions.
The HOA must weigh project objectives against the BSC cost options. BSC has provided specific
details for window flashing,roof to wall section flashing,and balcony railing intersections.
A general construction firm would provide estimates based on the believed scope of work, with
general fee schedules, as well as specific fee schedules for predicted work components. Contracts
would by necessity be on a time and materials basis (T&M). As work commences and actual
conditions are fully understood the rates and scope would be correlated and confirmed against
estimates,and the overall budget totals would be recalculated.
The HOA would be advised to obtain project management services with special attention to finance
and contractual conditions. While recognizing the nature of unforeseen conditions in remodel and
repair work, we believe the repairs can be completed within a reasonable time frame, together with
a budget consistent with typical building maintenance and repair expectations. The HOA reports
that the owner improvements made to balconies, deck, and other appurtenances are limited common
elements and thus the responsibility of the HOA in common. These repairs should be concurrent
with the other design and construction activities.
History of moisture issues at Centennial—what did they know and when did they know it?
In August of 2010, city staff requested that the Centennial HOA board provide copies of any and all
available meeting minutes, financial reports, or anything else that would help staff understand the
history of moisture intrusion issues, the HOA's finances, and what has been done to mitigate the
moisture problems. The HOA's management company, First Choice Properties & Management,
Inc., immediately provided electronic copies of meeting minutes, budgets, and financial statements
from 2007 through 2010. However, staff was told that all other records were stored in an office in
Glenwood Springs and would be difficult to produce. In December, 2010 some records dating back
to 1986 were scanned and e-mailed to staff While these records were by no means a complete
record, many years' records are still missing; they provided a good snapshot of discovery of the
moisture problems, HOA board discussion of those problems and attempts to remedy the problems.
The following bullet points document some of the more important events in a timeline from 1986 to
the present. This is by no means a comprehensive study of all the facts:
Exhbit A
8
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
• 11/24/86- Capital reserve study considered replacement of exterior stain, parking lot paving
and roofs only. Beginning fund balance was $12,000, out year contributions started at
$16,000, inflated each year by 3.5%, anticipated a capital reserve balance of$409,010 by
year 2010.
• 5/19/87-board meeting minutes mention broken window seals throughout complex..
• 6/17/87-board meeting minutes mention window problems and possible developer liability.
• 8/12/91- James J. Wilson Building Consultants, Inc. / Code Analysis and Design hired to
study water damage.
• 10/17/91- Wilson hired to perform comprehensive study of moisture damage and
recommend remedial measures.
• 11/20/91- Board letter to all homeowners identifies "potentially serious problem" of
moisture infiltration behind siding, "causing deterioration". Possible causes include; lack of
roof overhangs, lack of exterior caulking, poor ventilation of baths and appliances,
sprinklers directed at siding, lack of crawl-space and attic ventilation. Possible remedies
predicted to be"costly and complicated". Increases fees by 15%for 1992.
• 1/7/92- Wilson progress report discusses possible mold, decay, and "extensive moisture
damage".
• 3/9/92-Wilson progress report discusses latent defects and possibility of legal action.
• 11/23/92- Letter to all homeowners further discusses water infiltration, Wilson report, and
15% fees increase to study problem, install dryer vents, repair water damage, install
prototype roof drip edges.
• 11/17/93- Minutes of annual meeting reports that roof overhangs were installed on south
side of all buildings for$47,595.50.No increase in fees for 1994.
• 11/30/94-Minutes of annual meeting anticipates a surplus at year end of$40,000- $45,000.
• 1/24/95- Replacement Cost Study by Wilson Building Consultants, Inc. recommends total
funding for repair and replacement of$892,279.
• 2/1/95-First Choice revises total replacement costs from Wilson report down to $264,834.
• 2/8/95- Board meeting minutes note "now that replacement study has been completed, the
surplus will be passed on to the owners as a credit"to reduce 1 995 assessments.
• 12/9/98- Board meeting minutes note "not enough money in the reserve fund". Reserve
assessments will be increased "twofold", getting assessments back to same level of"five
years ago".
• 4/19/99- Wilson Replacement Cost Study recommends Replacement cost funding of
$804,700 for next 5 years.
• 9/1/99- Board meeting minutes state that reserve account is not sufficient. Will likely need
to increase both operating and replacement assessments for next year.
• 10/20/99-Board meeting minutes state that association finances are under budget.
• 12/1/99-Annual meeting minutes state assessments will increase no mention of amounts.
• 6/16/09- REG, Inc. prepared study recommending removal of all building exteriors to
repair/replace any and all moisture damaged building components.
Exhbit A
9
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
The capital reserve studies and expert reports as early as 1991 pointed to a large problem with
moisture intrusion and potential damage to all buildings if a comprehensive program of repairs
funded by a large increase in capital assessments was not undertaken immediately. While some
repairs were done, and assessments were increased slightly, by and large the expert's
recommendations were not heeded. Wilson Building Consultants has published a study undertaken
in 1991 and completed in 1992 that explains the scope and the urgency of the problem. This report
was the basis of updated reports by Wilson in 1995 and 1999 which repeated the scope of the
problem and recommended very large increases in the HOA's capital reserves to pay for the needed
repairs. These recommendations were not followed.
After a ten-year period of very little discussion or action on the problem, the HOA hired REG to
perform another study of the moisture problems in 2009. In this report the study's author August
Hasz, recommends wholesale removal of all building cladding, roofing, windows and doors and
removal of all damaged members. This report is the basis for the HOA's seeking approximately
$10,000,000 for repairs to their buildings.
