HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.202201101
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
January 10, 2022
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
TO JOIN ONLINE:
Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting"
Enter Meeting Number: 2555 964 0897
Enter Password: 81611
Click "Join Meeting"
-- OR --
JOIN BY PHONE
Call: 1-408-418-9388
Enter Meeting Number: 2555 964 0897
Enter Password: 81611
I.WORK SESSION
I.A.Housing - Council Goal: Lumberyard Affordable Housing Design Process Update
1
Page 1 of 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Project Manager
THROUGH: Rob Schober, Capital Asset Director
MEMO DATE: January 7, 2022
MEETING DATE: January 10, 2022
RE: Lumberyard Schematic Design Process Update #2
SUMMARY:
The project team will present information about project-related topics including site scheme
development, architectural precedents, community outreach results, sustainability
recommendations, market study and unit mix recommendations, pathways forward, financial
resources and implementation planning, ongoing areas of study, and land use actions in process.
The project team is seeking Council direction for moving forward based on the specific request of
Council described below.
BACKGROUND:
The packet for Council’s November 1, 2021 work session contained an exhibit which provided
detailed background about project work prior to November 1, 2021. At the November 1, 2021
work session, Council agreed to the project values and vision statement. The project team
presented four parking/site layout schemes - Pivot, Latch, Hinge, and Flange - and received
direction to make modifications prior to seeking community feedback on the four schemes.
Throughout December 2021, community outreach #4 included and a month-long survey and
community feedback opportunity via the Aspen Community Voice website along with an in-
person public outreach event held in downtown Aspen.
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
Council is being asked to provide the following direction during the work session:
1. Can the team proceed with a ‘kit of parts’ approach toward a single site scheme based
on Council input and the community input received?
2. Acceptance of how the design team will approach finalizing a unit mix moving forward
3. Adoption of baseline sustainability goals and direction to further explore sustainability
‘stretch goals’
2
Page 2 of 7
DISCUSSION:
Site Scheme Development:
The design team has made minor modifications to the four site schemes based on Council input
from the November 1 work session as well as related to additional design team stakeholder
meetings and recommendations as noted. Those are described below, and this list also includes
two impactful items from key referral agencies:
• Provide an option for a parking structure along the highway
• Provide better access to daylight where lacking
• Modify underground parking ratios to be 73%, 56%, 40%, 0%
• Increase open/green space where appropriate
• Modification to Hinge buildings to soften the arrival at the site green space
• Elevator access to upper-level units to maximize accessibility (CoA Building Dept.)
• Improvements to fire truck access (Aspen Fire Protection District)
During the work session, the team will walk through the modifications to the four site schemes
and explain the refinements made and the impacts to the project where applicable.
Architectural Precedent Study:
A study of relevant architectural precedents will be presented. This will include existing precedents
in Aspen and the surrounding area as well as an expanded view of pertinent precedents sampled
from around the world, intended to help to illustrate the use of double-loaded corridor building
types and breezeway-access building types as well as examples of similar size buildings with
horizontal articulation and articulating roof elements. The architectural precedent study will
conclude with a look at the potential to blend the base of buildings with the pedestrian streetscape
with stoops, gardens, and foliage.
Community Outreach Results:
The team will review the results to date of Lumberyard community outreach #4 which was
conducted throughout December 2021, including a public event held in downtown Aspen and a
month-long survey and community feedback opportunity via the Aspen Community Voice
website. Analysis will include applicability to project recommendations.
Sustainability:
The team will present the process by which project sustainability recommendations have been
developed. This process began with a review of the City of Aspen’s climate action commitments
and has been further developed through close collaboration with City of Aspen Environmental
Health Climate Action staff and with representation from Aspen’s Community Office for Resource
Efficiency (CORE).
Project sustainability recommendations will be presented in the format of a baseline certification
recommendation and recommended ‘stretch goals’ which will require further research in terms of
3
Page 3 of 7
feasibility. The team assembled a set of ‘must haves’ and ‘nice-to-haves’ as tools for identifying
10 big ideas that should be the focus of the project’s sustainability efforts:
1. Net zero on-site energy (or near net-zero)
2. 100% electric buildings (no on-site fossil fuels)
3. Minimum 15% full EV charging for parking spaces and additional 15% EV-ready spaces
4. Battery storage for partial site back-up power (See Resilient Design #6 below)
5. Equity in project design and in material sourcing
6. Resilient Design to prepare for increasing temperatures, wildfires, power outages, etc.
7. Healthy spaces, air filtration, ventilation, material selection, daylight, acoustics
8. Diversion of construction waste & on-site recycling and composting
9. Requiring third party commissioning and site verification
10. Metering of individual resident utility use
This effort has included an extensive review of sustainability certification programs available, the
opportunities and challenges associated with those certifications, and an analysis of the best
possible fit(s) for this project. As a result of this effort, the project sustainability recommendations
are outlined below:
Recommended Baseline Sustainability Goals:
• Certification to Enterprise Green Communities Plus, which includes WELL Certification
(International WELL Building Institute - IWBI), and which is a prerequisite for many types
of state and federal funding programs
• Net Zero Energy Certification, under any of Passive House PHUIS+ Source Zero, ILFI
Zero Energy Petal, Zero Carbon Petal, or DOE Zero Energy Ready Home
Recommended Stretch Sustainability Goals: (require further research of feasibility)
• Zero Carbon Certification
o Embodied Carbon remaining
o Put project on the map as a leader in carbon reduction
• Living Building Challenge Petal Certification (ILFI Zero Energy Petal, Zero Carbon Petal)
o Highest level of green certification
o Easily tailored to affordable housing project
o Push projects from being less bad to truly regenerative
• Recycled water
o Irrigation, flushing
o Close to plant
o Improves resilience
4
Page 4 of 7
Demographic Study and Program Unit Mix Recommendation:
The attached Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment was prepared by Economic &
Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) for the City of Aspen with the aim of providing recommendations
on the unit and income mix for the Lumberyard affordable housing development.
