Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20121009 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA October 9, 2012 5:00 P.M. I Call to Order II Roll Call III Scheduled Public Appearances IV Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Minutes — September 24, 2012 b) Thompson Divide letter c) Resolution 94, 2012 —Contract - MEAN - Ridgway d) Resolution 95, 2012 —Contract -Aeri-Graphics -Aerial Flyover contract amendment e) Resolution 96, 2012 — Contract— Excavation Services Inc.- Original Street sidewalk extension VII First Reading of Ordinances VIII Public Hearings a) Ordinance #24, 2012 — Source Gas Franchise Agreement IX Action Items a) Introduction of call up — 122 E. Durant - Hotel Durant b) Introduction of call up — 1006 E. Cooper c) Introduction of call up — 820 E. Cooper X Adjournment XI Executive Session Next Regular Meeting October 22, 2012 COUNCIL'S ADOPTED GUIDELINES • Stick to top priorities • Involve others in community problem solving • Be thorough, deliberate and accountable for consequences when making decisions COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. v September 24, 2012 The Honorable Michael Bennet United State Senator 1127 Sherman St.,Suite 150 Denver,Colorado 80203 Senator Bennet, The City of Aspen supports the efforts of the Thompson Divide Coalition (TDC) to secure protections from oil and gas development on federal lands in the Thompson Divide Area.As you know,the TDC represents a broad-based group of local ranchers,farmers,hunters, anglers,recreationalists,and local governments,formed to address mutual concerns regarding existing oil and gas leases on public lands in the Thompson Divide area. The Thompson Divide Area is defined by abundant wildlife and wildlife habitat; essential watersheds,and historic grazing rights for local ranches that provide significant economic, agricultural,and social values to this small region of the state.We are concerned that the area's clean water, rural and agricultural heritage,and recreational and sporting activities could be negatively impacted by oil and gas development. Having reviewed a discussion draft of the"Thompson Divide Withdrawal and Protection Act,"we recognize that the proposed legislation does not affect existing uses or property rights, including current natural gas leases,and request that you introduce the bill during this session in order to move this effort forward. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of the people of Colorado.We look forward to working with you on this issue in the weeks and months to come. Sincerely, Michael C. Ireland, Mayor City of Aspen MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council C FROM: Phil Overeynder, Special Projects Engineer THRU: David Hornbacher, Director of Utilities & Environmental Initiatives DATE OF MEMO: October 2,2012 MEETING DATE: October 9,2012 RE: MEAN Power Purchase Agreement(PPA)- Second Revised Supplemental Agreement REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council's approval of the"Second Revised Supplemental Agreement"with the Municipal Energy Association of Nebraska(MEAN). This agreement is necessary to update our PPA with MEAN, and to amend"Exhibit B"of that agreement to include the Ridgway Hydroelectric Project as a renewable energy source for the City of Aspen(COA). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION/BACKGROUND: The following timeline is relevant to previous contract actions between the COA and MEAN: • January 6,1982—(effective date 6/25/84) Energy Resource Pooling Agreement between MEAN and COA • June 25, 1984—Service Schedule M Total Requirements Power Purchase Agreement Between MEAN & COA • June 25, 1984—(executed by Aspen 9/11/84)—"Supplemental Agreement" containing "Exhibit A Proposed Future Hydropower Projects to be Built by Aspen. • Sept. 1, 1995—"Revised Supplemental Agreement" containing(renamed) "Exhibit B— Existing and Proposed Hydropower Projects of the COA" DISCUSSION: Exhibit B of the PPA between MEAN and COA must be amended to complete the actions necessary for the City of Aspen to purchase renewable energy from the Ridgway Hydroelectric Project. The Ridgway Project PPA was approved by City Council on August 13, 2012, and subsequently by the project owner, Tri-County Water Conservation District on August 22nd, 2012. Exhibit B provides the City of Aspen up to 6280 kW of installed capacity for future hydroelectric projects. The COA agreement with MEAN is unique amongst all MEAN participants and allows COA to construct, operate or participate in local hydropower projects for the benefit of Aspen Municipal Electric customers without being subject to the purchase of"all requirements"power from other Page 1 of 2 MEAN resources. This flexibility is only contained in Aspen's existing supplemental agreement with MEAN. City staff engaged MEAN staff early in the Ridgway discussions and worked collaboratively on the agreement revisions necessary for the City of Aspen's purchase of energy from this renewable energy source. As a result, MEAN's staff& Board have indicated their willingness to allow Aspen to participate in the Ridgway Hydro Project as well as to amend"Exhibit B" contained in the 1995 "Revised Supplemental Agreement"in so far as the total capacity of the projects remain the same. Should either CCEC or Ridgway hydroelectric projects fail to materialize, the amended agreement allows COA to substitute these projects with hydroelectric projects of equivalent capacities subject to MEAN Board approval. Further, there is a general provision allowing development of other small hydroelectric projects to the extent provided in the contract. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: No net budget impact due to: negotiated contract amount per kWh($0.059/kWh) is roughly equivalent to current"Schedule M"rates, and; minimal offset from appropriated renewable energy budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Combined, Ridgway and CCEC elevate the COA's energy portfolio to-97%renewable, closing in on the goal of 100%renewable energy by year 2015. Purchasing hydroelectric power from Ridgway (replacing current coal fired generation) will offset approximately 5,400 tons of carbon emissions per year. Additionally, this facility qualifies as a local renewable energy facility and will receive 150% to 200% of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve the "Second Revised Supplemental Agreement" and amendment to Exhibit B with the Municipal Energy Association of Nebraska(MEAN). ALTERNATIVES: If Council does not approve this amendment which provides for the inclusion of the Ridgway project in Exhibit B, alternatives may include: 1. Pursue additional renewable energy purchases through MEAN at significant added cost; 2. Continue purchase of coal fired energy, not achieving 100%renewable goals by yr. 2015. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: tze-"ttitou-"s c� S ATTACHMENTS: "Second Revised Supplemental Agreement", Exhibit B, and Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO.Zy Series of 2012 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A SECOND REVISED SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE MUNICIPAL ENERGY ASSOCIATION OF NEBRASKA, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a Second Revised Supplemental Agreement, between the City of Aspen and the Municipal Energy Association of Nebraska (MEAN), a substantially complete copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit"A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Second Revised Supplemental Agreement, between the City of Aspen and MEAN, a substantially complete copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the Mayor or City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of 52012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Second Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado This Second Revised Supplemental Agreement, entered into this day of , 2012, between the City of Aspen, Colorado, a home rule city of the State of Colorado (Aspen), and the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, an agency and political subdivision of the State of Nebraska (MEAN), supersedes and replaces the Revised Supplemental Agreement between Aspen and MEAN executed as of September 18, 1995. WHEREAS, due to unique circumstances affecting the sale of electric capacity and energy by MEAN to Aspen, the parties desire to agree on certain contractual terms in addition to those that would normally attend the sale of the electric capacity and energy by MEAN to a municipal customer; and WHEREAS, Aspen intends to acquire or has acquired an interest in a portion of the output of the Ridgway Hydropower Project (Ridgway) owned by the Tri-County Water Conservancy District (Tri-County); and WHEREAS, MEAN and Aspen desire to set forth the terms and conditions by which MEAN will manage the Ridgway output for Aspen and pass through the benefit of said output to Aspen in the manner hereinafter described. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. The parties have executed standardized contracts governing the sale of electric capacity and energy by MEAN to Aspen. These Agreements are the Electrical Resources Pooling Agreement (Pooling Agreement), dated June 25, 1984, the Service Schedule M Total Power Requirements Power Purchase Agreement (Schedule M Agreement), dated June 25, 1984, the Supplemental Agreement for Wind-Generated Energy Purchase, dated October 31, 2002, and the Second Supplemental Agreement for Wind-Generated Energy Purchase, dated August 4, 2005 (Preexisting Power Agreements), which are incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of any conflict or contradiction between the provisions of one or more of the Preexisting Power Agreements, and the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall govern and control. 2. The City of Aspen, Colorado owns and operates the Ruedi hydroelectric plant under 1 a permit issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) with a rated capacity of five megawatts, and a hydroelectric project known as Maroon Creek with a rated capacity of .5 megawatts; and Aspen intends to acquire or has acquired an interest in a portion of the output of Ridgway); which projects are used to supply capacity and energy to Aspen for resale to its customers. MEAN is fully aware that Aspen is planning and may construct itself, or jointly with third parties one or more of the additional proposed hydroelectric projects listed in Exhibit B to this Agreement that may also be used to supply capacity and energy to Aspen. Aspen has received a WAPA demand allocation under the Post 2004 Resource Pool of 988 kW in the summer season and 1,560 kW in the winter season. The parties agree that Aspen is only obligated to purchase from MEAN under the Schedule M Agreement the capacity and energy over and above that actually supplied by the following resources: (i) Aspen's allocation of 988 kW in the summer season and 1,560 kW in the winter season from WAPA under their Post 2004 Resource Pool, and (ii) the facilities listed in Exhibit B; notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties expressly agree that the hydropower output credited to Aspen under this Agreement for each unit shall be limited and is deemed not to exceed generation associated with the capacity amount listed for each respective unit on Exhibit B to this Agreement. 3. Calculation of MEAN Monthly Billing Demand and Energy A. Monthly Billing Demand is equal to the maximum hourly metered demand minus the WAPA demand allocation and minus the actual generation from hydroelectric generating facilities as set forth in Exhibit B, for the same clock hour, less applicable transmission losses as specified in the PSCo Contract and the Holy Cross Contract, less applicable transmission losses as specified in the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (Tri-State) network transmission service agreement for MEAN's delivery of Ridgway, for the current month, subject to the Minimum Billing Demand provision in Exhibit B, Schedule of Rates and Charges, to the Service Schedule M contract. B. Monthly Billing Energy is determined as follows: On an hourly basis, MEAN will reconcile the load and generation for Aspen. For each hour, the amount of supplemental energy supplied by MEAN under the Schedule M Agreement shall be actual metered energy minus the sum of energy supplied from WAPA and the energy generated from the hydropower projects listed on Exhibit B. Monthly Billing Energy equals the net of the amounts determined on an hourly basis for the current month, less applicable transmission losses as specified in the PSCo Contract, the Holy Cross Contract and the Tri-State network transmission service agreement for MEAN's delivery of Ridgway, for the current month. In the event Aspen's resources from the hydropower generation from the facilities listed on Exhibit B and the Supplemental Agreement for Wind-Generated Energy Purchase exceed the City's total electric power and energy requirements MEAN will credit the City for the excess amounts at the MEAN Base Energy rate set forth in the then-current Schedule of Rates and Charges to the Schedule M Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, no 2 provision of this Agreement shall reduce, modify or affect the amounts to be charged to Aspen for purchases under the following agreements between MEAN and Aspen: the Supplemental Agreement for Wind-Generated Energy Purchase, dated October 31, 2002, the Second Supplemental Agreement for Wind-Generated Energy Purchase, dated August 4, 2005, or the Supplemental Agreement for Wind Energy Generation Attributes Purchase, dated April 1, 2009; those amounts will be charged notwithstanding any excess generation from Aspen's hydropower projects on Exhibit B or WAPA. In addition, in the event that for any month the amount of WAPA firm energy purchases exceeds the amount of City's Total Metered Energy, as that term is defined in the then- current Schedule of Rates and Charges to the Schedule M Agreement, MEAN will credit the City for the excess amounts at the then-current WAPA energy rate. 4. Aspen shall be treated, for purposes of the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement, as if those hydroelectric generating facilities -listed- in Exhibit B which actually supply capacity and energy to Aspen, were WAPA Allocations (subject to Section 3 above regarding wind-generated energy purchases), and the following provisions of the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement shall not be applicable to Aspen with regard to the facilities listed on Exhibit B: Pooling Agreement Article VIII, Article IX; Section 13.02, Section 13.05, Section 13.06, Section 15.02, Section 15.04 Schedule M Agreement Article XII and Article XIV 5. Division of responsibility for transmission losses: A. MEAN shall bear all transmission losses associated with delivery of MEAN power and energy to Aspen at the Delivery Point. The Delivery Point is set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. B. Aspen shall bear all transmission losses associated with the delivery of WAPA power and energy as well as power and energy from the facilities listed on Exhibit B. 6. Division of responsibility for transmission charges: A. MEAN has entered into the PSCo Contract for delivery by PSCo of power and energy from MEAN resources, Ruedi and WAPA. Aspen has entered into the Holy Cross Contract for use of Holy Cross transmission and distribution facilities for delivery of power and energy from Ruedi to the transmission system of PSCo and