Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20130805 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION August 05, 2013 5:00 PM, City Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA I. Pro Cycle Challenge Update - oral report II. Core-Remp funding and Grants; Energy Smart Program III. Galena Plaza Design Review Page 1 of 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: CORE - Community Office for Resource Efficiency Mona Newton, Executive Director THRU: David Hornbacher, Director of Utilities & Environmental Initiatives DATE OF MEMO: August 1, 2013 MEETING DATE: August 5, 2013 RE: 2013/2014 Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (Remp) Funding Discussion Including 2013 Green Key Grants And 2013/2014 Programs REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council discussion and direction concerning the attached DRAFT Resolution, as forwarded by the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) Board of Directors, which recommends the expenditure of funds generated through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) for identified 2013/2014 projects and programs. The CORE Board of Directors includes: George Newman (Pitkin County), Cindy Houben (Pitkin County), Steve Casey (Holy Cross Energy), Steve Skadron (Aspen), Dave Hornbacher (Aspen), Chris Jacobson (Snowmass Village), Stacey Patch Bernot (Carbondale), Karin Teague (Basalt) and Bill Stirling (Energy 2000 Committee). BACKGROUND: In January 2000 the Pitkin County Commissioners and the Aspen City Council adopted the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) as a component of the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code. The program gives property owners the choice of mitigating excessive energy use through the installation of on-site renewable energy systems, or by paying an optional impact fee. CORE administers funds collected through REMP, providing programs and incentives designed to address the impacts of excessive energy consumption. Among a variety of other CORE initiatives, REMP revenues are used to fund the annual Green Key Grant Program. Green Key Grants support government, non-profit, commercial and residential projects located within the Roaring Fork Valley, which deliver tangible results in energy efficiency and renewable energy generation. According to the REMP ordinance, the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) is responsible for developing proposals for spending funds collected through REMP. Those proposals must be reviewed and approved by the CORE Board. Final approval of proposed REMP expenditures is required to be by Resolution of the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Aspen City Council. P1 II. Page 2 of 4 DISCUSSION: The projects and programs recommended for funding contribute to preserving a vibrant, healthy, and sustainable community by improving energy efficiency or generating energy using renewable resources, thereby resulting in significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. For example, total annual energy savings upon completion of the recommended 2013/2014 Green Key Grant projects are estimated to exceed 1,157,435 kWh, eliminating or avoiding approximately 691,000 lbs. of CO2e emissions per year. REMP funding procedures require approval by both the Aspen City Council and Pitkin County Commissioners. The attached Resolution details the projects and programs recommended for REMP funding by the CORE Board of Directors for a combined total of $1,037,285 in 2013/2014 expenditures. The recommended 2013/2014 Green Key Grant expenditures total approximately $472,000. In addition, the CORE Board recommends approval of $400,000 in REMP funds to accomplish the following programming: Community Grants ($50,000), Design Assistance Grants ($50,000), Low-to-Moderate Income Grant Program ($100,000) the Big Buildings Efficiency Challenge ($200,000) and $165,285 to support the program delivery costs for Green Key Grants, Community Grants and Design Assistance Grants. 2013 Green Key Grants The Green Key Grant requests were first reviewed and evaluated by the Citizens Grant Review Committee, using a set of criteria adopted by the CORE Board of Directors. The Committee’s recommendations were then forwarded to the CORE Board of Directors who discussed and concurred with most of the recommendations and revised some. Please refer to the attached DRAFT Resolution for detailed descriptions of the 2013 Green Key Grant projects recommended for funding from the REMP Fund. Furthermore, the 2013 Green Key Grant applications can be viewed in full at the following link: http://aspencore.org/2013-green-key- grant-submittals/ (Access Password: GreenKey). 