The report seeks to align the affordable housing development program based on analysis of income
data for households throughout the Roaring Fork Valley (RFV) and job growth within Pitkin
County. The study also examines demographic trends and condition along with other recent
additions to the affordable housing supply in the RFV.
The report reiterates the findings of the 2018 Greater Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study in
terms of the overall scale of the affordable housing need and goes on to additionally conclude
mainly the following:
• There has been a decline in lower income households throughout the Roaring Fork Valley
• Job growth in Pitkin County has been primarily in APCHA Category 3, followed by Category 2
• The project program mix should account for both of those
The recommended unit and income mix includes a range of possibilities while maintaining a total
of 310 housing units. The baseline recommendation considers a higher concentration of 1-bedroom
units, while in the alternate unit mix, EPS recommends that the City consider including more 3-
bedroom units in place of 1-bedroom units for the purpose of adding more bedrooms to the project
while maintaining a total of 310 units and to house more 3-bedroom families or roommate
arrangements.
The recommended program unit mix range includes 310 total units apportioned as follows:
• 212 rental units proportioned as 40% to 49% 1-bedroom units, 37% 2-bedroom units, and 14%
to 24% 3-bedroom units, and across income levels distributed as 22% Category 1, 38%
Category 2, 33% Category 3, and 7% Category 4
• 98 ownership units proportioned as 41% 1-bedroom, 43% 2-bedroom, and 16% 3-bedroom,
and across income levels distributed as 23% Category 2, 34% Category 3, 26% Category 4,
and 17% Category 5.
The project team is seeking the ability to work within this range as an opportunity to optimize the
project as the design process moves toward full schematic design. The program unit mix will be
further refined throughout the remainder of the schematic design process and will be considered
for final adoption at the conclusion of the schematic design process and will be included in the
affordable housing development application.
Pathways Forward:
The project team has considered the Council direction to this point along with the feedback
received from the community engagement efforts to date. The team will present the Site Matrix
5
Page 5 of 7
Comparison in which over 30 evaluation criteria categories have been developed from the input
received. And the four site schemes - Pivot, Latch, Hinge, and Flange - have been ranked in each
criteria category. Results and recommendations from this analysis will be presented and discussed.
The project team is requesting Council agreement to proceed with a ‘kit of parts’ approach to
continuing with the schematic design process toward a single site scheme based on the Site Matrix
Comparison discussion. The proposed ‘kit of parts’ will be presented for discussion. This
recommendation will primarily consist of utilizing the Hinge site layout and parking scheme as a
baseline with proposed modifications and refinements which are consistent with Council and
community feedback throughout the process. Proposed modifications and tools to be utilized in
further developing the Hinge scheme will include techniques discussed during the precedents
section of the presentation, including horizontal and vertical articulation, ground level softening
and creation of neighborhood-like elements at the entry of the ground-level units.
Financial Resources and Implementation Planning:
The project team will review the scope of work and goals related to planning financial resources
and the implementation of the development. This effort is being performed with the aim of
informing a project implementation phasing plan that may likely be proposed to include an initial
access and infrastructure project to be developed by the City of Aspen to prepare the site for
development. This could potentially be followed by private development of two or three affordable
housing implementation phases.
Sources of state and federal funding will be targeted for applicability and potential use to help
leverage the City’s investment, and the financial and development scope of study will be used to
inform City RFQ/RFP efforts to solicit private development involvement, which could also include
ongoing operations and management of housing facilities. This scope of effort will be equally
useful should the City remain in the development role for the implementation of housing facilities.
To develop an approach to the detailed effort with key City management staff, and with the aim of
creating a plan that can be executed to implement the project, the project team has a meeting
scheduled for January 11, 2022 with City of Aspen and APCHA management staff to review the
financial resources and implementation planning scope of work and the associated project
opportunities and challenges. Three such coordination meetings are proposed over the next six
months. Progress updates and recommendations are expected from this effort.
Ongoing Air Quality Study:
City of Aspen Environmental Health Department staff have invested many hours of challenging,
detailed cooperation with the Lumberyard project team. The project team is receiving assistance
from the City’s Air Quality Program Manager, Jannette Whitcomb, in designing appropriate air
quality monitoring, both short term and long term, at the Lumberyard housing project to provide
additional air quality information to decision makers, the project design team as well as the
community. With the assistance from the City’s air quality monitoring consultant, Air Resource
Specialists, we are in receipt of a proposal for a 2022 wintertime VOC snapshot air quality study
to improve knowledge on VOC levels during a worse case wintertime scenario. Staff is preparing
to commission the study and will submit that for Council’s consent soon.
6
Page 6 of 7
Also, in 2022, the City of Aspen Environmental Health and Sustainability Department plans to
expand Aspen’s air quality monitoring program into neighborhoods and outer portions of Aspen
using low-cost fine particulate sensors. The first phase will be installing two sensors at the
Lumberyard housing project site this January/February of 2022. Staff are currently identifying
locations at or near the site for these sensors. This effort will be moving forward with the aim of
informing the affordable housing development application, when appropriate.
Ongoing Noise Study:
The project team is utilizing the noise study information which was previously commissioned to
develop noise mitigation strategies and is considering additional scope of study related to noise
considerations at the project site.
Ongoing Transportation Impact Analysis:
On December 14, 2021, Council approved a scope of study with transportation consultant, Fehr &
Peers, including a Level Two Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) and a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Study which are required for the land use application. The approved scope
of work additionally includes analysis of transportation impacts around the AABC area and
through the SH 82 corridor. This effort will be getting underway with the aim of informing the
affordable housing development application, when appropriate.
Land Use Actions in Process:
The following two land use approval steps need to occur to make the Lumberyard project site
ready for the affordable housing development application. These actions are underway as
described below.
• Annexation of Mini Storage Site: The land use application to annex the 3-acre Mini Storage
site has been submitted to the City of Aspen Community Development Department and
7
Page 7 of 7
reviewed for completeness. Information about the schedule for the public hearing process will
be available shortly.