from the transmission system of PSCo to Aspen and for the delivery of all power and energy from the Delivery Point to Aspen. For the purpose of cost sharing arrangement between Aspen and MEAN, only the portion of Holy Cross facility charges associated 3 with the Aspen Substation shall be shared between Aspen and MEAN. All remaining Holy Cross charges shall be passed through by MEAN and paid by Aspen. All Tri-State charges for MEAN's delivery of Ridgway shall be the responsibility of Aspen as provided in subsection B below. B. MEAN is responsible for the portion of the transmission cost for delivery of power and energy from MEAN resources, and the City of Aspen is responsible for the portion of the transmission cost for delivery of power and energy from Ruedi, Ridgway, WAPA and any other constructed hydropower projects currently listed as proposed on Exhibit B. All transmission costs, including losses, associated with the Ridgway Purchase Polder Agreement shall be the sole responsibility of Aspen. Accordingly, Aspen shall be responsible for the lesser of the following costs: (i) costs of delivering power from the Ridgway project to Aspen, or (ii) costs for delivering power from the Ridgway project to MEAN's network load on Tri-State's system (which load shall be that determined by MEAN in its sole discretion). The allocation of PSCo and Holy Cross transmission costs between the City of Aspen and MEAN will be based 50% on the Energy Supply Ratio and 50% on Peak Demand Ratio defined as follows: 1. Energy Supply Ratio (ER) The ER for Aspen (ERA) is equal to the sum of the energy supplied by WAPA and the energy generated at Ruedi, less transmission losses as specified in the transmission agreements of PSCo and Holy Cross, divided by the total energy delivered to Aspen at the Point(s) of Measurement, for the previous calendar year. The ER for MEAN (ERM) is equal to one (1) minus the ERA. 2. Peak Demand Ratio (DR) The DR for Aspen (DRA) is equal to the sum of demand allocation from WAPA and the peak hourly generation from Ruedi coincident with the annual system peak demand for Aspen, less transmission losses as specified in the transmission agreements of PSCo and Holy Cross, divided by the annual system peak demand for Aspen as metered at the Point(s) of Measurement, for the previous calendar year. The DR for MEAN (DRM) is equal to one (1) minus the DRA. C. The monthly cost share will be calculated as follows: 1. The monthly cost share for Aspen shall be: (ERA x 50% + DRA x 50%) x Monthly Transmission cost from PSCo and Holy Cross 2. The monthly cost share for MEAN shall be: (ERM x 50% + DRM x 50%) x Monthly Transmission cost from PSCo and 4 Holy Cross D. All arrangements for and charges for transmission, distribution, losses and other charges on and for all power and energy after it is delivered by MEAN to the Delivery Point shall be the sole responsibility of Aspen. Except as provided below for Ridgway, the Delivery Point shall be as set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. This Delivery Point is also the delivery point for Service Schedule M. The Delivery Point for Ridgway shall be deemed to be the Tri-State meter, or such point as agreed hereafter by Aspen and Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. 7. Any decrease or increase in transmission losses or transmission charges shall accrue to or be-paid by the party to whom the loss or charge subject to the increase or decrease would be allocated in accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 hereof. Provided, however, that if as a result of an increase in transmission losses or transmission charges, a party determines in its sole discretion that continued performance under the Pooling Agreement or Schedule M Agreement would result, in the case of Aspen, in Aspen paying a higher rate for power and energy than it would pay to another supplier other than MEAN, or in the case of MEAN, would result in a MEAN Schedule M rate higher than it would be without Aspen on the system, then the party affected may give the other party notice of his intent to terminate the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement. Following such notification, the parties shall negotiate in good faith to reallocate transmission losses and transmission charges between them. If no agreement is reached between the parties, then the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement shall terminate on the third anniversary of the giving of the notice provided for herein. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement shall not terminate following notice given by Aspen under this paragraph if MEAN agrees to bear whatever increased transmission loss or transmission charge resulted in Aspen's notice of intent to terminate. In the event that the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement are terminated in accordance with this paragraph 7 and such termination is initiated by Aspen, then any Minimum Billing Demand charges that would have applied had the contract not been terminated will still apply. In the event that the Pooling Agreement and Schedule M Agreement are terminated in accordance with this paragraph 7 and such termination is initiated by MEAN, then any Minimum Billing Demand charges that would have applied had the Agreements not been terminated will not apply. 8. In the event Aspen shall become a Contract Purchaser, its obligation to purchase and MEAN's obligation to supply electric power and energy shall thereafter be at a Contract Demand equal to the maximum clock hour integrated system demand of Aspen, less its WAPA allocation, occurring during each Billing Period for the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods, adjusted to take into account any Aspen hydroelectric projects listed on Exhibit B operating during the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods. The adjustment for hydroelectric projects shall be based upon the operating experience of each hydroelectric generation unit during the maximum clock 5 hour of Aspen integrated system demand during the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods. Contract Demand, as used herein, shall constitute the Firm Power Requirement for the City for purposes of 3.01 of the Schedule M Agreement. 9. Management of Ridgway output. Aspen hereby designates MEAN as the party exclusively responsible for scheduling and managing the Ridgway output for Aspen. MEAN shall manage Aspen's Ridgway output and accept delivery of the output from Tri- County pursuant to the terms and conditions of the agreement between Aspen and Tri- County for Ridgway output. After receipt of the output by MEAN from Tri-County, MEAN shall manage the Ridgway output in the manner determined by MEAN in its sole discretion (as further described in Section 6), and MEAN shall apply any applicable credit for such output to the extent it qualifies as excess generation as described in Section 3.B. 10. The parties mutually agree that the provisions of Section 4.02 of the Schedule M Agreement shall not apply in the case of events resulting from or caused by the negligent or intentional actions of MEAN. 11. It is mutually agreed and understood that the obligations imposed by the provisions of the Pooling Agreement, Schedule M Agreement and this Second Revised Supplemental Agreement are only such as are consistent with applicable state and federal law. The parties further agree that if any provision of the Pooling Agreement, Schedule M Agreement or this Second Revised Supplemental Agreement, becomes in its performance inconsistent with state or federal law or is declared invalid, they will in good faith negotiate to modify the agreement accordingly. 12. In no event shall the obligations imposed be diminished or agreements be modified so as to jeopardize the effectiveness of the Schedule M Agreement as security for the payment of notes, bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness issued by MEAN. 13. This Second Revised Supplemental Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Nebraska. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWING.] 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have duly executed this Second Revised Supplemental Agreement as of the date below. MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO NEBRASKA By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Attest: City Clerk (SEAL) K:\Legal\K\MEAN\ERPA\Aspen CO\Drafts\Aspen_Second Revised Supplemental Agreement draft 100112.docx 7 Exhibit A to the Second Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado Delivery Point RUEDIDAM 500 MGM LINE 25 W ------------- O ASPEN BASALT ( � SUBSTATION ` (HOLY CROSS EA.) ; I HCEA LINE PUBLIC SERVICE CO OF COLORADO 915 W r H HCEA LINE � s a....----.-----------_ ASPEN SUBSTATION (HOLY CROSS E.A.) P= Point of Delivery M= Point of Measurement Point of Delivery Adjustment Equals None Exhibit B to the Second Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado Existing and Proposed Hydropower Projects of the City of Aspen, Colorado [See attached.] EXHIBIT B EXISTING HYDROPOWER PROJECTS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN Estimated May- Estimated October- Year of Installed September Energy April Energy Project Location Start-up Capacity(KW) Production (GWH) Production (GWH) Ruedi Reservoir 1986 5,000 9.8 10.5 Maroon Creek Pipeline 1989 360 1.1 0.3 Ridgway Hydrol 2014 4,500 2.8 7.0 Total of Installed Hydro 9,860 13.7 17.8 PROPOSED HYDROPOWER PROJECTS TO BE BUILT OR PARTICIPATED IN BY THE CITY OF ASPEN Estimated May- Estimated October- Year of Installed September Energy April Energy Project Location Start-up Capacity(KW) Production (GWH) Production (GWH) Castle Creek Hydro 2014 1,170 4.7 1.1 Other Hydropower Projects 610 0.5 0.4 Total of Proposed Projects 1,780 5.2 1.5 The City of Aspen will have the ability to purchase Ridgway power during the test period, starting in late 2013. If, for any reason,Aspen cannot participate in the Ridgway project, the 4,500 KW installed capacity associated with it will be automatically added to the 610 KW allowed installed capacity for proposed "Other Hydropower Projects." Z Other hydropower project locations may be substituted, subject to MEAN Board approval, not to exceed a total project capacity of 1,780 KW, or 6,280 KW if the City of Aspen cannot participate in the Ridgway project. 011"a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mary Lackner, GIS Manager THRU: Jim Considine, IT Director DATE OF MEMO: October 2,2012 MEETING DATE: October 9,2012 RE: Amended Contract Approval for Aerial Photography and LiDAR data REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is recommending an amendment of the existing aerial photography contract to add three additional products that will be derived from the data that was acquired. The total cost of additional products is $17,095. This brings the total contract value to $77,030. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The Asset Management Plan contains a$100,000 budget item for this purchase. City Council approved the 2012 Asset Management Plan in the 2012 Budget. City Council approved this contract on April 9, 2012, for $59,935 with the option to purchase additional products that total $38,160. DISCUSSION: There were several optional products in the project that were not initially contracted as staff further evaluated which derived products would be most beneficial. We have chosen the following products. The 3D wireframes will be generated for use by the Community Development department to update the SketchUp model of the city. Cost: $3,080 One foot contours with breakline support, will provide the city a detailed one foot contour layer for the 11.5 square miles of the project. Cost: $12,750 Other. The retiling of the image and Lidar files is needed as the file extents that were initially requested are enormous in size. A more manageable file size is needed to distribute and work with the data. Cost $1,265 Page I of 2 FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The acquisition of new aerial photography, and related data layers, is in the 2012 budget. The GIS department will be utilizing the imagery, terrain, and contour data in many of the data exports and custom mapping that we sell. Revenues collected by GIS are distributed between the City and County. Although GIS does not break down the actual data type to just orthophotography and contours, here is a summary of data export revenues for the past three years. Also included is the external GIS department revenue. Data Export Sales External GIS revenue % of Total 2011 $ 18,665 $ 54,068 35 % 2010 $ 11,622 $ 40,639 29 % 2009 $ 7,618 $ 30,600 25 % ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Having current data available to City staff decreases the number of site visits to confirm what current site conditions are. This saves driving by City staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the approval of this amended contract for additional aerial photography and LiDAR data derived products. ALTERNATIVES: If Council does not want to approve the staff recommendation, the additional products will not be acquired. At this time there are not adequate alternatives for acquiring this detailed data. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # q°5 of 2012" on the consent calendar of Tuesday, October 9, 2012. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION # 9 J (Series of 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND AERO-GRAPHICS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council An amended contract for, between the City of Aspen and, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for the 2012 Aerial Flyover, between the City of Aspen and a Aero-Graphics, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 9th day of October 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, 2012 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Amendment to the Scope of Work The following items will be added to the original Scope of Work: Product 3 —3D Wireframes for 27 parcels has indicated on the 8/31/2012 wireframes.kmz file provided to the vendor. $3,080 Product 5 —One foot contours generated with breakline support. A 3D shapefile of breaklines will also be delivered. $12,750 Other—retile the Lidar and images so file sizes are more manageable. $1265. Compensation Product 3 $ 3,080.00 Product 5 $12,750.00 Other $ 1,265.00 Total compensation $17,095.00 RESOLUTION #31 (Series of 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR 2012 AERIAL FLYOVER BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND AERO-GRPAHICS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for the 2012 Aerial Flyover, between the City of Aspen and Aero-Graphics, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for the 2012 Aerial Flyover, between the City of Aspen and a Aero-Graphics, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 9'h day of April 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, April 9, 2012. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk ^- ifM!fIN1'Ntispee CITY OF ASPEN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT -2009 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City of Aspen Project No.: 2012-023. AGREEMENT made as of 9h day of April, in the year 2012. BETWEEN the City: Contract Amount: The City of Aspen c/o GIS 130 South Galena Street Total: $59,935.00 Aspen,Colorado 81611 Phone:(970)920-5055 If this Agreement requires the City to pay And the Professional: an amount of money in excess of $25,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid Aero-Graphics hits until it has been approved by the City p Council of the City of Aspen. c/o Brad Marz 40 West Oakland Avenue City Council Approval: Salt Lake City,UT 84115-3007 P Date:April 9, 2012 Phone: 801-428-3123 Resolution No.: For the Following Project: City of Aspen Aerial Flyover Exhibits appended and made a part of this Agreement: Exhibit A: Scope of Work. Exhibit B: Fee Schedule. Agreement Professional Services Page 0 The City and Professional agree as set forth below. I. Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 2. Completion. Professional shall commence Work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all Work pursuant to this Agreement shall be completed no later than Nov. 1,2012 . Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause,be exceeded by the Professional. 3. Payment. In consideration of the work performed,City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit B appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed the amount set forth above. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. 4. Non-Assignability. Both parties recognize that this Agreement is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts,errors,omissions or neglect of any subcontractors' officers,agents and employees,each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. 5. Termination of Procurement. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 6. Termination of Professional Services. The Professional or the City may terminate the Professional Services component of this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional Agreement Professional Services Page 1 for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. 7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. C ity is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability,claims,and demands,on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, if such injury, loss,or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability,claims, or demands. if it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act,omission,or other fault of the City, its officers,or its employees,the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act,omission,or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. 9. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain,at its own expense,a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 a bove. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations Agreement Professional Services Page 2 assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance,or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration,or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims,demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workers'Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned,hired and non- owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles,the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000)aggregate. (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or Agreement Professional Services Page 3 carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) T he certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty(30)days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (f) City reserves the right to request and receive acertified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on,and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S.,as from time to time amended,or otherwise available to City, its officers,or its employees. 10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Proper- ty/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Risk Management Department and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. 11. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. Agreement Professional Services Page 4 12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested to the respective persons and/or addresses listed above. 13. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. l4. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. l5. Execution of Agreement by City. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence)to execute the same. 16. Illegal Aliens—CRS 8-17.5-101 &24-76.5-101. (a) Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. (b) Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. Agreement Professional Services Page 5 "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. (c) By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not employ illegal aliens. (d) Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: Agreement Professional Services Page 6 (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien;and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5),C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall.be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law, (2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 16. Warranties Against Contingent Fees,Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. (a) P rofessional warrants that no pe rson or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon a n agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Professional for the purpose of securing business. (b) Professional agrees not to give any employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for Agreement Professional Services Page 7 ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement,or to any solicitation or proposal therefore. (c) P rofessional represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. (d) In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a Professional, contractor or subcontractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Professional; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 17. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 18. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This Agreement shal I be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. Agreement Professional Services Page 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first written above. CITY OV ASPEN,COLORADO: PROFES [Signature] [Si Pure] By: (CK- By: 1 ame] [Name] Title: Title: Date: �' /D -I Z Date: 312 ��►Z Approved as to form: ity Attorney's Office Agreement Professional Services Page 9 Exhibit A to Professional Services Agreement aer-o-graphics Statement of Understanding The general scope of this project is to procure precise orthorectified imagery, WAR acquisition and processing, 3-D building wire frames and Oblique color imagery of Aspen. This will assist the city and other local agencies in supporting planning and engineering projects,to update existing GIS planimetric feature layers and for public use. Aero-Graphics recognizes that the required orthoimagery coverage encompasses approximately 11.9 square miles around Aspen.Acquisition of the imagery will occur with our Microsoft/Vexcel UltraCam X digital camera system at a ground sample distance(GSD)of 6.7cm. Boundaries for the acquisition phase are shown below in Exhibit 1. p ControlpointiocatlonF,; ��appro�imdt�,and will v� Exhibit 1. Boundaries of the orthophoto(red),Option 1 LiDAR(red),Option 2 LiDAR(tan),Highway Corridor 3D Wireframe/Simple Structures(cyan) Aero-Graphics,Inc:Geospatial Services 4 aero-graphics Deliverables will include: Product 1:Digital Orthophotoaraahs • 3-band natural color,3-inch GSD orthophotography in TIFF and MrSID formats along with associated TFW and SDW files. • Entire project mosaic in TIFF and MrSID formats. • Project metadata • AT Report in PDF format • Camera Calibration Report in PDF format • GPS Survey Report in PDF format and file Geodatabase • Ground Control Layer in a file Geodatabase with descriptive attributes • Photo Center Layer in a file Geodatabase with altitude,data and time attributes • Flight Line Layer In file Geodatabase with time,date and elevation attributes • PLSS tile Index in PDF and SHP file format • Data will be referenced to State Plane,Colorado Central Zone,NAD83.Vertical . will be based on NGVD29:Units will be U.S.Survey Foot.Data to be furnished on USD-II compatible portable hard drives. Product 2:MDAR Acauisition Aero-Graphics will utilize its Optech Orion WAR sensor to acquire 8 points/m2 data throughout the Option 1(Red boundary)or Option 2(Tan Boundary)area.The data will be delivered as LAS 1.2 format files. • Unclassified point cloud data in LAS 1.2 format. • Classified point cloud data in LAS 1.2 format(Bare-earth and First Return) • Data will be referenced to State Plane,Colorado Central Zone,NAD83.Vertical will be based on NGVD29.Units will be U.S.Survey Foot.Data to be furnished on USD-11 compatible portable hard drives. Product 3:3D Wireframes/Simple Structures Aero-Graphics will utilize the acquired digital imagery to collect the building data requested. Option 1—3D Wireframes for approximately 100 buildings within the Red Boundary. Option 2—3D Wireframes for the buildings within the Cyan Boundary. • 3D Wireframe data in SHP file format. - - - - - - - - Option 3—Simple 3D Structures • Building footprint and a spot elevation at the highest elevation point within the polygon in SHP file format. Aero-Graphics,Inc:Geospatial Services 5 aero-graphics Product 4:Obliques of Aspen Aero-Graphics will utilize its gyro-mounted Hasselblad H4D-40 digital camera for this task. • 25-30 exposures delivered in TIFF format. Product 5:Open-Ended Based upon the stated use of Products 1-4 the following products are suggested for your consideration: • Color Infrared,3-inch GSD orthophotography in TIFF and MrSID formats along with associated TFW and SDW files. • Bare-earth DEM surface data with 3'cell size • One-foot contour data generated without breaklines • One-foot contour data generated with breaklines • Classified HDAR data-Buildings Aero-Graphics,-Inc:Geospatial Services 6 aero-graphics Project Management.Since 1965,Aero-Graphics has established a strong record of completing geospatial projects on time,on budget,and of the highest quality for k numerous government entities and regional consortiums throughout the United States. Since aerial imagery ages quickly,Aero-Graphics focuses on the timely delivery of customized geospatial solutions. We own and operate a full-time aerial photography service and rely on talented in-house production personnel.This allows us complete control of our flight and production schedules. These advantages,coupled with being invested in reliable,state-of-the-art equipment,help our schedule to virtually never slip. No portion of this project will be subcontracted. For over 20 years,Aero-Graphics'personnel have streamlined the production of high- quality orthorectified imagery through direct digital acquisition and careful automation. This in turn has created more time for rigorous quality control and further innovation; all of this combines to accelerate delivery time and to ensure a product that exceeds client expectations. Client-Consultant communication throughout the project is vital to success. Aero- Graphics embraces this necessity by holding in-person kickoff and debriefing meetings, through weekly email updates,and by being available to discuss any project related issue at anytime throughout the project. Our project manager and technical specialists are available 24 hours a day,7 days a week to support any needs the City may have at any stage,from project planning to execution, all the way through to post-delivery. Aero-Graphics always stands behind its services, whether within contract dates or far beyond. Aero-Graphics has developed a proven management strategy that produces accurate, timely deliverables in a cost-effective manner. This strategy includes the following key elements: • Clearly defined objectives Intelligent mission planning a Prompt imagery acquisition • Adherence to project milestones • Effective production oversight • Constant communication These time-tested tenets have created a long tradition of exceeding clients' expectations. We are confident they will ensure the long-term success of this project. Furthermore,as technology evolves,Aero-Graphics is committed to embracing new innovations and using them to continually improve the delivery schedule and quality of the City's final deliveries. We look forward to an opportunity to demonstrate our capabilities on this project. Aero-Graphics,Inc:Geospatial Services 7 EXHIBIT B Fee Schedule Product I Digital Orthophotos $31,360.00 Product 2 LiDAR $27,965.00 Product 4 Oblique images $ 610.00 The City reserves the option to add one or more of the following after Products I,2 and 4 are complete: Product 3 3D Structures $12,530.00 Product 5 Classified LiDAR data—buildings $ 9,910.00 DEM surface data in ESRI format $ 1,930.00 One-foot contours generated with breakline support $12,750.00 TIN for ARCGIS $ 1,040.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Garrett Sabourin, Project Manager, Engineering Dept THRU: Tyler Christoff, P.E., Senior Project Manager Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: October 01, 2012 MEETING DATE: October 09, 2012 RE: 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension Project Contract Approval SUMMARY: Staff recommends Council approve the 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension Project contract with Excavation Services, Inc. in the amount of$44,635.00. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this project is to construct a missing sidewalk connection along the east side of Original Street from Hyman Avenue to the northerly alley. Staff has organized two meetings with the neighboring community to discuss the proposed improvements and to solicit input. The citizen response was extremely supportive of the plans and feels that the extension would be a great safety and aesthetic improvement to the heavily used corridor. DISCUSSION: The Pedestrian Capital improvements program is an ongoing safety enhancement plan with the goal to develop and maintain safer pedestrian corridors in Aspen. Staff has identified and prioritized pedestrian projects within the city which have safety concerns, lack connectivity, or need to be improved to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. The section of sidewalk being proposed for construction has been recognized by city staff and the neighboring community as a safety and connectivity concern, and is not currently ADA compliant. Need for this connection in a heavily travelled residential area has become apparent. The 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension Project was advertised for bid on September 10, 2012. Three (3)bids were received and opened on September 24, 2012. Bids were received from three (3) Contractors as seen below: Excavation Services, Inc. $44,635.00 K&W Concrete $51,206.00 Fitzgerald Landscaping $58,035.00 Excavation Services, Inc. bid of$44,635.00 was identified by staff as the lowest qualified bidder. They have experience in various City Right of Way infrastructure projects and have performed well in this capacity. Staff recommends that it is in the City's best interests to award the final construction contract to this vendor. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding Tabor Fund ADA Improvements $10,000.00 Original Street Sidewalk Budget $39,000.00 TOTAL $49,000.00 Expenditures Excavation Services, Inc. Construction Bid $44,635.00 Contingency $ 4,365.00 TOTAL $49,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends council approve the 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extensions Project contract with Excavation Services, Inc. in the amount of$49,000.00. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No.q� , Series of 2012." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: S ATTACHMENT A—Contract with Excavation Services, Inc. ATTACHMENT B—Photograph of the Project Area RESOLUTION #9 (Series of 2012) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND EXCAVATION SERVICES INC, SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING THE 2012 ORIGINAL STREET SIDEWALK EXTENSION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Excavation Services, Inc a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Excavation Services, Inc regarding 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension Project, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 9th 2012. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk The City of Aspen CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION ONTAWFneY's Office THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on October 9, 2012, by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, hereinafter called the "City", and EXCAVATION SERVICES INC, hereinafter called the "Contractor". WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared, in accordance with the law, specifications and other Contract Documents for the work herein described, and has approved and adopted said documents, and has caused to be published, in the manner and for the time required by law, an advertisement, for the project: 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension, and, WHEREAS, the Contractor, in response to such advertisement, or in response to direct invitation, has submitted to the City, in the manner and at the time specified, a sealed Bid in accordance with the terms of said Invitation for Bids; and, WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined, and canvassed the Bids submitted in response to the published Invitation for Bids therefore, and as a result of such canvass has determined and declared the Contractor to be the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the said Work and has duly awarded to the Contractor a Contract for Construction therefore, for the sum or sums set forth herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments and Contract for Construction herein mentioned: 1. The Contractor shall commence and complete the construction of the Work as fully described in the Contract Documents. 2. The Contractor shall furnish all of the materials, supplies, tools, equipment, labor and other services necessary for the construction and completion of the Work described herein. 3. The Contractor shall commence the work required by the Contract Documents within seven (7) consecutive calendar days after the date of "Notice to Proceed" and will complete the same by the date and time indicated in the Special Conditions unless the time is extended in accordance with appropriate provisions in the Contract Documents. 4. The Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work described in the Contract Documents and comply with the terms therein for a sum not to exceed FORTY FOUR THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE ($44,635.00 DOLLARS or as shown on the BID proposal. 5. The term "Contract Documents" means and includes the documents listed in the City of Aspen General Conditions to Contracts for Construction (version GC97-2) and in the CC1-971.doc Page 1 "CC1 Special Conditions. The Contract Documents are included herein by this reference and made a part hereof as if fully set forth here. 6. The City shall pay to the Contractor in the manner and at such time as set forth in the General Conditions, unless modified by the Special Conditions, such amounts as required by the Documents. 7. This Contract for Construction shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein or in the Contract Documents, this Contract for Construction shall be subject to the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the -approval requirements- of Section 4-08-040. This agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the City Manager or the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) following a resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor or City Manager(or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) to execute the same. 8. This agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Contractor respectively and their agents, representatives, employees. Successors, assigns, and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Contractor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet his or her interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 9. This agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom the Contractor or the City may assign this Contract For Construction in accordance with the specific written consent, any rights to claim damages or to bring suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or the Contractor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 10. No waiver of default by either party of any terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 11. The parties agree that this Contract for Construction was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be kept exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 12. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Contract for Construction, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 13. This Contract for Construction was reviewed and accepted through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto, and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of this Contract for Construction. M-971.doc Page 2 "cc1 14. The undersigned representative of the Contractor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Contract for Construction, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of the Contractor for the purposes of executing this Contract For Construction and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Contract for Construction for the terms and conditions specified herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract for Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTESTED BY: CONTRACTOR: By: Title: F - Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. CC1-971.doc Page 3 "CC1 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION (To be completed if Contractor is a Corporation) STATE OF L"((X- �Ci 0 ) COUNTY SS.OF C r LEI ) On this day of `�+ 4trv`'b2 , 20__LL, ,, before me appeared S4�,r , to me personally known, who, being by nie first duly sworn, did say that s/he is r es i d t of �,�xc�vc�him der v ►`c es 1 and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors, and said deponent acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above written. �• US� q ''y a Notary Public PUI oe= clo\u', & • Ci s, �� 'S I t�o I Address My commission expires: CC1-971.doc Page 4 "CC1 Public Contract for Services: Contractor: By: Title: JPW-saved:9/27/2012-867-M:\city\cityatty\contract\forms\certification-hb-06-1343.doc Certification and Supplemental Conditions to Contract for Services - Conformance with 48-17.5.101, et seq. Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session,the Legislature passed House Bill 06-1343 that added a new article 17.5 to Title 8 of the Colorado Revised Statutes entitled"Illegal Aliens— Public Contracts for Services."This new law prohibits all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly employing or contracting with an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract.The new law also requires that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes.This Certification and Supplemental Conditions has been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. Applicability. The certification and supplemental conditions set forth herein shall be required to be executed by all persons having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program"means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress,as amended,that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Contractor"means a person having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen. "Public Contract for Services"means any type of agreement, regardless of what the agreement may be called,between the City of Aspen and a Contractor for the procurement of services. It specifically means the contract or agreement referenced below. "Services"means the furnishing of labor,time,or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. PURSUANT TO SECTION 8-17.5-101,C.R.S.,et. seq.: By signing this document,Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Contractor does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien; and (ii)Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens. The Public Contract for Services referenced below is hereby amended to include the following terms and conditions: 1. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 2. Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 3. Contractor has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Contractor does not employ any illegal aliens; and if Contractor has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Contractor shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five(5)days of the date of the Public Contract. Contractor shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three(3)calendar months thereafter, until Contractor is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed,whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. 4. Contractor shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. 5. If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien, Contractor shall: (i) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or contracting with an illegal alien; and (ii) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the illegal alien;except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. 6. Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5- 102(5), C.R.S. 7. If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102,C.R.S.the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated,Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Contractor's violation of Subsection 8- 17.5-102, C.R.S. BID PROPOSAL FORM PROJECT NO. :2012-089 BID DATE: September 24,2012 PROJECT: 2012 Original Street Sidewalk Extension PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY: EXCAVATION SERVICES INC. CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL TO: The Governing Body of the City of Aspen, Colorado The undersigned responsible bidder declares and stipulates that this proposal is made in good faith,without collusion or connection with any other person or persons bidding for the same work, and that it is made in pursuance of and subject to all the terms and conditions of the advertisement for bid, the invitation to bid and request for bid,all the requirements of the bid documents including the plans and specifications for this bid, all of which have been read and examined prior to signature. The bidder agrees to keep this bid open for SLdV(60)COnsecudVe Calendar days from the date of bid opening. The Contractor agrees that construction shall start immediately following a mandatory pre-construction conference held by the Engineering Department,which also constitutes the Notice to Proceed. Submission of this proposal will be taken by the City of Aspen as a binding covenant that the Contractor will finish construction within the time specified in the Special Conditions of this contract document. The City of Aspen reserves the right to make the award on the basis of the bid deemed most favorable to the City,to waive any informalities or to reject any or all bids. The City shall not pay the Contractor for defective work and/or for repairs or additional work required for successful completion of the project. All work not specifically set forth as a pay item in the bid form shall be considered a subsidiary obligation of the Contractor and all costs in connection therewith shall be included in the prices bid for the various items of work. Prices shall include all costs in connection with famishing the proper and success completion of the work, including furnishing all materials,equipment and tools,and performing all labor and supervision to fully complete the work to the City's satisfaction. Poor quality and workmanship shall not be paid for by the City. Such work product must be removed immediately and replaced properly at no cost to the City. All quantities stipulated in the bid form at unit prices are approximate and are to be used only as a basis for estimating the probable cost of work and for the purpose of comparing the bids submitted to the City. The basis of payment shall be the actual amount of materials furnished and work done. The Contractor agrees to make no claims for damages,anticipated profit,or otherwise on account of any differences between the BPI-971.doc `BPI Page 1 TB Conbadoes IrdUals amount of work actually performed and materials actually furnished and the estimated amount of work. The City reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of work to be done on the basis of the bid unit price and up to plus or minus Twenty Five(25)Percent of the total bid. By signing this document,Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States;and (ii)Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens. I hereby acknowledge receipt of ADDENDUM(s)numbered 0 through 0 i BPI-971.doc `BP1 Page 2 TB Contradoes Initials ESTIMATED QUANTITYLIST UNIT TOTAL BID ITEM DESCRIPTION J QUANTITY COST Materials Testing LS 1 s-2000.00 $ 2000.00 Removal of Sidewalk SY 33 $ 40.00 $1320.00 Removal of Gutter LF 20 $_4O 00 $ 800.00 Removal of Curb and Gutter LF 80 $_20.00 $ 1600.00 Removal of Asphalt Mat SY 18 $_.3O 00 $ 540.00 Removal of Pavement Markings SF 35 $_15 00 $ 525.00 Sawing Asphalt Material(6 III LF 105 $_.5.-00 $ 525.00 Unclassified Excavation CY 41 $ 50.00 $ 2050.00 Erosion Control LS 1 $ 350.00 $ 350.00 Reset Structure(Light Post) EA 1 $_2500.00 $L2500.00 Reset Structure(Landscape Materials) LS 1 $.-1000.00 $ 1000.00 Reset Ground Sign EA 1 $-2,,%00 $--MOO Landscape Restoration LS 1 $ 2000.00 $2000.00 ABC(3/4"Crushed Screened Rock) CY 15 $-50-00 $ 750.00 Aggregate Base Course(CL 6) CY 8 $_.L5 00 $ 600.00 Hot Mix Asphalt(9")(Patching)(Asphalt) SY 15 $_L5:.00 $ 1125.00 Concrete Pavement(8 IN)(Class E) SY 35 $ 130.00 $ 4550.00 Concrete Sidewalk SY 96 $_L5.00 $ 7200.00 Concrete Curb Ramp w/detectable warning EA 4 $._1800.0.0 $ 7200.00 _ Curb and Gutter Type 2(Section II-B) LF 10 $__50.00 $L500.00 Gutter Type 2(2 FT) LF 25 $ 50.00 $_1250.00 Mobilization LS 1 $ 3500.00 $ 3500.00 Construction Zone Traffic Control LS l $ 2500.00 $ 2500.00 TOTAL BID IN NUMBERS: 44,635.00 Total Bid in Words: FORTY FOUR THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE&00/100 BPI-971.doc 'BPI Page 3 -r]5_ Corftractor's IniBals it n ij ti I I acknowledge that in submitting this bid it is understood that the right to reject any and all bids has been i reserved by the owner. Authorized Officer: TROY BUSTER ,Title: PRESIDENT Full name signature: Company address: PO BOX 1159 CARBONDALE CO 81623 Telephone number: 963-8355 Fax number: 963-4336 Attested by: Subcontractor& Material Supplier List Name: TJ CONCRETE ,Phone#: 379-6300 Address: CARBONDALE CO Service or Product: CONCRETE Name: Al TRAFFIC CONTROL ,Phone#: 876-0738 Address: SILT CO Service or Product: BARRICADES Name: ,Phone#: Address: Service or Product. Name: ,Phone#: BPI-971.doc 'BPI Pane 4 tra s Initials AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLUNCE PROJECT NUMBER: 2012-089 The undersigned contractor has read a copy of the Contract Documents including the construction plans, for this project and understands and hereby affirms that he/she does not now, nor will he/she in the future,violate the provisions of said Contract Documents,so long as he/she is under the Contract to the City of Aspen for the performance of a Contract. The undersigned further acknowledges he/she understands and agrees to all terms and conditions of the Aspen Municipal Code and its being part of the Contract with the City of Aspen. Attest: Corporate Seal EXCAVATION SERVICES INC. tractor By: STATE OF COLORADO ) SS. COUNTY Before me -��� ��� ��vi 5 4-cr a notary public and for County,Colorado personally appeared known to me personally to be the person(s)whose signatur (s)in my presence this Q day of }- r" ;A.D.20_La. My commission expires: •''fit" '''`'r. Notary Public BUST t�OS AR Y•; K o N• Pusoo •:0, �ryr ... •'�, V l�OF CO 4aMna�' ACIML& 'AC1 ATTACHMENT B: Project Site Itb. � a f;a Photo 1: Looking north, parallel to Original Street from Hyman Avenue. Photo 2: Looking south, parallel to Original Street from Alley. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Taylor, Director of Finance THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE OF MEMO: September 17th, 2012 MEETING DATE: October 9th,2012 RE: Proposed Franchise Agreement 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 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. 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 too 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 was concerned about either emergency situations or just plain oversight. This provision was finally settled by agreeing that the city would pay for only the incremental cost over a less expensive solution that Source gas may have identified. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The source gas franchise will generate approximately $260,000 per year for the City. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve ordinance at first reading ALTERNATIVES: Make revisions to the ordinance before the election or remove the question form the November ballot. PROPOSED MOTION: I move that the ordinance approving the Source gas franchise agreement be approved at first reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: i 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. "Council" is the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. I "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 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 2 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 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. 3 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 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 4 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 City 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. City projects, by definition, are not emergency situations. 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 City project or as a result of an emergency situation, 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 prior to finalizing the planning and engineering and any subsequent material modification of any City project which may require the Grantee to relocate its facilities, the City shall pay the Grantee relocation and restoration expenses incremental to the expenses that Grantee would have incurred if the City had met and conferred with the Grantee in such manner. The City will not be required to pay relocation or restoration costs in those circumstances in which the City could not have reasonably known that there would be a potential impact to Grantee 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 conducted at 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, except as otherwise provided in paragraph 6A. 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 6 the City with as-built drawings of each such facility in such formats and providing such details as reasonably requested by the City. 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. 7 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 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 8 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 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 9 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 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. 10 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, 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 Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED on second and final reading this day of LCZ btL , 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 12 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Nadolny, Planning Technician ` THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ' tM RE: Notice of P&Z approval of Consolidated Commercial Design: 122 E Durant Ave, P&Z Resolution #17, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: October 9, 2012 BACKGROUND: On October 2, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approved Commercial Design Review for a project at 122 E. Durant Ave, also known as Hotel Durant. This was a consolidated Conceptual and Final Design Review, which addressed the mass, scale and placement of the proposed building, as well as the building's design and materials. The subject property is located west of Aspen's commercial core,just east of Koch Lumber Park on Durant Ave. The applicant is proposing an expansion and remodel of the existing lodge, increasing the building by 3,596 square feet (sf), for a total building size of 10,500 sf. The project will maintain the existing 20 lodge room count, but will increase the square footage of each room by an average of 95 sf, with the rooms ranging in size from 291-401 sf. A fourth story space is proposed that will include an open air deck at the front of the building, and will accommodate a larger lodge unit and common room at the rear half of the building. The project meets all underlying dimensional requirements. The public amenity requirement will be met at 1,905 sf, or 31% of the total parcel. The single parking space that is currently found on the property will be maintained. The building is proposed at 40 feet at its highest point, which is an additional two foot height allowance granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, per Section 26.710.190(D)(8) Maximum Height (e) of the Land Use Code. This allowance will accommodate a flat-roof design over the proposed fourth floor rooms that better fits the architectural character of the building, as well as the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The flat roof was also favored over a proposed gabled roof design as it aids in reducing the building's mass and height, and lends to a more pedestrian-friendly scale. As no additional room have been proposed, the project is not required to undergo growth management review, per Section 26.470.040 Exempt Development(6) of the Land Use Code. Planning staff recommended in favor of the design review, and the P&Z approved the design by a vote of 7:0. A copy of the P&Z Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. A copy of the approved massing is attached as Exhibit A in the form of elevations and a computer generated image. 1 PROCEDURE: This is not a public hearing and no staff or applicant presentation will be made at the October 9th Council meeting. If you have any questions about the project, please contact the staff planner, Sara Nadolny at 970-429-2739. Pursuant to Section 26.412.040(B), notification of all Conceptual Commercial Design Approvals must be placed on City Council's agenda within 30 days. City Council has the option of exercising the Call Up provisions outlined in Section 26.412.040(B) within 15 days of notification on the regular agenda(by October 23rd). For this application, City Council may vote to Call Up the project at their October 9, 2012 meeting. If City Council decides to exercise the Call Up provision, it will be placed on the October 23, 2012 or November 6, 2012 City Council regular agenda for discussion. If City Council does not exercise the Call Up provision, the P&Z Resolution shall stand, and the applicant will move forward through the land use review process. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Approved Plans Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution 18, Series 2012 Exhibit C: P&Z draft minutes Exhibit D: Land Use Code Section 26.412.040(B) 2 FAIM- A-1 Resolution Exhibit B - 1 South Elevation ELEVATOR TO R EXCEEDS HEIGHT LIMIT BY LESS THAN 10' NOTE:SEE WEST ELMTION FOR ACCUROVE BUILD ING HE MTS OF ALL PRIMARY MASSES 40'ABOVE GRADE AS MEASURED I FRONT PLANE OF BLDG�-APP'LIC E FOR 34' -T:0 ROOF DECK V- (r T_4,FIN,FLR_THIRD LEVE4 " T-0, FIN: FL,R-SECOND LEV L&Vk , c � I TO,FIN. FR LOBBY OCr j - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T O_F IN FLR-BASEMEN_ T EXISTNG GRADE AS MEASURED @ FRONT PLANE OF BLDG,TO 9V-0 REMAIN- INDICATES MOST RESTRICTIVE CrRADE Fyk (4- k O*Z Resolution Exhibit B - 2 North Elevation NOTE:SEE WEST ELE-wr m FoR Arct*tAT44 BUILDING HMM OF ALL PRIMARY MACES -�-- T.O. ROOF 1r1ECK 7.0,FIN. FM- LEVE - . TO FIN FLP C4 NC►LE'VEto& _ ...�_ T:0, FIN.FLR,-Lt?ffY LEVE ...f..,r Resolution Exhibit B - 3 West Elevation HEIGHT&S MEASURED 9 FRONT PLANE OF BLDG DORMERS ON EAST 4 ViEST ROOF EXCLUDED APPLICABLE FOR30'F ROM FRONT HE4GHTOFE MW OR FROMME1�E ! E�►#. UI.ATtK A,SFa4TF"FtlPt TO HALFVWkY POINT OF E AUOVi ED TO OF DORMER IS LESS'mm W%OF ROOF � E',CEED HGT.LIMrr BY LESS TH.4AI 10 RUNE$AIGGE IS NOT HIGHER T-AN FO<OF tsEIGHT Of STAID TOVl R HEIGHT OF STAIR TOVkR MEAW,REDTO HALfY^t POINT OF 12 12 I 14 MEASJREDTO KAVV Y POfff EAVE-AUOwED TO EXCEED ItOT '' X - $6,EVE MO$T OF EVE-ALL VOW TO EXCEED LIM?BY LESS TKAN 10 RESTRICTIVE GRADE 1 LIMIT BY LM TI-*V 12 x , x �i�} �.w fptt ( .�•� X111'' tPx - - - - ' - - x, _T:Q.Ft . FFG LEA 42'3 30r — 7 391.9 1:12' 'EIGHT OF ROCFT�PGABLE WP ED TO _ T{� FIN I� =SI: �1^l3 EE `, VM._ POINT OF ' — - VF MOEL z i f f � o ♦s ` Lc T a EKISTING GRADE TO REMA14- ♦ � i'` �3 •.Y T 1 r I`� a h r h M R S P F ��.• � �_�iww�ws�s F li �•. ain f fi ii!!N! v r ......li ..rte::. .�a 4, ... .,.....�. - � t a ,. 1 1 4 Lm 015 law �+� MA, o", I 1 xQ o .......................J I LAP aROx 2l'-a' I � F r F F F-•.t r F F ,e.•� F t t r r � r i F t `�- € r t t F t o � t F i;.� F i r t� + E � 't F�a�oy I I ��iM� E F r e E-' a•� {- r f. t ��. .�.t �. F F f�'�.f.k:0.--s=�� —E_r F i- LJ I Ei JF1 adewalh}nr FYos1.1 Aa^.�..e< E f E _ e F f �. t. .�• I I t - T�_ I •c> I �z• E � F ------ � I n � I I A x 17 I f r X c I 1 cE�F t _ _ . t Concrete Smrr 15-6" I I yy We!( I I /H I I 1 � I A?erL I I 'l ? eD r• RESOLUTION NO. 179 (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A FINAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN FOR LOTS P & Q, BLOCK 70,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,AND FRACTIONAL LOTS 6 & 7,BLOCK 2 OF THE EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS HOTEL DURANT9 122 E.DURANT AVE,CITY OF ASPEN,PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2735-131-04-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Hotel Durant LLC (Applicant), represented by Phillip Ring, RDS Inc, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of a Commercial Design for a remodel and expansion of Hotel Durant; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.412 of the Land Use Code, commercial design review approval may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on October 2, 2012 the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and recommended approval of the consolidated final commercial design with the findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant appeared before the Planning and Zoning Commission for a hearing regarding commercial design review initially on August 7, 2012, and during a continuation hearing on August 21, 2012. WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the development review standards for Conceptual and Final Commercial Design Review have been met, as long as certain conditions are implemented. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission approves the Commercial Design Review, pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, for the Hotel Durant building, subject to the conditions listed below. Sectionl Approval of the consolidated Final Commercial Design does not preclude meeting other requirements of the Municipal Code, such as Engineering and Parks standards. Drawings illustrating the approved design are attached as exhibits to this Resolution. Section 2• The building will be increased by a total of 3,596 s£ The unit count will remain unchanged at 20 units. The building shall be compliant with the dimensional standards of the underlying zone district. 1 Section 3: Building Height The building is approved with an additional two-foot height allowance, bringing the total height from 38' to 40'. This allowance is granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission per Section 26.710.190(D)(8)(d)Maximum Height for the Lodge zone district in the Land Use Code. Section 4: Public Amenity Space The approved public amenity space shall comprise 1,905 sf, or 31% of the total requirement, to be maintained on-site. The public amenity space will consist of a landscaped green area at the front and sides of the property, with a table and bench seating. Section 5: Trash/Recycling The trash/recycling area exists off of the north fagade alleyway. This area will be improved to meet the standards of the code as a space that is a minimum of 15 linear feet and can accommodate one trash dumpster and at least four recycling collection bins. Section 6: Glazing Low reflectivity glass should be researched and installed for all south-facing glass surfaces to minimize reflection from these surfaces to the extent possible. Section 7: Building The final design shall meet adopted building codes and requirements when a building permit is submitted. Section 8: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. The design must meet the Urban Runoff Management Plan requirements. A construction management plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permit. Section 9: Sidewalk Curb and Gutter All sidewalk, curb and gutter must meet the Engineering Standards as outlined in Title 21. A final grading plan depicting the improvements in the right-of-way must be approved by the Engineering Department prior to building permit issuance. Section 10: Parking Parking that is within the public right-of-way will not be dedicated to the Hotel Durant without issuance of an encroachment license. Section 11: Parks Landscaping in the public right-of-way will be subject to landscaping in the right-of-way requirement, Chapter 21.20, of the Municipal Code. There shall be no plantings within the City right-of-way which are not approved by the City Parks and Engineering departments. Per Municipal Code 13.20, an approved tree permit will be required prior to any tree removal or development within the drip line of the tree. All tree permits must be approved prior to approval of building permits. 2 Section 12: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Section 13: Public Works The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Section 14: Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 15: Environmental Health The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement and pool designs. Section 16: Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting. Section 17: Impact Fees Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a Parks Development fee and a TDM/Air Quality fee pursuant to Chapter 26.610, Impact Fees, as applicable. The amount of the fees shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the Applicant submits a Building Permit. Sectionl8: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section19: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. 