Staff's conclusion is that if the HOA had acted sooner on the recommendations of several experts, it
could have mitigated most of its problems rather painlessly. However, even today the problem is not
a$10,000,000 problem and if a sensible program of capital repairs is undertaken,the HOA can fund
this program with an increase in capital assessments and doing repairs over a several year period,
making the most serious repairs a high priority.
Conclusions
The inspections reports all corroborate and identify the initial requirement to repair the construction
issues that result in water intrusion. Once the excess moisture intrusion is mitigated mold will not
grow.
The costs we can estimate from this investigation are well below the suggested outcomes from
2009. If the mold mitigation is added, and considering some contingency for unforeseen conditions
the per-unit cost of repairs may be below$7,000.
Buildings depreciate. Regularly scheduled repair and maintenance are necessary to avoid
deterioration, correct deficiencies, and maintain function and value. Homeowners routinely incur
periodic repair expenses with any structure. In the case of multifamily homeownership,those repair
costs are shared,typically through reserves, special assessments, or other financing.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS:
The 2009 extrapolation of costs based on what was experience and projected by the HOA was
$100,000 per unit but involved, as best we could discern, a comprehensive redesign and
reconstruction of the buildings, inside and out.
Exhbit A
10
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
This redesign and rebuilding approach is potentially attractive in some respects (essentially a
"new building") but it is well beyond what most building owners would prudently consider,
unless there was expectation of an outside funding mechanism or other value windfall. The HOA
has suggested equity increase and borrowing potential by removal of the affordable housing
program deed restrictions. That discussion is beyond a Staff level purview. However, home
ownership and building ownership requires owner responsibility for regular maintenance and
preservation of the depreciable elements. It would be highly unusual for an original builder or a
mortgagor to carry maintenance as an outside responsibility while granting fee ownership, and
forced removal of agreed-upon terms and conditions is unknown.
The 2010 BSC investigation was accompanied by a local construction firm which provided
manpower and equipment. They have performed similar work locally. Based on their
observations and discussions with BSC they felt considerably less work would be required than
was suggested in 2009. We spoke with DS about mold work and received "very worst" case
numbers for attic mold clean-up. Together the total per unit cost was less than $7,000. Again, the
building science experts and mold experts have agreed that the prudent approach is to stop the
moisture intrusion, and then identify and repair damaged areas. The record indicates the HOA
had similar information and recommendations for as much as 20 years.
The revised scope proposed by the HOA may be attractive to the owners to use the provided
opportunity to enhance improvements to a point. But it would have per unit financial
implications.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Building reuse and preservation is one the most sustainable and environmentally effective
method of resource management. For this reason reuse of existing materials and reduction of
demolition is recommended. As the areas of de-cladding are expanded beyond those areas
needing repair increase material, transportation, and landfill deposits are increased.
On the other hand, a complete de-clad would allow for installation of a complete building wrap,
and perhaps additional insulation and more efficient windows.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff must recommend a careful approach, similar to what any prudent home or building owner
would do with such an asset. That is, implement strategies immediately and incrementally,
consistent with the BSC recommendations, to stop and mitigate the moisture issues in every
building. Failure to do so or continuing the debate merely prolongs and increases the damage and
financial problem. The HOA should then begin work on a strategic approach to each building to
uncover and repair the damage. This could be done on a schedule that allows moderate
assessments to the owners over time. If additional improvements such as new windows were
desired, those could be handled unit by unit or through an HOA arranged finance mechanism.
Exhbit A
11
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
This same work program has been recommended in one form or another to the HOA for over 20
years. The rental portion of Centennial has been gradually dealing with the design/construction
problems that bring on moisture/mold problems on an ongoing basis and claims not to have the
same issues that the ownership group now faces. Had the HOA accepted the recommendations of
their consultants and property managers over the years, they would not now be facing the work
that is in front of them. The magnitude of the recommended work is within the capability of the
HOA and homeowners.
In addition, the HOA must plan for approval and inspection of any owner initiated additions to
the buildings to ensure they are correctly constructed and installed, to avoid a repetition of water
intrusion due to inadequate flashing. Penetrations into attics must be monitored to maintain
moisture barriers, if the HOA continues to allow attic access into Limited Common Elements
(which should also be properly documented in the association documents).
ALTERNATIVES:
The HOA has understandably been concerned about how to fund a project scope as was
discussed in 2009. Removal of the affordable housing program deed restrictions was suggested
as a possible funding mechanism/equity increase that might allow debt.
The BSC suggested strategies are significantly less expensive and are consistent with HOA and
homeowner responsibilities, and environmentally sound policies.
If City Council authorized funding, capital asset staff could assist the HOA with project
management tasks
PROPOSED MOTION:
NA at this time
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Exhbit A
12
Exhibit A: Centennial
August 7, 2012
ATTACHMENTS:
• BSC/REG joint letter
• National Jewish Health/DS Consulting joint letter
• BSC Investigation and Recommendation report
• BSC Architectural Details
• DS Consulting Mold Inspection and Sampling Report
• Resource Engineering Group, 8.20.2009, Centennial Site Report
Resource Engineering Group, 8.20.2009, Centennial Housing Unit 314 & 316 Site
Observations
• Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, " Mold Information Sheet"
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "Mold Remediation in Schools and
Commercial Buildings"; also addressing residential.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Mold Remediation -Key Steps"
• New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; Guidelines on
Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor Environments,November 2008
• Colorado Environmental Health Association, "The Top 10 Mold Myths — Replacing
hysteria with science"
• DS Consulting/National Jewish Health—conference call minutes—August 2010
• August 16, 2010, Lee Cassin, City of Aspen Environmental Health Director — notes
on the DS/National Jewish Heath conference call
Exhbit A
13