• Subdividing the Undeveloped Site: The undeveloped, developable portion of the adjacent
Burlingame Lot 1A property needs to be subdivided so that it can be joined with the balance
of the project site for development. The application for this action is being prepared.
While the prerequisite actions described above are in process, the Lumberyard project team plans
to continue to develop the schematic design for affordable housing development with direction
from City Council and as informed by the community outreach to date. When City Council is
satisfied with the resulting schematic design for affordable housing development, such information
will be crafted into a development application and submitted for review and approval. The attached
presentation slides contain both a short- and long-term project timeline.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2022 project budget of $1,500,000.00 was approved by City
Council. Ongoing financial impacts related to project design decisions are TBD.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that Council consider the recommendations and
provide the requested direction as recommended or as modified by a majority of Council.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Presentation slides
Exhibit B – Lumber Yard Market Assessment, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
8
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION I JANUARY 10, 2022
9
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
2CUSHING TERRELL
4.0 TODAY’S DEEP DIVE
4.1 DESIGN
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY RESULTS
4.3 PUBLIC OUTREACH RESULTS
4.6 PATHWAYS FORWARD
4.7 FINANCIAL RESOURCES DISCUSSION
5.0 WHERE WE ARE GOING
3.0 VISION & GUIDING PRINCIPLES
2.0 WHERE WE ARE NOW
1.0 WHERE WE HAVE BEEN
TODAYS TOPICS
10
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
3CUSHING TERRELL
WHERE WE HAVE BEEN
11
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
4CUSHING TERRELL
WHERE WE HAVE BEEN
Recap of 11.01.2021 City Council Work
Session
Our Asks from the Meeting:
• Reach agreement on Vision and definitions of guiding principles.
• Provide feedback on additional explorations or metrics that will assist the council and community in
evaluating success moving forward.
• Confirm the range of parking alternatives presented today are reasonable for the council to allow the
Design Team to present to the community for feedback.
Our Takeaways / Tasks:
• The Guiding Principles presented reflect project values: Prioritize Quality of Life through Livability, Green
Space, Energy Efficiency, and Parking.
• Actionable Feedback
• Push buildings back toward Deer Hill
• Make arrival into site more of a public space
• Explore a scheme with a parking structure similar to those proposed in the site studies
• Overall Hinge and Flange (with anticipated modifications) generally aligned more closely with the
priorities
• Community Feedback sought on modified versions of all four alternatives presented
1.0
22 SPACES
22 SPACES
LATCHPIVOTHINGEFLANGE12
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
5CUSHING TERRELL
TASK AT HAND
Programmatic Elements
• 10.5 Acre Site
• Program of 310 Affordable
Housing Units
• High Density 30+ Units per acre
• On-site resident parking for 432
cars
• Combination of Rental and For
Sale Units
• Phased approach to construction
over 10+ years
• Sustainable and Resilient Design
• Space for Childcare Center on
Site
• Trail Connectivity
• Access to Daylight Views within
Housing Units
• A Public Transit Stop
• Noise Mitigation to adjacent
Highway & Airport
• Elevator Access to Upper Level
Housing Units
• A Safe and Inviting Pedestrian
Experience
OUR CHALLENGES
• Tight spacing between buildings, access to daylight
• Concern about building scale, heights and orientation
• Noise Mitigation
• Elevator access to units
• Innovation through modular design and sustainable building
strategies
• Demographics of target user mix (i.e. “who is this housing
for?”)
• Maintain a schedule for construction to begin in 2024
1.0
13
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
6CUSHING TERRELL
WHERE WE ARE NOW
14
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
7CUSHING TERRELL
What will be covered
Our ask of you:• Address council’s concerns from the previous effort
• Updates on Site Parking Scheme Development
• Preliminary Public Outreach Results
• An Overview of Sustainable Goal Workshops and Recommendations
• An Overview on Demographic Studies and Recommendations on Unit
Mix
• Pathways Forward
Scheme Development:
• Can we proceed with a Kit of Parts approach to a single
scheme based off of your input and community input?
• Acceptance of how the design team will approach finalizing a
unit mix moving forward.
Sustainability:
• Adoption of baseline sustainability program and approach to
Net Zero
• Acceptance of further exploration of Stretch Goals
TODAY’S OBJECTIVES2.0
15
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
8CUSHING TERRELL
Near-term Timeline
Overall Development Timeline
January 10, 2022
Present Public Outreach results to Council
Mid January - December 2022
Land Use Entitlement Process and Planned
Development Documentation
Mid February 2022
Present Progress Update on Schematic Design
to Council
Mid March 2022
Present Final Schematic Design to Council
Late March 2022
Post Final Schematic Design Package on
Project Website
April – September 2022
Design Development, Land Use Application and
Preliminary Budgeting
January 2023 – October 2023
Construction Documents
October 2023 – January 2024
Bidding
February 2024
Construction Start on First Phase
2.0
YOU ARE HERE
2005 2022 2023 2024 ... 20282027202520202019201620112007
City of Aspen Reserves Ability to Develop Housing at 3+ acre “Triangle Parcel” North of BMC West
Use of Housing Funds to Purchase BMC West Property 4+ acres
Annexation of BMC West Property into Aspen City Limits
Lease Assumed by ProBuild/BFS, Extended through 7/31/2025
Community Outreachand Conceptual Design Process Begins
Community Outreach, Conceptual DesignTarget of 310 Units,Purchase of 3-acre Mini Storage Property
Complete Schematic Design, Submit Development Application forApproval Process
Remaining Phases of Housing Construction and Occupancy TBDTarget for First Phase of Housing Construction to Start
Target for Occupancy of First Phase of Affordable Housing
PD Recording,Construction Documents,Building Permit Application Process
Target for Access & Infrastructure Construction Start
Parking Alternatives Analysis, Schematic Design Community Outreach, Mini Storage Annexation Application
2021
16
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
9CUSHING TERRELL
ENGAGEMENT
Public Stakeholder
• December 15th afternoon and evening
Public Engagement events at the
Limelight Hotel - Featuring a Facebook
Live Event
• Ongoing online Survey available for
public input until January 25th
• Aspen Community Voice Project page
provides project updates and solicits
feedback
• Next Chance for Engagement: Schematic
Design posted to Community Voice
Project page
• City Engineering and Public Works
• City Environmental Health and
Sustainability Department
Air Quality
Climate Action Office
Waste & Recycling
• City Parks and Open Space
• City Parking and Transportation
• Community Development
• Building Department/ Accessibility
• Fire Marshall
• APCHA Housing
• Pitkin County Community Development
• John McBride - Aspen Business Center
• CORE
• AVLT
2.0
17
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
10CUSHING TERRELL
VISION & GUIDING PRINCIPLES
18
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
11CUSHING TERRELL
We believe that a strong and diverse year-round community and a viable and
healthy local workforce are fundamental cornerstones for the sustainability of
the Aspen Area community.