3 APPROVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on October 2, 2012. LJ Erspamer, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Deb Quinn,Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian,Deputy City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A—Site Plan Exhibit B—Elevations 4 E.14 16 i-F-c Regular City Planning & Zoning Meetin! — Minutes October 02, 2012 Comments 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 122 East Durant—Hotel Durant Commercial Design Review 2 South Aspen Street 7 1 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meetinp_—Minutes October 02, 2012 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30. Commissioners present were Ryan Walterscheid, Keith Goode, Cliff Weiss, Bert Myrin, Jim DeFrancia, Jasmine Tygre, Stan Gibbs and LJ Erspamer. Staff in attendance were Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, Jennifer Phelan, Sara Nadolny, City Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. Comments Jennifer reminded the Commissioners about the State Planning Conference in Snowmass Village; the bulk of the conference was Thursday and Friday. November 6th is Election Day. LJ, Jasmine, Jim and Ryan said no meeting on November 6th and agreed to meet on October 30th. Jennifer asked who was available for the meeting on November 22nd (Tuesday of Thanksgiving week) Ryan and Bert will not be able to attend. Jackie Lothian stated the City Attorney's office was having an Ethics Training Class on October 23`d from 10-11 am; please send Jackie an email. Minutes — Bert said on the 18th he asked a question about the cost of the hotel. Jackie Lothian explained that P&Z's job was not to review monetary things so we really don't comment on that. Bert said that is was stated by the applicant's and that was why he asked if they had a printing press for the money. Debbie said that it was still part of the record. LJ said that we hear from the applicant's that we have to do it so why can't we ask for a Performa. Debbie answered because it was not part of the criteria from the land use code on which you make your decision and that can't be made as part of your decision. MOTION.- Jim DeFrancia moved to approve the minutes from September 19`h with corrections from Bert; seconded by Cliff Weiss. All in favor, APPROVED. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest Cliff said someone from the Hotel Durant contacted an associate of his and it did not change his thinking about it. Continued Public Hearing: 122 East Durant (Hotel Durant) Commercial Design Review LJ Erspamer opened the continued public hearing on the Hotel Durant. Sara Nadolny entered Exhibit H into the record (a letter from Larry Mages, Lift One); she received this today and Larry said he has an issue with the glass. Sara said this was a consolidated conceptual/final review continued from August 21St 2 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes October 02, 2012 Sara stated some issues from the last meeting that you asked the applicant to address were the calmness of the overall design of the building, forms and materials, to create a better relationship between the stair and the towers, create a better relationship between the decks of the front facade, the applicant was asked to show plans for the trash and recycling area and the commission was split on the desired roof form over the 4t" floor story (gabled or flat roof). Sara said the number of roof styles have been reduced and relate better architecturally to each other and the materials have been limited and relate better to the overall design of the building as well as the surrounding neighborhood. Sara said the relationship between the towers has been achieved and reduced the height of the front stair tower and helps integrate with the rest of the building. To create a better relationship between the front decks the applicant has used some of the same glass material as the safety rail on both sides of the decks. They have carried the stone material to the east which balances off the front facade and the roof over the side deck mirrors the roof over the west side and they opened up the sides of the deck which gives the design a lighter airier feeling. Sara said the applicant has agreed to bring the trash/recycling area up to code; they may have to redesign to be shifted to face the alley. Sara said the roof from and heights and at the last hearing the commission was split on the roof form; staff directed the applicant to provide 2 different designs that would depict a gable and flat roof over the 4t" floor rooms. Comparing the flat roof to the gable roof will not allow the flat roof to be possible unless the 2 feet in height variance is allowed, which will bring the total height of the building to 40 feet. This additional 2 feet may be granted by the commission by this process of design review. Staff supports option 2 with the flat roof for the 4" floor because it better reflects the design of the building and add less real height and mass to the building. The 4t" floor is not visible from the street for this option and creates a better pedestrian environment and scale. Sara stated materials are a final design issue and the stone design turns the corner from the front facade and kind of abruptly to the east side and it affects the quality of application and looks more applied than the actual building; staff feels there should be a more definite point of transition at this point. And after meeting Ken from the design team they have come up with steps to alleviate this and overall staff is pleased with this design. 3 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting— Minutes October 02, 2012 Bert Myrin said the trash is not against the alley and asked if our code provides direction for that. Sara replied it has to be 15 linear feet and it has to be turned to the long edge to face the alley and the reason is the intent is in the code. Bert said so the intent is there so we might need to change the code so it is clearer. Bert said in the memo you had concerns about the stone corner and asked how does the memo come out and then the applicant gets it and asked if it was a secret that you are just assessing these things. Sara replied no sometimes it is just a matter of timing and that came out before the memo was written and the design team said that was also a concern of theirs and they were working on and the memo which came out first and that was why she said something about it. Jim DeFrancia asked if Sara had a view on the glass balcony. Sara replied that staff talked about using the least reflective materials as possible for the glass. Jennifer Phelan stated that this was the material that you are seeing throughout town using glass that is a material for the railing; staff thought that the materials that they were picking made the fagade a better overall fagade. Ken Adler used power point to show the changes as they were also exhibit F in the packet. Phil Ring said the owner Brian Schafer was also present. Phillip said that since we last met we have been able to address the concerns that were brought up and we are pleased with the progress made and done the best that we can addressing concerns and pleased that staff has recommended approval. Phillip recapped a couple of points that they are not capping their FAR, it is important for the hotel that we are adding amenities something to help finance the project which is difficult for you but needed for our financing. Phillip said one of the benefits of the project was the major energy efficiency improvements and have been working with engineers and the city electric department to maximize those efficiencies. Phillip said this was reinvesting in a lodging base in Aspen. The elevator moved away from the street and reducing the height of the stair tower and matching in pitch; simplifying the roof forms so they better relate to one another. Staff encouraged them to bring forward 2 options with the roof forms; a pitched roof form that will match the 38 foot zoning requirement and the 40 foot flat roof version that would require the variance approval from this board. Ken said that Sara and Phil covered it with the lowering of the stair tower; going back to the shed roof and tying the materials together and to pick up on that vocabulary on the front fagade. Ken said additionally as Sara mentioned we made a few changes in response to that material turning the corner. Ken showed on power point the wrap of stone on the southeast only on the first floor and on the southwest getting rid of the glass rail with a half wall wooden material. Ken said 4 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes October 02, 2012 they preferred the flat roof version and it was actually 220 square feet less space of the roof top deck and the flat roof ties in better with the surrounding buildings and the character of the building itself. Ken said if the commission felt the flat roof was better they had one small change to the back of the building at the stair tower and penthouse to gain about 50 square feet and are still under the FAR limit from 1400 to 1600 below the FAR limit. Cliff Weiss asked what is glass and what is not. Cliff said the balcony rails on the cover pictures are glass. Ken said that right now they don't know what those railings will be at the end of the day; they might be glass and maybe something else and will come down to a budget issue. Cliff asked if there was glass railing on the roof. Ken responded there was a little portion in the front and on the eastside; the addition of the sides eliminates the glass railings. Ken said they have pulled the railing back about 4'/2 feet back. Cliff asked what was the stone wrap all the way up or on the bottom stone with wood above; he asked if they preferred the flat roof. Phil answered they prefer the flat roof for a number of reasons: it will be less expensive to build; it will be far more energy efficient; it lays out better; the roof forms are much simpler than the gabled roof and you won't be able to see it from the street. Bert said the staff memo on page 8 (Resolution page 2) mentions the height allowances. Jennifer stated the actual underlying zoning allows a height of 38 feet which may be increased to 40 feet through Commercial Design Review. Bert said the 40 foot was just more appealing. Sara replied that the Mountain Design Guidelines that she talked early about were these 5 guidelines to create a building with an overall energy efficiency; the 40 foot option creates a more pedestrian friendly environment. Jennifer said there were design objectives that this helps meet. Bert said on the same page number 9 do those encroachments become dedicated to the Hotel. Jennifer said for clarity right now there is no type of license; anyone can park there. Jennifer said they have the ability to ask for an encroachment license from the Engineering Department and that would be an exclusive encroachment license if it was granted. LJ asked what was between the hot tub and the south side of the building; is there a wall there. Ken replied that it was basically a 42 inch high roof, the entryway and the guardrail. Public Comments: 1. Paul Taddune thanked the commission for considering Larry Mages email; he was the president of the association. Paul read from Lift One 5 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting— Minutes October 02, 2012 concerning the Hotel Durant increasing its height and installation of a recreation area on the roof across the street from Lift One. Paul said he met with Phil and Ken and they seemed to think that the hot tub hours could be limited to times, which would help the neighbors and the Hotel. Lift one does not want to see any additional height in the area because they were prohibited by City Council from having some increased height roof elements and having said that I think that everyone is in agreement that the flat roof works better for everybody. Paul asked about the solar voltaic panels on the roof and about the reflective material and the railings and glass on the building being reflective. 2. Mack Boelens asked if they were adding parking as well. Jennifer replied the same number of units were being proposed so the same parking was proposed. 3. Juana White lives across from the building and voiced concern for the hot tub on the roof and Brian said they were going to limit times. Commissioner Comments: Jim said it was a good project and enhances our lodging base; the applicant has shown some sensitivity. Jim said he was for option 2 which staff recommended. Cliff said they shouldn't have people in the hot tub late at night and it is probably a safety thing. Cliff said the solar panels are at a 12 x 3 angle so even if the sun hits those panels it will not reflect into the eyes of the units across the street. Cliff liked where the stone doesn't overlay all the way up and he likes a gabled roof but the neighbors like it and you say it is cheaper and more energy efficient so I go with it. Stan asked the angle of the solar panels. Ken replied it was about 18-19 degrees. Stan said it just was not possible to reflect the sun back. Stan said the issue about the hot tub and the distance to Lift One and the city has a noise ordinance. Stan said he was sure there were treatments of glass to reduce their reflectivity. Stan said the flat roof was less massive for the neighborhood. Keith said that he was in support of the staff recommendation. Bert said that he could support Stan's suggestion about the reflectivity of the balcony railings and the stair towers. Bert asked staff is there was concern of the glass rooftop railings being more reflective. Jennifer responded not that we know of. Bert did not bring anything about the noise levels and time. 6 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting— Minutes October 02, 2012 Ryan asked from process to operation that if we recommend approval and you change a material how does that tie in with that approval. Jennifer replied there were minor changes that staff can approve; the railings and how they can keep the transparency with an alternative material and if it felt like it was really going away from the spirit of the approval we would send it back to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Ryan liked the building and could support it. Jasmine said that she had nothing to add. LJ said he didn't think it was in their purview to impose a curfew on the roof top. LJ said with option 2 the flat roof was less offensive. LJ asked if we approve the resolution and then add an amendment about the glazing. Debbie stated there was a suggestion to add a condition to the resolution to add glazing be as non-reflective as possible and if they need to come back for a change there is a process to use. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to recommend approval of the request for a commercial design review at 122 East Durant, Resolution 17-12, adding all South facing glass surfaces be minimally reflective, seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll Call: Keith Goode, yes; Stan Gibbs, yes; Cliff Weiss, yes; Jim DeFrancia, yes; Jasmine Tygre, yes; LJErspamer, yes. APPROVED 7-0. Public Hearing: South Aspen Street PUD LJ Erspamer opened the continued public hearing on South Aspen Street PUD. Adjourned at 7:30 pm. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 7 Exhibit D: 26.412.040.B. Appeals, Notice to City Council, and Call-Up. 1. Appeals. An applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, pursuant to this Chapter, may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and standards of Chapter 26.316, Appeals. 2. Notice to City Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Conceptual Design, the City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City Council an opportunity to avail itself of the call-up procedure set forth below. Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project with a copy of the approving document. The notification shall be placed on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting within 30 days of the approval, or as soon thereafter as is practical under the circumstances. 3. Call-up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City Council may order call-up of the action within fifteen (15) days of notification, as outlined in 26.412.040(B)(2). Consequently, applications for Final Design shall not be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued during the notice and call-up period. If City Council exercises this call-up provision, no applications for Final Design shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in subsection 26.412.040.B.4. If the City Council does not call up the action within the call-up period, the resolution shall be the final decision on the matter. 4. City Council action on call-up. The City Council shall, at a public meeting, consider the application de novo. The City Council may, at its discretion, consider evidence included in the record established by the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning and Zoning Commission, as applicable, or supplement the record with additional evidence or testimony as necessary. The City Council shall conduct its review of the application under the same criteria applicable to the reviewing body. The City Council's action shall be limited to: a. Accepting the decision. b. Remanding the application to the applicable Commission with direction from City Council for rehearing and reconsideration. (Ord. No. 13, 2007, §1) c. Continuing the meeting to request additional evidence, analysis, or testimony as necessary to conclude the call up review. 5. Additional Actions. The rehearing and reconsideration of the application by the applicable Commission shall be duly noticed pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E Public Notice and shall be limited to the topics listed in the direction from Council. The decision made by the applicable Commission is final and concludes the call up review. Substantive changes, as defined in Section 26.412.080 Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval, made to the application during the call up review and outside the topics listed in the remand from Council shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.412.080 and may require a new call up notice to City Council. The call up review shall be limited only to the changes approved in the Amendment application. MEMORANDUM TX TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer 41vo RE: Notice of HPC approval of Conceptual Major Development, On-site Relocation, Demolition and a Setback Variance for 1006 E. Cooper Avenue, HPC Resolution #21, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: October 9, 2012 BACKGROUND: On October 9, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approved Conceptual Major Development Review, On-site Relocation, Demolition, and a Setback Variance for a project at 1006 E. Cooper Avenue. The approval included demolition of a shed and existing non-original additions to a Victorian era miner's cottage. The historic building is to be relocated a few feet to the side and forward of its existing location. A new addition will be constructed to the back of the site. HPC granted approval finding that the elements to be demolished have no historic significance, based on substantial information available from a long-time property owner. The miner's cottage has already been relocated on the lot in the past, and the board found the new siting of the building to be appropriate with the context of the adjacent buildings. The proposed addition is linked to the Victorian with a small, one story connecting element. Approximately half of the new addition is limited to one story in height, and is lower than the Victorian building. The massing and detailing of the taller area of the addition are considered to be sympathetic to the character of the miner's cottage. HPC granted a rear yard setback variance in order to allow the addition to sit far behind the historic house. Planning staff recommended continuation of the design review to restudy the length of the one story connecting element between the old and new construction. HPC approved the design with the condition that the connector be increased in length by a vote of 4-3. Dissenting board members felt that the connector was adequate as proposed. A copy of the approved massing is attached as Exhibit A. The HPC Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. PROCEDURE: This is not a public hearing and no staff or applicant presentation will be made at the October 9th Council meeting. If you have any questions about the project, please contact the staff planner, Amy Guthrie, 429-2758 or amy.guthrie @ci.aspen.co.us. Pursuant to Section 26.412.040(B), notification of this HPC approval must be placed on City Council's agenda within 30 days. City Council has the option of exercising the Call Up provisions outlined in Section 26.412.040(B) within 15 days of notification on the regular agenda. For this application, City Council may vote to Call Up the project at their October 22, 2012 meeting. If City Council does not exercise the Call Up provision, the HPC Resolution shall stand, and the applicant will move forward to the Final design review hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Conceptual Design Exhibit B: HPC Resolution 21, Series 2012 Exhibit C: Draft HPC minutes from September 19, 2012 mer ewx,iwc�v¢.emu _ _ T I Y I L u iI JLLLji L ' —� 'fdT-18 NJrJ J NAM SIRG •y '•• - - - . - w O Ti ill U cf, 2 N O---- ------- ----- W O I II I II i ll i ll i i ' I � du J C N N LL______________��_______________JJ L�_____� —___________________—___C_________________________J N > N Q (A d Q d n O O T 10z E�stin-South Elevation East Cooper):Main Cottage-1006 East Cooper Us East Elevation:Main Cottage-1006 East Cooper o U 2 o y U w m c°(D o Wo 0 0 0 iacnW m io Wa I L - - � ! r r , r f ______________________________ II II II II I G,TMAI®I4N TO Mw I I I II I I J I � • s ____ ____J — —__ 3 Existin North Elevation Towards Alley):Main Cottage-1006 East Cooper 4�Existin West Elevation:Main Cottage-1006 East Cooper AZ 01 SCALE ti<=1'-tY A2V1 SCALE-tea=t'(Y N AO Q -- -- -- -- -- -- � Ar, — ¢-- -- -- -- -- -- -7 CHAR E— I I � —a C . e I yx x I F0 _ � 0 a f J� Iv III .III -j I — -i 4M I Z J 1 I : -144 - ll o } i II NI N a -I �I - N o u ( — 90I < - o I _ m o I �px w rn I – l ��_ m l 3 m u P Z. o CD I L � M a I lu CD o I @ o IO (D N o 10 r y � I I II II I _ 11 II - II O Ln II II � I o ]: - IN II yyy LJ �` ____ ________v� I \ fps i f � II I� I I `� I �'Ll I L �IW fag L-° I b ill r Ig �e _ I1 I; '.L J HH 6 1 a D I ORT - m= § w w/i 11' 1 - D CIDUOSIS LOT L LOT M _ LOT L LOT M i ,ms ewer coo�a.�ln,e 9" DIA W/ 15'.DRIPLINE �� 7.5 DIA W/ 13' DRIPLJNE Ary L11E DECIDUOUS ` DECIDUOUS EAST COOPER AVENUE EAST COOPER AVENUE ORT 1006 East Cooper Residence-HPC CONCEPTUAL A .03 1 E- 1006 East Cooper Avenue,East End District meamm p�9�la+a a�aI = _ tt ' � an .nam¢o vrtl ma ruw City of Aspen-Colorado L f LOWER UVtL a. I s� _ Y I �2 10 �l`e m ---= --- - - D I k o , y CD y cL I I ' r m - m R gig.P r0 3�p l a m 11I� �g d I I l� a € I m a _ o CD CD CD cD ED o q .I g I - NI n I I o I _ CD � � Io° Ln x. --- t T 00 W i< w I is a ,N II \ - • DIA w I --- - tDC-1D CIDUOUS- OJIS W 10'` i W`10'� -y- LOT L LOT M LOT L LOT M 9• DIA W/ 15'ARIPLINE 7.5` DIA W/,13' DRIPLIN 9` DIA W/ 15'ARIPLINE 7.5` DIA W//13' DRIPUNE DECIDUOUS ` DECIDUOUS DECIDUOUS DECIDUOUS —— — EAST COOPER AVENUE °^ EAST COOPER AVENUE ORT ORT 1006 East Cooper Residence-HPC CONCEPTUAL per 1006 East Cooper Avenue,East End District A-2.04J 0,, Xn to FML PRMED MI I City of Aspen-Colorado •e WKk LEVEL ROOA MM �E14�9a}i Im n Z m � n Y D v D 2 �n x �' GE n CL k m .a�..� I — - y M. CD n o ---- ------- -- ---- P° a o - S � T m -- I m p I .. tM ._ ?+ " r y i O - o a M s , — °' r H' 3 � I I t" � III O O k I I fA$p{ A S --w.ws.,+u . :£ :a". �7•uF:�3•:x � w 1006 East Cooper Residence-HPC CONCEPTUAL Am2GOS 1006 East Cooper Avenue,East End District MK(ONCE N :MWMD fOUlll i Nil City of Aspen-Colorado ••,"•• a MIET MUMON{MASYMO SNOYS 0v i� E_2 RECEPTION#: 592514, 09125/2012 at 10:07:25 AM, 1 of 3, R $21.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), RELOCATION, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCE APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1006 E. COOPER AVENUE,LOT L AND THE WEST 10' OF LOT M, BLOCK 34, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION #21, SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-32-004 WHEREAS, the applicant, BMD Aspen LLC, represented by l Friday Design Collaborative, requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variance approval for the property located at 1006 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections, The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and 1006 E. Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution #21, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 3 Additionally for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080.A.4, Demolition of Designated Historic Properties, it must be determined that: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area; and WHEREAS,the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C.La, Variances. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated September 12, 2012, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended restudy of some aspects of the project; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 12, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the 1006 E. Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution#21, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 3 proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of 4 to 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variance approval for the property located at 1006 E. Cooper Avenue with the following conditions: 1. The proposed one story connector piece between the historic house and addition is to be increased in length in the north/south direction so that it is 10' long. The addition is to slide 2' closer to the alley. 2. A 7' reduction in the rear yard setback requirement is approved. 3. Provide further information about the design and history of the chimney on the west side of the Victorian, for review at Final. 4. At building permit, provide a $30,000 letter of credit or cashier's check to insure the safe relocation of the Victorian building, as well as a plan for protection of the building from a housemover or structural engineer. 5. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of September 12, 2012, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day of September, 2012. Ann Mullins, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: athy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 1006 E. Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution 421, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Jay Maytin, Jamie McLeod, Patrick Segal, Sallie Golden and Jane Hills. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of August 15th second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Public comments: Bill Wiener, 701 Gibson. It is important to preserve the character of this community. The height issue is now before the public because of what went on with council and the 28 feet. When we put extra height on a building we are putting extra volume on it also. There are circumstances that where a building needs to be taller than 28 feet. To do that they need to mitigate. It is time to start looking at volume and that is mass and it is changing the character. There is a formula that I can work on. You would get setbacks that create urban feel with little gardens. Jay said our guidelines indicate no setbacks. Bill said the character of this community has been little gardens, flowers and a piece of sculpture and variety around town. This is not that kind of large city where we need everything to the property line. Bill said he will do a volume analysis. 1006 E. Cooper Ave. Conceptual Major Development, Demolition and Variances, Public Hearing Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney said the public notice is appropriate and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I. Amy said the parcel is 4, 372 square feet. It is in the RMF zone on E. Cooper. There is a Victorian house on the site that has several additions to it. The proposal is to strip back to the original miner's cottage with a gable end facing Cooper Ave. One issue bringing the house back to the original is that they will be crossing the threshold of demolishing more than 40% of the structure and once you do that your project is considered new construction. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 They lose their right for the maximum FAR that they could have had if they kept the additions and just added on. They will take an FAR penalty of 20% on what they can build out. The proposal is within the 80% allowance 2,192 square feet and they are not currently asking for the FAR bonus. There has been some discussion about TDR's but that is not on the table tonight. They are requesting to demolish the shed in the back and we have no basis to think it has historical significance. There is a request to move the Victorian slightly on the site to allow for it to be free standing and up toward the front of the property. Right now it is slightly sequed on the property and there has been some suggestion that it has been moved in the past. In terms of the relocation there will be a lawn area all around the house. There is a connector that hooks to an addition in the back. One of the concerns is that the connector is 8 feet long rather than 10 feet long. The concern is consistency and is it providing the separation that is really needed. Staff recommends HPC hold firm to the 10 foot requirement. The addition has a simple gable end and is two stories tall and set well back. Part of the addition is one story. It represents a quiet back drop behind the miner's cottage which makes it successful. They are asking for a five foot variance along the back depending how the connector discussion goes. Patrick inquired about the sheds. Derek said there is a tuff shed from 1998 to 2000, the rear structure and the main house. Staff is recommending that the connector extend by two feet and in order to fit the whole project on the site they either need to move forward or back. Jamie went over the issues to review: demolition of more than 40%; demo of the non-historic shed and the tuff shed. Moving the Victorian and the connector piece and the five foot variance for living space above the garage. Derek Skalko, architect Adam Gillespie, owner Derek said there is the main cabin with several additions to it in the periods of 1937 -1942 and 1964-1969. In the rear there is a chicken coop. In the neighborhood we have an historic house, a large condominium and an apartment complex. It is a very diverse mix and not like the West End. The Moore family owned the house and it was moved once and possibly twice. Originally the property went back and west. Then the house was shifted in the 60's when a foundation was added to it and it was shifted 6 degrees. The 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 foundation is construction from the 60's or 70's. The chicken barn was added in the 40's with a flat roof. In the 90's the tuff shed was added, an awning and a new bathroom. Derek presented colored elevations as to when the additions occurred. There will be reconstruction of the west wall of the building. The addition that is to be removed is impeding any kind of development. In our proposal we also have a perpetual easement of 121 square feet that further reduces our FAR by 18 square feet on the lot. The proposal is to move the building over five feet which we feel is more historically accurate and also five feet forward. We are creating a lot of open space around the property and pushing most of the massing to the rear of the property. The structure is a two story structure and the height of the condo building next door is 38 feet. We could extend the building another two feet but would need a variance. The existing shed is 7.5 feet off the property line. We have kept all our light wells away from the side neighboring setback. We are not trying to maximumize the square footage of the property. We have already taken a 20% reduction in FAR and we have a perpetual easement and a program that works. With the extension of the breezeway we may ask for a bonus to make sure we can achieve the FAR. If there is a way to do a TDR and use that for some other parcel we would entertain that. The FAR bonus if given would be for the project proposed and it wouldn't be for further development on the site. We are keeping the scale within the context of the miner's cottage. We want a clear definition of old and new and a simplistic design. Patrick said in the alley 20 years ago there were numerous chicken coops all along that alley. The 6 degrees is probably a declamation error and they used a magnetic north rather than a true north and forgot to compensate for that. The mass to the rear is a good fit. The front yards are a character of Aspen of that time. Derek said there is a chimney inside but we have done no demolition at this point and we aren't sure if it can be used as an indoor/outdoor application for a fireplace. Amy said they have no onsite parking right now and they could maintain that legally. They are offering to ad one parking space. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 Willis asked when the gable was added to the chicken coop? Derek said he thinks it happened around 2002 or could have happened in the late 90's. Willis asked what advantage did you achieve by demolishing more than 40% of the structure? Derek said from a square footage point we hurt ourselves. For our program we didn't have to use all of the square footage that an R6 lot would entail or grant us. The building size is 15 x 20. We want to work with what is truly representative of the building in 1890. Nora asked aesthetically what does it do by bringing the building forward two feet. Derek said theoretically we could move forward 10 feet. The applicant has concerns about having some space in the front yard so people aren't looking in the windows. Adam Gillespie said the property and neighboring properties are set back and we wanted to keep it in context with what the neighborhood was and it is a benefit to the property and the landscaping. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comments. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Ann stated the issues: Demolition and on-site relocation Length of connector Five foot variance for the building on the alley FAR bonus Jamie said she accepts everything except the five yard setback. The concern is too much two story on the alley. Patrick said the idea fits with the character of the neighborhood. The massing stepping down in the back is appropriate. Whether we do the five foot variance or the eight foot connector is not a huge concern. Jay said he is in agreement with everything including the bonus. Out of the bonus I would give you the square footage that you need in order to make the project work. I also feel the connector should be ten feet and pushed back. The chimney should be restudied as it is big and bulky and represented as brick. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 Nora thanked the applicant for doing a project that gets you the program that you want without a lot of variances and square footage. Jane said she likes the entire project and the applicant should be commended for his appreciation in doing the project. I would like to be the monitor on this project. The project is an outstanding attribute to that neighborhood. Willis said he supports the project and the requests. Sallie also said she supports the demolition and relocation. A longer length would be acceptable and I support the FAR bonus which could be used to get more length. The chimney should be restudied. Ann said she would like to see what can be pulled away from the alley. The connector should be extended to ten feet but I don't want to see the house move forward because then it would be out of sink on either side. I am also in support of the FAR bonus if needed. Derek said all of the two story massing in contextual form is keeping it to the back. There is a fireplace in the building and it will be restudied. Willis said he like the chimney the way it is drawn out. MOTION: Jay moved to approve the plan as proposed, resolution 21,with a restudy of the chimney and a ten foot connector using the rear setback to make up for the two feet. (7 foot variance) The demolition and relocation are also approved. Motion second by Patrick. Amy said you need to provide a ten foot setback and they are providing five and now they are going to provide 3. Roll call: Patrick, yes; Jay, yes; Willis, yes; Sallie, yes. Nora, no; Jamie, no; Ann, no. Motion carried 4-3. Nora, Ann and Jamie did not want to see the building go into the setback. They liked the building in its current location. Derek clarified that the massing is to be taken toward the alley two feet and we have a ten foot connector. 5 #1000a c . MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer C � RE: Notice of HPC approval for Demolition of a Shed at 820 E. Cooper Avenue, HPC Resolution #22, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: October 9, 2012 BACKGROUND: On September 19, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approved Demolition of a shed along the alley at 820 E. Cooper Avenue. The property is landmarked due to the presence of a Victorian era miner's cottage on the site. HPC granted Demolition approval after finding that there is no documentation to demonstrate that the shed has historic significance. The shed does not appear on turn of the century maps of the property, so it is not directly related to the history of the miner's cottage. There is no building permit on file, however the construction date has been narrowed to 1960-1975. Examination of Boise Cascade brand markings on the lumber used to construct the shed indicate that it was built after 1960. The oldest official record of the structure that has been located is a photograph and valuation done by the Pitkin County Assessor's office in 1975. Planning staff recommended approval of the demolition request and the HPC voted 6-0 in favor. Drawings of the shed are attached as Exhibit A. A copy of the HPC Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. PROCEDURE: This is not a public hearing and no staff or applicant presentation will be made at the October 9th Council meeting. If you have any questions about the project, please contact the staff planner, Amy Guthrie, 429-2758 or amy.guthrie @ci.aspen.co.us. Pursuant to Section 26.412.040(B), notification of this HPC approval must be placed on City Council's agenda within 30 days. City Council has the option of exercising the Call Up provisions outlined in Section 26.412.040(B) within 15 days of notification on the regular agenda. For this application, City Council may vote to Call Up the project at their October 22, 2012 meeting. If City Council does not exercise the Call Up provision, the HPC Resolution shall stand, and the applicant will move forward through the building permit process. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Drawings of shed Exhibit B: Draft HPC Resolution 22, Series 2012 Exhibit C: Draft HPC minutes from September 19, 2012 %IOU ._ _ e - I - o I II � I. a i a �I � I II !i I I I _ I I c _J 3a So Eth4Elgation Outbulding) 820 East Cooper Residence o � _ Q U uJ m co 0 w U c � 11 Existin Plan Outbuildin -820 East Cooper Residence ���I� I� N N w,a scwLE:,u-=rte ail I!i Ili I, ICI!, o N Q w CL CL a CL 0 4 East Elevation Outbuildin -820 East Cooper Residence $U U nTs r a caw wo c F mm I �n { yq 7 I 1 — I� M Elevation(Alley-Outbuilding)-820 East Cooper Residence - -'I North 9) IAJ w1.61 SGLE'il6•=1-0• �SGG 2 Existin Roof plan Outbuilding)-820 East Cooper Residence �0� R C� NOTE:COMPLETE REMOVAL OF ALLEY OUTBUILDING IS PROPOSED AT THIS TIME. DRAWINGS ARE PROVIDED FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SITE DOCUMENTATION N LOCATION OF PROPOSED REMOVED STRUCTURE 61 West Elevation Outbuilding)-820 East Cooper Residence 0 Q A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING DEMOLITION APPROVAL FOR THE EXISTING SHED AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 820 E. COOPER AVENUE, LOT P, BLOCK 111, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #22, SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-28-005 WHEREAS, the applicant, CWG Holdings LLC, represented by 1 Friday Design Collaborative, has requested Demolition review for a shed located on the property at 820 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot P, Block 111, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, in order to authorize a Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080, Demolition of designated historic properties, it must be demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the city to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, C. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen, or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally,for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located, and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and C. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated September 19, 2012 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval of the proposed demolition of the shed; and 820 E. Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution#22, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, at their special meeting on September 19, 2012, during a duly noticed public hearing, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval of the demolition of the shed by a vote of 6 to 0. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Demolition approval for the shed located on the property at 820 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot P, Block 111, City and Townsite of Aspen. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its special meeting on the 191h day of September, 2012. Ann Mullins, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 820 E. Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution #22, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSI.ON MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2012 Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jane Hills, Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Patrick Segal, Sallie Golden. Jay Maytin and Jamie McLeod were excused. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk 422 E. Cooper Ave. Conceptual Major Development-Public Hearing - MOTION: Ann moved to continue 422 E. Cooper public hearing and conceptual development to October 24, 2012; second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Nora will recuse herself on 623 E. Hopkins Jane will recuse herself on 623 E. Hopkins 820 E. Cooper— Demolition of Shed, Public Hearing Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney stated that the public notice is properly provided and the applicant can proceed.. Exhibit I Amy stated that the proposal is only for the demolition of a shed or out building on the alley. It is a 3,000 square foot lot and the shed sits partly into the alley and it has been used at certain times as a dwelling unit. The proposal is to demolish the shed and at some future point we will see potential reworking of the historic resource. The shed does not appear on the Sanborn 1904 map and there is nothing in the building files indicating when it was built but it is recorded at the assessor's office by 1975. There is no mention as to how old it is. Staff suggests that demolition be approved. _ Derek Skalko, architect said essentially we are talking about 820 E. Cooper. The historic mining cottage has had at least one addition to the back rear. We are not touching the mining cottage. We are focusing on the rear alley building which was built around 1965 and 1975. The building was used in 2006 as an abandoned unit and someone was sleeping in it. By code it is too small for an ADU. The building poses a problem for the future of the lot. It is a shed structure and the head height is about 6'8" and goes up to about 8'2". It can't be transformed into a garage and has asbestos and black mold. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2012 With the removal of the shed there will be a physical parking area on the property. Nora inquired about the vegetation and if there will be any landscaping done after it is removed? All the changes will bring the lot back into conformity. Derek said probably we would do a gravel parking area. At this time we don't want to do any major landscaping at this time. There is also construction going on next door which impacts anything we would do. The State of Colorado has the oversight regarding the asbestos. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comments. There were no public comments. The public comment section of the agenda item was closed. Ann stated that there is only one issue, demolition. MOTION: Nora moved to approve resolution #22 as proposed and amended by Amy. Motion second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. 623 E. Hopkins — Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review, Public Hearing Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney said the public notice is properly provided and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I Elevations — Exhibit II Amy said this is a 6,000 square foot lot that currently has two commercial businesses in the front and an annex building for Susie's in the back. HPC previously awarded conceptual with some rehab work on the two miner's structures and demolition and replacement of the building along the alley. The HPC conceptual approval had no conditions for restudy and one condition that the roof top deck on the new building in the back be restricted to what was represented to HPC and nothing further in the future and no mechanical equipment. At this point we are looking at details, landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, new materials and restoration issues. Overall staff is pleased with the project which keeps the historic buildings prominent on the street. The detached structure on the alley will serve as a back drop to these buildings. The only things suggested for restudy are the siding on the barn and exposure of the clapboard. We need to know specifically what the 2