2013/2014 REMP Programs CORE has been surveying the landscape of programs available to increase adoption of energy efficiency and renewable energy across all sectors. CORE and our partners serve the residential market and small commercial market with rebates and technical assistance through a variety of programs. For 2013/2014, CORE’s Appliance and Solar Rebate Programs are proposed to be funded and administered under the Energy Smart Program, which is presented for consideration under a separate discussion item on this work session agenda. In addition to continuing to offer Community Grants and Design Assistance Grants, one new program would expand Energy Smart to serve low-to-moderate income homeowners while another would address the challenges and opportunities in improving energy efficiency in larger commercial and residential buildings, both public and private. CORE has staff with the technical capability to deliver these programs, and the capacity to add the two new programs. • Community Grants (existing program) Community Grants aim to support a broad spectrum of environmental and energy projects with tangible results for the Roaring Fork Valley. The aims of Community Grants are to reduce energy consumption, reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, offset greenhouse gases, promote the use of renewable energy, educate the community on energy issues, and develop more sustainable energy technologies. Community Grants range from $1,000 – $10,000 and are awarded at the discretion of CORE’s Executive Director. P2 II. Page 3 of 4 • Design Assistance Grants (existing program) The Design Assistance Grant is made available to aid commercial and institutional development projects in implementing integrative efficient design. This grant serves the purpose of promoting new technology and innovation during the design phase of new building construction. These grants are also awarded on the approval of CORE’s Executive Director. Energy Design Assistance grants range from $1,000 - $15,000. • Low-to-Moderate Income Grant Program (proposed new program) We have received input from the Pitkin County Health and Human Services Department that while rebates incent many to implement energy efficiency, there are also many homeowners who can’t afford do any efficiency work on their homes. To serve those households, we propose to create a grant program that will be offered to households whose incomes are above 200% of poverty, and lower than the median income. The grant will provide up to $2,500 in energy efficiency work to a homeowner. Our request for this program is a total of $100,000. CORE staff will develop the program and be responsible for implementing it; it will mimic the state weatherization program offered to families 200% of poverty or lower. Staff will coordinate assessments that will be performed by the trained analysts, work will be performed by trained contractors and overseen and inspected by CORE staff. CORE would pay contractors directly for the work performed on each home. The homeowner would receive education from CORE staff about home energy management, as education combined with measures will achieve the greatest savings. Energy consumption and savings would be tracked by CORE and reported to the homeowner and the CORE Board annually. As this is a new program, we will report back to the CORE Board after six months of implementation about the success and challenges of this program. • Big Buildings Efficiency Challenge (proposed new program) Typically, the commercial sector represents approximately 50% of the energy consumption in buildings. While CORE offers incentives to the commercial sector, we see an opportunity to leverage the impact of our resources by offering rebates to owners of larger buildings, which include public and private buildings and multifamily complexes. This program would enable CORE to work directly with building owners and operators to help them move ahead with efficiency projects. Our request for this program is $200,000. President Obama announced the Better Buildings Challenge focusing on helping American commercial and industrial buildings become 20% more energy efficient by 2020 and we will strive to attain the goal with this program. He has also announced the intention to expand the program to multifamily housing, which is what CORE is proposing to do as part of the big buildings program. For each of the new programs we are recommending, specific guidelines and eligibility standards are yet to be determined. CORE staff will work closely with our partners to establish program parameters that will allow us to reach targets with the greatest need and the greatest opportunity for improvement. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Funds collected through REMP will be used to fund the projects and programs, which will have no financial impact on the City’s General Fund. RECOMMENDED ACTION: CORE will return to Council on August 26 with an updated memo and resolution based on today’s discussion for approval. P3 II. Page 4 of 4 ALTERNATIVES: If Council chooses not to approve the resolution the REMP funds would stay in the account and would be available for future renewable energy projects. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: DRAFT Resolution #__ 2013 - A Resolution of the City of Aspen City Council Authorizing the Expenditure of Funds Generated Through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program P4 II. DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. ___ Series of 2013 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS GENERATED THROUGH THE RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM. WHEREAS, on December 13, 1999, City Council approved Ordinance No. 55 Adopting the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code, and WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code allows that funds collected through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) be spent in accordance with a resolution passed by the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, and WHEREAS, at its meeting on July 11, 2013, the Board of Directors of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) approved the REMP spending proposals described herein, and WHEREAS, the spending proposals meet the screening criteria of addressing affordable housing, cost-effectiveness, public visibility and education, environmental benefits, energy efficiency, leverage, unique opportunity, new technologies and green design. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO that the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) is authorized to negotiate and secure contracts and manage the installation and/or implementation of the following projects and programs: I. Projects supported by CORE Board of Directors for funding from REMP Recommended 2013 Green Key Grant Project Funding 1. Aspen Center for Environmental Studies $9,818 2. Aspen Skiing Company $10,000 3. City of Aspen - ARC $50,000 4. City of Aspen - Burlingame $150,000 5. City of Aspen – Cozy Point Ranch $62,891 6. Colorado Rocky Mountain School $10,357 7. First Methodist Church - Insulation $19,500 8. First Methodist Church – Solar PV $18,000 9. GarCo Public Library District – Carbondale Solar PV $25,000 10. Mountain Rescue Aspen $75,000 11. Roaring Fork Conservancy $15,000 12. Sopris Elememtary/Mtn. Valley Dev. Services $7,211 13. We-Cycle $19,330 Total: $472,107 P5 II. 1. ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES (ACES) – LED LIGHTING ACES is a non-profit environmental education organization. Their request proposes an LED lighting retrofit for the Hallam Lake Visitor Center in Aspen. The retrofit is estimated to achieve an 11% reduction in the facility’s total electrical load. ACES’ programming will incorporate lessons highlighting the retrofit project and expose the Center’s 28,000 yearly visitors to the lighting technologies in use. Motion sensors and day-lighting controls will maximize efficient use of the proposed upgrades. Annual Energy Savings: 6,153 kWh Annual CO2e Savings: 12,060 lbs. (HCE carbon factor of 1.96 lb) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $6,153 (10 yr project life, energy cost $.10/kWh) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.24 (10 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $19,636.13 Amount requested: $14,636.13 Approved Funding: $9,818.00 2. ASPEN SKIING COMPANY – LIMELIGHT IN-ROOM CONTROLS The Aspen Skiing Company is a for-profit privately held corporation that owns and operates the Limelight Hotel. Their request is to support an in-room energy management system (smart thermostats, occupancy sensors, integrated controls) throughout the 126- room Limelight. The project will allow room temperatures to be controlled in response to occupancy status, outdoor temperatures, and other variables, in order to maximize system efficiency. Upgrades are estimated to achieve a 43% reduction in the facility’s heating/cooling energy load. Annual Energy Savings: 27,344 kWh and 15,332 Therms (equiv. to 449,336 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 199,071 lbs. (COA carbon factor.72 lb and natural gas carbon factor 11.7 lb) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $306,133 (20 yr project life, energy cost of $.10/kWh and $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.006 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $52,613.19 Amount requested: $52,613.19 Approved Funding: $10,000.00 3. CITY OF ASPEN – ASPEN RECREATION CENTER (ARC) The Aspen Recreation Center is owned and operated by the City of Aspen. This request would support the purchase and installation of 1,150 LED and 45 induction light bulbs in fixtures throughout the facility. The upgrades are estimated to achieve a 59% reduction in the lighting system’s energy consumption. Annual Energy Savings: 145,269 kWh Annual CO2e Savings: 104,594 lbs. (COA carbon factor .72 lb) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $145,269 (10 yr project life, $.10/kWh) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.034 (10 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $103,594.90 Amount requested: $50,000 Approved Funding: $50,000.00 P6 II. 4. CITY OF ASPEN – SOLAR THERMAL BURLINGAME PHASE IIA(i) Burlingame Phase IIA(i) is a 48-unit for-sale deed restricted affordable housing project of the City of Aspen. The request would support the installation of solar hot water pre-heat systems for these units. The project is expected to reduce natural gas consumption within this phase by 50%. Annual Energy Savings: 4,698 Therms (equivalent to 275,314 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 54,967 lbs. (natural gas carbon factor of 11.7 lb) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $77,047 (20 yr project life and $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.027 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $300,000 Amount requested: $150,000 Approved Funding: $150,000 5. CITY OF ASPEN – COZY POINT RANCH, LLC Cozy Point Ranch, LLC is a private for-profit corporation, which holds a lease to operate the 168-acre Cozy Point Ranch, an equestrian/agricultural/open space and recreation property owned by the City of Aspen. The request would support the implementation of key recommendations from a 2011 commissioning report. The project includes lighting upgrades in the indoor riding arena and stables - conversion of numerous 400W and 150W Metal Halides and T-12 Fluorescents to LED and T-8 fixtures, along with the addition of daylighting sensors and system controls. Replacing the indoor riding arena’s forced air heating system (currently controlled by a single manual thermostat) with two-stage infra- red natural gas tube heaters controlled by a programmable thermostat is also proposed. The energy and emissions reductions resulting from proposed heating upgrades are estimated using the average potential savings defined in the commissioning report. Annual Energy Savings: 55,318 kWh (light) and 1,649 Therms (heat – eq. 48,316 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 127,716 lbs. (HCE carbon factor of 1.96 lbs., nat gas carbon factor of 11.7 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $82,362 (10 yr life lighting, 20 yr life heating, $.10/kWh & $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.04 (15 yr. combined proj. life) Total Project Cost: $134,580 Amount requested: $62,891 Approved Funding: $62,891 6. COLORADO ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL (CRMS) CRMS is an independent non-profit college preparatory school located in Carbondale. This request would support the installation of an 8-panel solar hot water system on the school’s North Dormitory. The system will provide energy for 75% of the building’s domestic hot water needs and up to 50% of the heating needs. The project is expected to reduce CO2 emissions by 81,088 lbs. Annual Energy Savings: 90,000,000 BTU’s (eq. to 899 Therms, or 26,362 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 10,518 lbs. (natural gas carbon factor of 11.7 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $14,744 (20 yr project life and $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.02 (20 yr project life) P7 II. Total Project Cost: $32,857 Amount requested: $10,357 Approved Funding: $10,357 7. FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS - INSULATION The First Methodist Church of Glenwood Springs is a religious institution. This request would support the installation of rigid roof insulation on the church’s sanctuary roof, in order to bring it up to a code-standard R-49. The Church is currently investigating the structural capacity of their roof – relative to the additional insulation (and the solar system proposed in #8 below). Design and cost estimating is very preliminary at this time. Added insulation is estimated to reduce annual CO2e emissions by 8,190 lbs. Annual Energy Savings: 700 Therms (equivalent to 20,515 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 8,190 lbs. (natural gas carbon factor of 11.7 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $11,480 (20 yr project life and $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.047 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $39,000 Amount requested: $19,500 Approved Funding: $19,500 8. FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS – SOLAR PV The First Methodist Church of Glenwood Springs is a religious institution. This request would support the installation of a 12kW solar photovoltaic system. The Church is currently investigating the structural capacity of their roof – relative to a solar installation (and the added insulation proposed in #7 above). Design and cost estimating is very preliminary at this time. Annual Energy Savings: 17,623 kWh (Source: PV Watts) Annual CO2e Savings: 34,364 lbs. (Glenwood Springs Electric carbon factor of 1.95 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $35,246 (20 yr project life and $.10/kWh) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.05 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $36,000 Amount requested: $18,000 Approved Funding: $18,000 9. GARFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT (GCPLD) – 30KW PV SYSTEM The GCPLD is a special district operating six library branch locations across Garfield County. Their request is to support the design, purchase and installation of a 30kW photovoltaic system on the solar-ready roof of the new Carbondale Branch Library. The project is conceived in partnership with Colorado Mountain College’s (CMC’s) Integrated Energy Department, and contemplates a cost-sharing arrangement including GCPLD, CMC, CORE, the Town of Carbondale and private donors. The project will engage CMC students in the system design and installation process. The Carbondale Branch Library saw nearly 100,000 visitors in 2012. With energy modeling projecting a total demand of 48kW to power the new building, a 30kW system would provide more than 60% of total annual electrical use. P8 II. Annual Energy Savings: 44,056 kWh (Source: PVWatts) Annual CO2e Savings: 77,098 lbs. (Xcel Energy carbon factor 1.75 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $88,112 (20 yr project life and $.10/kWh) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.028 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $125,000 Amount requested: $25,000 Approved Funding: $25,000 10. MOUNTAIN RESCUE ASPEN Mountain Rescue Aspen is a non-profit volunteer organization providing backcountry search and rescue and mountain safety education services. This request would support components of the new $4.9m MRA Headquarters building in Aspen. Specifically, funding is requested to install a 7.7 kW solar photovoltaic system, a 32 square foot solar hot