We are committed to providing affordable housing because it supports:
• A stable community that is invested in the present and future of the Aspen Area.
• A reliable workforce, also resulting in greater economic sustainability.
• Opportunities for people to live in close proximity to where they work.
• A reduction in adverse transportation impacts.
• Improved environmental sustainability.
• A reduction in down valley growth pressures.
• Increased citizen participation in civic affairs, non-profit activities and recreation
programs.
• A better visitor experience, including an appreciation of our genuine,
lights-on community.
• A healthy mix of people, including singles, families and seniors.
City of Aspen - 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan
(Housing Section) Vision
Philosophy
3.0 VISION
19
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
12CUSHING TERRELL
3.0 VISION
The goal of APCHA is to provide affordable housing opportunities through
rental and sale to persons who are or have been actively employed or self-
employed within Aspen and Pitkin County, and that provide or have provided
goods and services to individuals, businesses or institutional operations,
within Aspen and Pitkin County (prior to retirement and/or any disability),
and other qualified persons as defined in these Regulations, and as they are
amended from time to time.
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority
(2021 APCHA Housing Regulations) Mission Statement
20
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
13CUSHING TERRELL
A stable, thriving affordable neighborhood.
Pedestrian friendly, environmentally sustainable,
connected, and welcoming.
Looks, lives and feels authentically Aspen!
VISION STATEMENT
21
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
14CUSHING TERRELL
3.1 COMMUNITY CONNECTION
Defining Community Connection
Successful neighborhoods are integrated into the fabric of their communities.
A big part of this connection is ensuring ease of access to the diversity of
modes of transit that already exist in Aspen.
Having the ability to select the appropriate mode of transit based on
weather, destination, purpose, or whim allows residents of the Lumberyard to
leave their cars parked for incidental travel.
A connected community can greatly contribute to well-being and
contentment in day-to-day life.
What success might look like:
• Adequate parking on-site so as not to negatively impact neighboring
areas
• Pedestrian walkways throughout and connecting to the ABC and existing
trails
• Maintain and improve the bike paths to the ABC and Annie Mitchell
• Vehicular connections to the ABC and Highway 82 with appropriate
stacking distances
• Space for a possible transit stop
• Space for multimodal transportation alternatives
• Spaces allowing neighbors to engage with one another
22
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
15CUSHING TERRELL
Defining Sustainability
In working with the City of Aspen Environmental
Health & Sustainability department and
Community Office for Resource Efficiency
(CORE), the design team has defined
Sustainability through three pillars: Environment,
Economic, and Social. All three are needed to
create a strong and long lasting community.
Environmental Sustainability - The ability to avoid
depletion and degradation of natural resources
while allowing for long term environmental quality.
Economic Sustainability - The ability of an economy
to support an appropriate level of economic capacity
and activity to serve societal needs.
Social Sustainability - The capacity to create healthy,
accessible, livable places for all.
What success might look like:Energy
• Full Electrified Buildings and Net Zero Energy Site-wide,
including on-site storage
• Forward-looking Electric Vehicle infrastructure
• Leveraging passive solar strategies
• Enhanced building commissioning and metering
Water
• Advanced metering
• Low usage building systems and fixtures
• Native plantings and xeriscaping
Waste & Recycling
• C&D waste management and planning
• Construction activity pollution prevention
Wellness
• Healthy and sustainable building materials
• Dedicated and filtered fresh air
• Increased daylighting and well controlled electric lighting
3.2
SUSTAINABILITY
- City of Aspen Climate Plan.
As history has shown, Aspen has a civic
responsibility to act on behalf of its
constituents, a moral imperative to take
the steps necessary to meet the challenge
of climate change, and the potential to be a
catalyst for meaningful and effective action
around the state, country and world.
23
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
16CUSHING TERRELL
Defining Pedestrian Friendly
3.3 PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY
The goal of this development is to emphasize people over cars. We know
there will be a lot of vehicles housed at the lumberyard along with residents.
Strategies that calm traffic and reduce physical conflicts between cars and
people will be utilized. Providing landscaping or parallel parking along
walkways bordering streets helps provide physical separation.
Pedestrian friendly means thoughtfully designed sidewalks. Walkways should
be connected and well lit. They should be wide enough to allow people to
pass comfortably, especially when pushing strollers, walking dogs, or carrying
that particularly heavy bag of groceries. A walkway lined with trees providing
dappled shade in the summer makes them inviting places to be.
What success might look like:
• Separated sidewalks
• Connected circulation paths throughout the site
• Tree-lined walkways
• Appropriate lighting strategies
• Sidewalks with winter solar access
• Snow storage plans and snow shed safety
24
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
17CUSHING TERRELL
Defining Living Well
At the root of all housing projects, but particularly acute
when discussing affordable communities, is the sentiment
that everyone deserves a good place to live. What does
this mean and how do we get there?
Living Well means providing for community members basic
needs, but also allowing them the opportunity to thrive
and enjoy all the same benefits afforded to all members of
the community.
At a basic level, Living Well means providing a safe
and secure environment. It also means creating an
environment that allows for positive physical and mental
health. For the sake of this effort the Design Team has
categorized items such as indoor air quality, noise and
hazard materials under the ‘sustainability’ tag, but it is
important to note the interconnectedness.
Specific to the way the community members of Aspen at
large live, Living Well might mean creating a community
that does not preclude or challenge one’s ability to enjoy
the natural resources found in abundance in and around
the area.
3.4 LIVING WELL
What success might look like:
• Day-lit indoor spaces with access to views
• Adequate storage space for outdoor lifestyle
equipment as well as maintenance and repair
facilities
• Easy access to parking or public
transportation when running errands
• Quality design & finishes to promote a sense
of ownership- Easy access to outdoor spaces
• Comfortable spaces to allow for gathering of
friends and family
• Quiet, efficient and reliable fixtures and
equipment
• Increased accessibility both on site and within
dwellings
ASPEN TIMES
SKI MAGAZINE
25
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
18CUSHING TERRELL
Defining Authentically Aspen
A practical rugged quality that reflects the alpine lifestyle of this historic mining
town turned ski destination.
SURVEY RESULTS:
3.5 AUTHENTICALLY ASPEN
“I think keeping it mountain contemporary in style fits
best with the ABC area, the aspen ideal, and the appeal
to a broader range of inhabitants”.
“...Needs to have mountain appeal due to entrance to
Aspen and how many people see this every day”.
“Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. The design should
be efficient! Aspen has a long history of building very
inefficient and affordable housing units with excess
emphasis on ‘custom’ design, ‘no 2 units alike’. Housing
resources are limited and outstrip demand.”
“Keep the mountain aesthetic
26
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
19CUSHING TERRELL
COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
27
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
20CUSHING TERRELL
TODAY’S DEEP DIVE
28
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
21CUSHING TERRELL
4.1 DESIGN
Refinement of November 1,2021 Parking Alternatives site schemes based upon City Council feedback
and further Design Team due diligence. Schemes explore various parking strategies and building
typologies and their impact on energy performance, quality of life, and connectivity to the community.
Timeline
NOV. 1, 2021 COUNCIL WORK SESSION: PARKING ALTERNATIVES
JAN. 10, 2022 COUNCIL WORK SESSION: UPDATED PARKING ALTERNATIVES
How to Use this Section
The Design section of this document will focus
on the exploration of how to solve the challenges
of the Lumberyard project. Design explorations,
such as drawings, are a critical tool in which the
team synthesizes information into a relatable
format to spur discussion and further exploration,
but also to drive consensus.
The type and scale of these explorations will
be particular to the moment in time within the
design process, but will always be specific to
conversations and studies necessary to move
the project forward. This section will serve a
chronology of solutions or possibilities presented
to various stakeholder groups.
29
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
22CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
City Council Feedback from
November 1, 2021 Meeting
Potential Project Impacts from Other
Engagement & Due Diligence Efforts
Provide elevator access to all upper units
In considering equity, accessibility and potential future code adaptions and
recommended amendments the design team is exploring how to approach
elevator access to all upper level units.
Refined fire truck access
At the November work session it was noted that a key driving factor to
developing the concept design was to provide fire truck access within 150 feet
of all building facades. The design team has continued to test concepts against
this requirement.
Site Boundaries
Through the entitlement process, particular to the south triangle of the site,
the team has been working to find a final determination of the site boundaries.
Concepts presented today will reflect a change in these boundaries since last
meeting, but without detriment to the project.
• Prioritize Quality of Life through Livability, Green Space, Energy
Efficiency, and Parking.
• Push buildings back toward Deer Hill
• Explore a scheme with a parking structure similar to those proposed in
the site studies
• Overall Hinge and Flange (with anticipated modifications) generally
aligned more closely with the priorities
• Provide better access to daylight where lacking
• Explore if the various schemes can have better distribution of
underground parking
• Break up the large buildings shown in Hinge
• Make arrival into site more of a public space
30
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
23CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
PIVOT SITE CONCEPT
WHAT HAS CHANGED?
• Revised site boundaries at south triangle
• Created a mix of building types to allow for
better separation between buildings to allow
for more access to light and views
• Revised building types to allow for potential
elevator access to upper floor units
NOVEMBER
CURRENT
22 SPACES
0 50’ 100’ 200’
31
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
24CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
Below Grade Parking Greenspace ConnectivityDirect Sun Hours
Winter
DWELLINGS:
PARKING COUNT:
DWELLING COUNT:
PIVOT SITE CONCEPT
42.3%73%0.6 ACRESBELOW GRADE PARKING
316
63
53
432
UNDERGROUND
CARPORT
SURFACE
TOTAL
UPPER UNIT ACCESSED VIA CATWALK
DIRECT ACCESS TO LOWER UNITS
2 STORY SINGLE UNIT
ELEVATOR FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO UPPER LEVEL UNITS
PEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITY
SHARED GREENSPACE
4 STORY BLDG
Units in Pivot scheme are imagined primarily as
two-story structures stacked upon one another
with single-story accessible units located on
grade. The units would be accessed via exterior
stairs located within a covered breezeway
With no units back to back the idea was to
provide all units with access to southern sun light
as well as the ability to have windows on at least
two sides.
The potential for double-height interior spaces
with the two-story units provides an opportunity
for a dynamic space while also limiting the height
necessary for stairs to access the units.
WHY PIVOT? A DIFFERENT TAKE
ON APARTMENT LIVING!
Pivot began inside out and explores two story units that aren’t back-to-back. This approach provides more access to daylight and views as well as opportunities for cross ventilation. Breaking the buildings apart in this manner creates a series of pedestrian streetscapes occupied by front stoops and balconies providing the opportunity for smaller communities to flourish within the Lumberyard.
32
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
25CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
LATCH SITE CONCEPT
WHAT HAS CHANGED?