water system (11,680,000 BTU/yr), a KalWall (translucent daylighting wall assembly), LED lighting, and DDC HVAC system controls. Approved funding is to support the renewable energy generation systems only (i.e., solar PV and solar hot water). The grant shall be conditioned upon MRA agreeing to install a BTU meter on the solar hot water system. MRA shall also agree to install the DDC controls and LED lighting, although REMP funding is not being awarded to support those project elements. Annual Energy Savings: Solar PV: 11,308 kWh/yr (Source: PV Watts), Solar Thermal: 11,680,000 BTU/yr (eq. to 117 Therms/yr or 3,421 kWh/yr) Annual CO2e Savings: 23,532 lbs. for renewables only (HCE carbon factor 1.96 lbs., nat gas carbon factor of 11.7 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $24,535 (renewables only, 20 yr project life, $.10/kWh and $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh eq) Saved: $0.29 (renewables only, 20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $152,800 Amount requested: $152,800 Approved Funding: $75,000 11. ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY The Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC) is an independent non-profit organization with a mission to inspire people to explore, value, and protect the Roaring Fork Watershed. This request is to support inclusion of an automated building energy management system in the Conservancy’s future River Center building. Funding requested is an estimate of 20% of the total HVAC system cost, and is not based on a specific design or cost proposal. System controls are an essential component for achieving building efficiency goals, in combination with the high efficiency boilers and solar thermal elements (both supported in prior years with Green Key Grants totaling a combined $60,000). The grant shall be conditioned to require RFC to commission the building upon completion and to conduct performance monitoring every two years in order to verify system performance over time. Annual Energy Savings: TBD Annual CO2e Savings: TBD Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: TBD Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: TBD Total Project Cost: $30,000 Amount requested: $30,000 Approved Funding: $15,000 (not to exceed 50% of actual system cost) P9 II. 12. SOPRIS ELEMENTARY/MOUNTAIN VALLEY DEV. SERVICES – SOLAR THERMAL GREENHOUSE Sopris Elementary School, located in Glenwood Springs and part of the Roaring Fork School District, has partnered in this proposal with the non-profit Mountain Valley Developmental Services, which serves developmentally disabled children and adults. Their proposal is to install a 5-panel evacuated tube solar thermal array already owned (and in storage) by the school. The school expects to reduce the greenhouse’s natural gas consumption by 20-25% (by reducing demand on existing natural gas greenhouse heaters), which is estimated to reduce CO2 emissions by up to 37,746 lbs. per year. Annual Energy Savings: 3,500 Therms (equivalent to 25,000 kWh) Annual CO2e Savings: 40,950 lbs. (natural gas carbon factor of 11.7 lbs.) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $57,400 (20 yr project life, $.82/Therm) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.014 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $10,500 Amount requested: $7,211.55 Approved Funding: $7,211.45 13. WE-CYCLE – SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAI CS We-Cycle is a non-profit organization that operates a bike-sharing program for the City of Aspen. We-Cycle has installed 13 self-service bike sharing stations throughout the city, providing up to 100 bicycles for public use. Their grant proposal would support the installation of photovoltaic solar collectors on all 13 stations. With a 110 W system proposed at each station, the project contemplates a total of 1.43 kW installed. Energy Savings: 2,100 kWh Annual CO2e Savings: 1,512 lbs. (COA carbon factor .72 lb) Lifecycle Utility Cost Savings: $4,200 (20 yr project life, $.10/kWh) Grant cost per kWh (or kWh equivalent) Saved: $0.46 (20 yr project life) Total Project Cost: $19,330 (Renewables only. Total Project: $599,744) Amount requested: $19,330 Approved Funding: $19,330 II. Programs supported by CORE Board of Directors for funding from REMP: 1. Community Grants - $50,000: These grants support smaller projects (ranging from $1,000- $10,000) throughout the year for community-based resource and energy saving projects in lieu of the annual Green Key Grants, which typically fund larger projects. 2. Design Assistance Grants - $50,000: These funds support innovation and integrative energy efficient design for new construction projects. 3. Low-to-Moderate Income Grant Program - $100,000: These funds will be used to improve the energy efficiency of homes owned by families whose incomes exceed the qualifications for the state’s weatherization program, but are below 400% of poverty level. Qualifying homeowners will be eligible for a grant up to $2,500 for energy assessments, insulation, and high-efficiency refrigerators, hot water heaters, furnaces and/or boilers. P10 II. 4. Big Buildings Efficiency Challenge – $200,000: Public- and private-sector buildings, and multi-family complexes will be targeted with this program to provide technical assistance and rebates to upgrade the efficiency of these buildings. CORE will also work with the building industry to provide incentives to conduct deep retrofits of buildings during remodeling. III. Administrative and overhead expenses supported by CORE Board of Directors for funding from REMP: 1. Administrative and program delivery - $165,285: These funds are to support the program delivery costs for Green Key Grants ($136,730), Community Grants ($17,115) and Design Assistance Grants ($11,440). INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _________, 2013. __________________________ Steve Skadron, 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 P11 II. Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: CORE – Community office for Resource Efficiency Mona Newton, Executive Director THRU: David Hornbacher, Director of Utilities & Environmental Initiatives DATE OF MEMO: July 29, 2013 MEETING DATE: August 5, 2013 RE: Energy Smart Program funding REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council’s discussion and direction to redirect unspent Green Key Grant funds and re-allocate them to the Energy Smart Program and rebates. BACKGROUND: Over the past six months CORE staff undertook a comprehensive review of all Green Key Grants awarded since 2000 that had a balance of unspent funds. CORE staff communicated with all awardees to determine if funds had been spent or were going to be spent and as of May 1, 2013, a deadline established by the CORE Board of Trustees, a total of $959,000 will remain unspent. CORE is proposing to re-allocate those funds to continue the services and rebates within the Energy Smart Program, and the rebates offered with REMP funds. As you may recall, Pitkin, Eagle and Gunnison counties were awarded a joint grant from the Department of Energy Better Buildings Program in 2010 and the Energy Smart Program was developed and has been implemented since January 2011. The program goal is to reach 10% of the homes and reduce energy costs by 15% with retrofits. In addition to meeting energy efficiency goals of the program, numerous health and safety issues have been identified and remedied through the program – roughly 20% of home audits through the program identity some level of health and safety issue. Energy Smart accomplishments to date in the city of Aspen: • 257 home energy assessments, 89 Sample energy assessments in Multi-family residences, with 40 additional assessments before the end of August. • 684 home energy retrofits. • 2,297,000 Annual Carbon saving • These retrofits represent an investment of $1,019,000 in Aspen with an annual estimated savings of $140,000. • The total amount of rebates paid out is $183,968.73 for a leverage of the rebate of 7:1. • Trained pool of local contractors, and energy efficiency professionals. • Documented savings of 7% in energy costs from assessments and installation of quick fix items. • Documented savings of up to 15% when retrofits are completed. P12 II. Page 2 of 3 The grant funds were also used to develop lasting assets for the program which include: a strong recognized brand and marketing materials, trained contractors and staff, a revolving loan program and a customized Salesforce Data Management System to track participants, measures and savings. DISCUSSION: To continue to reduce energy consumption and thereby carbon emissions in Pitkin County in an effective manner, CORE’s Board of Trustees supports re-allocation of $959,000, originally allocated REMP funds that will remain unspent to the Energy Smart Program to continue this successful program for the remainder of 2013, 2014 and 2015, and recommends approval of the attached draft resolution. The Energy Smart team is also proposing to expand the partnership with Holy Cross Energy and to SourceGas. If these proposals are accepted, the funds available to residents and businesses would be expanded. CORE staff is poised to continue this program with our experienced and dedicated team and program assets and is requesting that the County Commissioners to authorize re- appropriating the unspent grant funds to continue this program after August 11, 2013 when the program’s DOE grant funds will all be expended. The program has recently been awarded a no cost extension of the program through November 2014, which will allow an additional $15,000 to be utilized by the Pitkin County Energy Smart team through October 2013. To reduce confusion in the marketplace about rebates and programs, CORE would use the Energy Smart brand to promote residential and commercial rebates for energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements. The rebates that CORE has offered in past years would be modified to align with those currently offered by Energy Smart, and would include air sealing and insulation, water heaters, boiler, furnace and window replacement rebates. Rebates would be offered to homeowners and businesses for energy assessments when they install a measure. Beginning in 2014 rebates for appliances would only be available for refrigerators. Based on CORE staff analysis, most appliances available for purchase today are very energy efficient and incentives are not needed. When new appliance standards are released, a review will be performed to determine whether it is necessary to incent consumers to purchase the higher efficiency models. There is still, however, a need for a market push for homeowners to make the investment in energy