• Revised site boundaries at south triangle
• Revised building types to allow for potential
elevator access to upper floor units
• Revised frontage road on the northwest site to
allow for more space between buildings within
the site
• Added fire truck access all the way around
perimeter of south triangle of site
• Refined relationship of underground parking
with buildings to be more efficient
NOVEMBER
CURRENT
22 SPACES
0 50’ 100’ 200’
33
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
26CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
Units in Latch scheme are imagined primarily as two-
story structures stacked upon one another with single-
story accessible units located on grade. The units
would be accessed via exterior stairs in front of the
buildings
The units are located back-to-back and side-to-side to
reduce the exposure of the building envelope to the
elements. The exterior stairs in front of the buildings
provide opportunities to break up the massing and
scale of the building while as providing shade and
dedicated exterior patio space to each unit
The potential for double-height interior spaces with the
two-story units provides an opportunity for a dynamic
space while also limiting the height necessary for stairs
to access the units.
WHY LATCH? BIGGER
GREEN SPACES!
Latch strives to provide connected
public-facing open spaces on the site.
Imagine children playing in the central
green space or walking your dog along
the landscaped pedestrian alleys. Latch
buys bigger green spaces by putting
more parking underground. A vehicular
loop skirts the perimeter of the site
providing functional access while
still providing a pedestrian friendly
environment.
Below Grade Parking Greenspace ConnectivityDirect Sun Hours
Winter
DWELLINGS:
PARKING COUNT:
DWELLING COUNT:
LATCH SITE CONCEPT
43.2%56%1.25 ACRESBELOW GRADE PARKING
243
91
98
432
UNDERGROUND
CARPORT
SURFACE
TOTAL
DIRECT ACCESS TO LOWER UNITS
UPPER UNITS ACCESSED VIA CORRIDOR
PEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITY
2 STORY SINGLE UNIT
ELEVATOR FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO UPPER LEVEL UNITS
4 STORY BLDG
34
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
27CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
HINGE SITE CONCEPT
WHAT HAS CHANGED?
• Revised site boundaries at south triangle
• Revised frontage road on the northwest site to
allow for more space between buildings within
the site
• Added fire truck access all the way around
perimeter of south triangle of site
• Removed central road and flipped building
layout to create a viable centralized green
space upon arriving on site
• Shifted some underground parking to surface
for a better balance between the two
NOVEMBER
CURRENT
200'100'50'0
SCALE: 1"=100'-0"
0 50’ 100’ 200’
35
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
28CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
Below Grade Parking Greenspace ConnectivityDirect Sun Hours
Winter
With the Hinge scheme the name of the game is
with the building typology is efficiency. A double
loaded corridor to access the units limits exterior
snow maintenance on sidewalks. With walls and
floors adjoining the exterior envelope exposed to
the elements is also greatly reduced versus other
options. The result is a much smaller footprint on
site, but a much bulkier building
Unit layouts in this scenario would work best as
single level. With corridors and elevators to access
upper floors meeting and exceeding accessibility
standards becomes less of a concern.
The smaller footprint overall on site allows for
the potential of more variation in roof line which
is critical in combating the perceived bulk of a
building this size.
DWELLINGS:
WHY HINGE? NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETSCAPES!
Hinge understands how we live. Our
friends come to visit. We run quick
errands. And sometimes that happens
in a car. Hinge provides parking on the
street to accommodate our daily lives.
It also provides parking underground
for those less frequent trips. Hinge is a
walkable neighborhood with architecture
defining streetscapes on the public side
and cloistered courtyards on the
private side.
PARKING COUNT:
DWELLING COUNT:
HINGE SITE CONCEPT
48.9%40%1.77 ACRESBELOW GRADE PARKING
172
120
140
432
UNDERGROUND
CARPORT
SURFACE
TOTAL
DOUBLE LOADED COR-RIDOR WITH COMMON AREA ON EACH FLOOR
BLDG CONSOLIDATED TO PROVIDE LARGE COMMUNITY GREEN SPACE
1 STORY SINGLE UNIT
ELEVATOR FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO UPPER LEVEL UNITS
4 STORY BLDG
36
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
29CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
FLANGE SITE CONCEPT
WHAT HAS CHANGED?
• Revised site boundaries at south triangle
• Added standalone parking structure within
highway buffer at northwest corner of site to
allow more room within the site
• Addition of parking structure also allowed for
better separation between buildings to allow
more access to light and views
• Revised building types to allow for potential
elevator access to upper floors
NOVEMBER
CURRENT
0 50’ 100’ 200’
37
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
30CUSHING TERRELL
4.2
Units in Flange scheme are imagined as single-
story structures stacked upon one another with
accessible units located on grade. The units
would be accessed via exterior stairs located
within a covered breezeway.
The units are located back-to-back and in most
locations side-to-side to reduce the exposure of
the building envelope to the elements.
Similar to the double-loaded corridor typology
this creates an efficient footprint across the site.
The smaller footprint overall on site in this case
allows for more surface parking, but with an
alternative parking strategy it would also create
opportunity for more variation in roof line.
WHY FLANGE? LET’S BE GOOD
STEWARDS!
Flange explores providing all parking
through a variety of street spaces, lots
and carports maximizing the challenging
site boundaries. With Flange the initial
carbon footprint has a smaller offset
by not constructing an underground
garage. The resultant neighborhood is a
walkable balance between our vehicles
and other modes of connection.
Below Grade Parking Greenspace ConnectivityDirect Sun Hours
Winter
DWELLINGS:
PARKING COUNT:
DWELLING COUNT:
FLANGE SITE CONCEPT
42.4%0%0.5 ACRESBELOW GRADE PARKING
147
140
145
432
PARKING DECK
CARPORT
SURFACE
TOTAL
1 STORY SINGLE UNIT ELEVATOR FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO UPPER LEVEL UNITS
WALK-UP BREEZEWAY ACCESS TO EACH UNIT
PEDESTRIAN STREETS TO CREATE COMMUNITY
4 STORY BLDG
38
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
31CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story Precedents in Aspen
North of Nell - Aspen Aspen Square Hotel - Aspen
39
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
32CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
Hotel Jerome - Aspen
4-Story Precedents in Aspen
Lift One Condos - Aspen
40
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
33CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
North of Nell
0.46 Acres
20,250 Sq.ft
Pivot
0.27 Acres
11,855.5 Sq.ft
Hinge
0.83 Acres
36,324 Sq.ft
Latch
0.16 Acres
7,016 Sq.ft
Flange
0.27 Acres
12,096 Sq.ft
Scale Comparison
41
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
34CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
Green Leaf Lofts - Glenwood Springs
4-Story Precedents around Aspen
Glenwood Green Apartments - Glenwood Springs
42
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
35CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
Six Canyon - Glenwood Springs
4-Story Precedents around Aspen
Roaring Fork Apartments - Basalt
43
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
36CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story Precedents around the World
Huski Apartments - Falls Creek, Australia Oporto Anselmo Apartments - Porto, Portugal
Similar Typologies - Double Loaded Corridor Buildings
44
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
37CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story Precedents around the World
Valenton Housing - Valenton, France The Beverly - Los Angeles, CA
Similar Typologies - Breezeway
45
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
38CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story
Precedents
around the
World
Tributary Rise - Vestavia, AL
Tietgen Residence Hall - Copenhagen, Denmark
• Various sized windows
• Facades broken up by
multiple materials
• Various textures and colors
• Shading elements
• Balconies with varying
depths
New Water Condos Vancouver, Canada
Horizontal
Articulation
46
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
39CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story
Precedents
around the
World
Vertical
Articulation
• Set backs
• A distinct ground floor level
• Recessed/extruding
balconies
Terrace House - Frankfurt, GermanyBenedict Commons - Aspen, CO
Virginia Placer - Telluride, CO Preston on Fourteenth - Mission, Canada
47
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
40CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
4-Story
Precedents
around the
World
Softened
Ground Plane
• Blending the buildings base
with the pedestrian street
• Stoops and private balconies
• Gardens and foliage
• Soft lines
The Three Sisters - Chicago, IL
Legends Park Apartments - Memphis, TN
Venue on 16th - Denver, CO
48
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
41CUSHING TERRELL
4.2 SITE SCHEME DEVELOPMENT
Interior
Corridor
Precedents
Nuselska Apartments - Prague, Czech Republic
ERG 6 Apartments - Jurmala, Latvia
Tietgen Residence Hall - Copenhagen, Denmark
• Access to natural light
• Open central staircase
• A variety of high quality
materials and textures
• Dynamic lighting
• Areas for informal gatherings
or quite reflection
49
50
51
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
43CUSHING TERRELL
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
Our Process to Achieve Success
City of Aspen Commitments:
• 80% reduction in GHG emissions
by 2050 from 2004 baseline.
• This requires a 26% reduction in
the residential sector
The Six Categories of the Climate
Action Plan:
• Reduces Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
• Promotes Equity
• Fosters Economic Sustainability
• Improves Local Environmental
Quality
• Enhances Public Health and Safety
• Builds Resilience
Guiding Principles
Energy & Environment
To move on from current practices to design buildings that
benefit people without sacrificing the ecosystem or needs of
future generations.
A design that takes current UN SDG (Sustainable
Development Goals) goals into consideration. A design that
not only reduces operational impact, but also impact during
the construction process.
Equity
To create a development that enables all people to
participate, prosper, and reach their full potential. Create a
positive impact for people who have been disadvantaged or
excluded.
Resilience
The ability to adapt to changing conditions and maintain
functionality when faced with know environmental and
infrastructural vulnerabilities.
Resilient design to deal with warming climate, wildfires and
drought.
Recommended Targets
1. Near Net Zero On-Site Energy
2. Fully Electrified Buildings
3. Minimum of 15% full EV charging for parking
spaces and additional 15% of EV-Ready Spaces
4. Battery Storage for partial back-up power of site*
5. Equity in project design and in material sourcing
6. Resilient Design to protect against wildfire, power
outages and higher temperatures
7. Focus on healthy spaces through filtration,
material selection, daylight, acoustic and
ventilation
8. Diversion of construction waste & On-Site
Recycling and Composting
9. Requiring Third party commissioning and site
verification
10. Metering of individual resident utility use
Identify The Baseline Stakeholder Goal Setting
• Performance Targets
• Programs or Methodologies
for implementation within
design and construction
• Metrics for evaluation both
now and on-going
• Identify hazards,
vulnerabilities, opportunities
and their impacts
Create Path for
Implementation
52
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
44CUSHING TERRELL
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
Set a Baseline: Adopt Enterprise Green Communities Plus
Why Adopt a Sustainability Certification Program?
Accountability & Structure
• Cementing community goals as project requirements
• Continuity of project goals from design team to contractor to eventual building
operations
• Specific and measurable goals to guide design and measure success
Funding Opportunities
• The majority of tax credit financing programs require projects to achieve one of the
certification programs outlined here
• Supported by the community
Why Choose Enterprise Green Communities Plus?
• Nation’s only green building program design explicitly for affordable housing
• Best aligned with stakeholder / design team project goals
• Interactive design approaches that give residents a voice in the design process
• A path to zero energy with strategies to help all developments move closer to zero
emissions
• Healthy living practices such as ample ventilation and healing-centered design
• Water standards that promote efficiency and protect against lead poisoning
• Resilience requirements that prepare homes for local climate hazards
• Certification process is a good value, versus many other programs, balancing checks
& balances and documentation
Comparison: Certification Programs vs. Project Goals
53
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
45CUSHING TERRELL
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
Net Zero
Alignment with Aspen Climate Targets & Public Engagement
• Aspen’s Climate Action Plan provides a green house gas reduction kit of tools. Pursuing or requiring Net
Zero is included
• Aspen’s Climate Action Plan also sets a 47% reduction of green house gas emissions by 2030. While it is
hard to say how the future developments contribution to this reduction target, it highlights the importance
of being aggressive in reduction targets for the planning of new developments today
• The public engagement efforts during concept design as well as this team’s schematic design, the public
has expressed continued support for Aspen to generally be a leader in sustainability, but also specifically in
pursuing Net Zero energy targets for the Lumberyard project
Recommendation: Minimum 75% On-Site Renewable Energy
Achieving 100% on-site renewable, based upon the limited development of the project to-date, appears to be a
stretch, but achieving close to Net Zero is a possibility. This is achievable with strategies such as highly-insulated
envelope, heat pump technology, passive orientation, and PV located on roof and parking structures.