efficiency retrofits. Energy efficiency is widely recognized as the simplest, fastest, least expensive and lowest risk way to meet growing energy demand and achieve desired environmental outcomes and reach community goals. Energy users will more likely investment in efficiency with the coaching support and rebates offered by programs such as Energy Smart. Continuation of the program is also important to create consistency in the market place for consumers, and service providers and the economic benefits derived from the program. Funds, if approved by the City council and County Commissioners, would support CORE's rebates for both the residential and commercial sectors, as well as the cost of program delivery. Program delivery includes: technical assistance to homeowners once the P13 II. Page 3 of 3 assessment of a home is completed to understand the recommendations, any safety issues discovered, and financing options including rebates and the loan program. Staff also assists homeowners in identifying contractors and understanding bids they receive. Staff promotes the rebates through the media and marketing and CORE is responsible for processing the rebates and analyzing data and sharing that with utility partners. Aspen Utilities, Holy Cross Energy and SourceGas have been partners in the program, helping to reduce assessment costs, and providing rebates to homeowners and businesses. City of Aspen Utilities will continue to be a partner in the program and we have submitted a proposal to Holy Cross Energy for continued and expanded support for this program. We will also seek continued support from SourceGas for the program. Our aim is to continue the program with even greater success. The program and rebates recommended for funding contribute to preserving a vibrant, healthy, and sustainable, community by reducing carbon, improving energy efficiency, creating jobs, and reducing costs for residents and business owners. Re-allocating funding the unspent Green Key Grant funds to the Energy Smart Program and rebates will continue to support this impactful program and complements the other programs that CORE offers and is proposing to offer to low-to-moderate income homeowners, occupants of big buildings so that there are a broad spectrum of services for all buildings. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Unspent Green Key Grant funds would be re-allocated to continue the Energy Smart Program and fund rebates to both the residential and commercial sectors, which will have no financial impact on the City’s General Fund. RECOMMENDED ACTION: CORE staff will return to the City Council meeting on August 26 with an amended memo and resolution based on today’s discussion. ALTERNATIVES: If Council chooses not to approve this resolution re-allocating the REMP funds rebates would be eliminated and the services of Energy Smart Program would be limited to any funding received from other partners. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: DRAFT Resolution #__ 2013 - A Resolution of the City of Aspen City Council Authorizing re-allocation of unspent Green Key Grant funds to Energy Smart Program and rebates. P14 II. DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. ___ Series of 2013 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING RE-ALLOCATION OF UNSPENT GREEN KEY GRANT FUNDS TO THE ENERGY SMART PROGRAM AND REBATES FROM SEPTERMBER 1, 2013 TO DECEMBER 31, 2015. WHEREAS, on December 13, 1999, City Council approved Ordinance No. 55 Adopting the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code, and WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code allows that the funds be spent in accordance with a joint resolution by the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Board of Trustees for the Community Office for Resource Efficiency approved this spending proposal, and WHEREAS, proposals that met the screening criteria of housing, cost- effectiveness, public visibility and education, environmental benefits, energy efficiency, leverage, unique opportunity, new technologies and green design and were awarded funding, but will not spend the funding as allocated, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That $959,000.12 of unspent Green Key Grant Funds shall be re-allocated from the previously awarded grants to continue the Energy Smart Program to be offered to residents and businesses in CORE’s service area from September 1, 2013-2015. P15 II. The re-allocated funds will be used to provide rebate monies to the commercial and residential sectors, for energy efficiency measures and renewable energy systems. These funds will also be used to support the program delivery services provided by the Energy Smart staff to ensure that the rebates are utilized. The funds will support advertising, education and program outreach, rebate administration, energy and carbon savings analysis, technical assistance and coaching to homeowners and business owners. That the City Council of Aspen hereby approves this Resolution and does hereby authorize the Mayor of City Manager to execute this resolution on behalf of Aspen. This resolution is conditioned upon the approval of a similar resolution by the Pitkin County Commissioners. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _____ day of _________, 2013. __________________________ Steven Skadron, 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 P16 II. Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM: __________________________________________ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John Laatsch –Project Manager, Capital Asset Scott Chism – Planning and Construction Operations Manager, Parks THRU: Randy Ready – Assistant City Manager Scott Miller – Capital Asset Director Jeff Woods – Manager of Parks and Recreation DATE OF MEMO: August 1, 2013 MEETING DATE: August 5, 2013 RE: Galena Plaza Site Plan Design Review REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council approval of the Galena Plaza Site Plan and authorization of the completion of 100% Detail Design is being requested. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The last Council action specific to Galena Plaza occurred on April 16, 2013, when Council provided approval on the configuration / design of the proposed Site Plan relative to configuration of Law Enforcement Parking and authorized continued development of Detail Design. On March 19, 2013 Council provided clear direction on the configuration for the Law Enforcement Parking, modifications for the consideration of a future Library Expansion, more green space and reduced paving areas for the plaza. Council has also reviewed the Galena Plaza design at a September 18, 2012 work session and identified project priorities from each Council member including: • More/better utilization of the space; • Create a strong connectivity between Rio Grande Park and the Aspen Downtown Core; • Simplify and provide flexibility--Open Park Plan; • Enhance Pedestrian Experience; • Humble and Organic in its creation; “Less is More”; BACKGROUND: The design process to determine a replacement public space to Galena Plaza in association with the required parking garage roof repair started in earnest in January 2010. At that time, a staff and stakeholder group established Galena Plaza Program Requirements and Galena Plaza Design Objectives which were intended to guide the comprehensive project design effort and test various design proposals. Staff has checked in with Council multiple times over the last three (3) years to review P17 III. Page 2 of 2 aspects of the garage roof replacement and plaza redevelopment project. Each discussion with Council has generated adjustments to the project design. DISCUSSION: Since the April 16, 2013 Council work session, the Design Team has been further developing the plaza and surrounding area Site Plan design that Council approved for continued development at the April 16th work session. The result of that design development effort will be presented to Council at the August 5th work session. Staff and the Design Team believe that the presented Galena Plaza Site Plan (Attachment A) achieves the design balance that Council has requested to date, achieves Council priorities for quality public space, achieves the Law Enforcement parking requirements and achieves Library needs for a future expansion. On July 16, 2013 during the attendance at a BOCC meeting, staff learned that the Library was interested in moving forward with the construction of a Library Expansion with an RFP for Design-Build services to be offered in August 2013 with a possible construction start in the summer of 2014. The Design Team has not yet reflected this new proposed Library expansion direction into the project scheduling, however additional considerations to the garage roof and plaza design effort to facilitate this revised direction will be made. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: A comprehensive project budget range of $4.0- $4.4 million for the proposed Criteria Design was established in 2011 and approved by Council. The budget range for the proposed Criteria Design was discussed during the July 19, 2011 and October 25, 2011 Council work sessions. Costs for a 100% Detail Design will be presented to City Council in an upcoming work session. Funding partnerships still must be finalized with Pitkin County Library, Sanitation District and a review of our funding partner’s needs to take place. Cost projections for each component of the construction will then be presented to City Council at the appropriate time for approval. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The environmental impacts are generally positive. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve the submitted Galena Plaza Site Plan (Attachment A) and authorize the completion of 100% Detail Design. ALTERNATIVES: City Council could choose not to approve the recommended Galena Plaza Site Plan and a continuation of the project’s Detail Design effort. City Council could choose to provide other direction to staff than the requested recommended action. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Galena Plaza Site Plan P18 III. Ga l e n a P l a z a As p e n , C o l o r a d o IS S U E D A T E 8. 5 . 1 3 10 ’ 20 ’ 40 ’ 6 0 ’ N PI T K I N C O U N T Y LI B R A R Y E . M A I N S T . 6 S P A C E S 4 S P A C E S 2 S P A C E S 6 S P A C E S 10 S P A C E S N . M I L L S T . R I O G R A N D E P L A C E CI T Y OF F I C E S PI T K I N C O U N T Y JA I L CO U R T H O U S E LIB R A R Y A L L E Y AC R A S T U D Y A R E A N. GALE N A S T . 44’ LA W E N F O R C E M E N T PA R K I N G S U M M A R Y : 26 V E H I C L E S 2 P U B L I C ATTACHMENT AATTACHMENT A At t a c h m e n t A SI T E P L A N P19III.