As further design development occurs, energy modeling will inform the project feasibility of pushing toward
100% energy use offset, but based upon city climate action targets and public feedback, the design team would
recommend proceeding under the assumption of setting a 75% offset baseline.
On-Site Energy Production:
Cost of PV system and any on-site
storage/infrastructure
Building Envelope:
Insulation and window performance
beyond code minimums
Systems:
All-Electric HVAC and plumbing systems
required. Centralized systems may be
required to reduce consumption
Design:
Optimal passive orientation and PV
location drive building design
Services:
Requires alignment with capabilities local
utilities. May be operational hurdles with
resident metering.
Project Impacts
54
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
46CUSHING TERRELL
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
Stretch Goals
Stretch goals may be stretch because of their
feasibility within the project context, or because
at this early point in the projects development not
enough information is available to establish whether
their pursuit is possible.
The programs / targets presented here represent
an extraordinary commitment to leadership in
sustainability. The selected opportunities here are in
line with the project’s goals / targets established in
the design team’s goal setting efforts.
The design team would like to gauge the City
Council’s interest in further investigation in any or all
of these programs / targets.
Zero Carbon Certification
• Only Embodied Carbon remaining
• Put project on the map as a leader in
carbon reduction
Challenges: Cost
Living Building Challenge Petal
Certification
• Highest level of green certification
• Easily tailored to affordable housing
project
• Push projects from being less bad to
truly regenerative
• Cement the City of Aspen as a leader
when it comes to sustainability
Challenges: Cost + Added Complexity
of design process
Recycled water
• Irrigation, Flushing
• Close to plant
• Improves resiliency
55
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
47CUSHING TERRELL
4.4 SUSTAINABILITY
Colorado Reference Projects
Allison Village
Arvada, CO
EGC + ZERH
In Construction
Basalt Vista Affordable Housing Community
Basalt, CO
Net Zero + All Electric
In Construction
1500 N Valentia
Denver, CO
EGC + ZERH
In Construction
Alta Verde
Breckenridge, CO
EGC + ZERH
In Construction
Cadence
Fort Collins, CO
EGC + ZERH
In Construction
56
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
48CUSHING TERRELL
4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY RESULTS
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) had
done a Demographic and Market Assessment
for the City of Aspen with the aim of providing
recommendations on the unit and income mix
for the Lumberyard.
The report seeks to align the affordable housing
development program based on analysis of
income data for households throughout the
Roaring Fork Valley (RFV) and job growth
within Pitkin County. The study also examines
demographic trends and condition along with
other recent additions to the affordable housing
supply in the RFV.
The report reiterates the findings of the 2018
Greater Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study
in terms of the overall scale of the affordable
housing needs.
Summary
• There has been a decline in lower
income households throughout the
Roaring Fork Valley
• Job growth in Pitkin County has been
primarily in APCHA Category 3, followed
by Category 2
• The project program mix should account
for both of those
The Main Takeaways
from this Study
57
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
49CUSHING TERRELL
4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY RESULTS
Change in Renter Households by AMI 2010 - 2019
• Household growth
overwhelmingly in category 3
and above
• Loss of renter households in
category 2 and below
• Employment growth is
among lower-incomes, yet
household growth is among
higher incomes
• Workers being pushed to
other areas
• Housing units are not being
occupied by new job holders
• Household growth
overwhelmingly in
category 3 and above
• Declines in Category
1 & 2
Change in Owner Households by AMI 2010 - 2019
EPS Report Takeaways
CAT. 1 CAT. 1CAT. 2 CAT. 2CAT. 3 CAT. 3CAT. 4 CAT. 4CAT. 5 CAT. 5CAT. RO CAT. RO
58
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
50CUSHING TERRELL
4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY RESULTS
Change in employment by AMI, Market Area
• Market area: Aspen to Glenwood
• Converted wages to household income using
APCHA AMI guidelines
• 1.6 earners per hh
• 39% of job growth under 80% of AMI; 35%
between 80% and 120%
• High demand under 80% of AMI
EPS Report Takeaways
CAT. ROCAT. 5CAT. 4CAT. 3CAT. 2CAT. 1
59
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
51CUSHING TERRELL
4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY RESULTS
The recommended unit and income mix
includes a range of possibilities while
maintaining a total of 310 housing units. The
baseline recommendation considers a higher
concentration of 1-bedroom units, while in the
alternate unit mix, EPS recommends that the
City consider including more 3-bedroom units
in place of 1-bedroom units for the purpose
of adding more bedrooms to the project
while maintaining a total of 310 units and to
house more 3-bedroom families or roommate
arrangements.
Unit Mix Range Recommended Unit Mix
Alternate Unit Mix
60
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
52CUSHING TERRELL
4.6 PATHWAYS FORWARD
ExploreResearch Evolve Recommend
To date the primary objectives of the design team were to: 1. Define what success looks like
overall for the project moving forward; and 2. Research and explore parking alternatives that will
drive forward successful site and building design.
Through council, stakeholder, and public engagement, the design team has been able to evolve
site concepts based upon parking alternatives to a point that allows for evaluation to these
concepts against overall project goals.
The design team will present our comparative analysis of the parking alternatives developed
to this point and will ask for the adoption of a recommended path forward allowing future
development under a single scheme.
61
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
53CUSHING TERRELL
4.6 PATHWAYS FORWARD Site Matrix Comparison
Construction Cost
Project Phasing (Does scheme allow for project to be phased)
Building Envelope (Linear Feet of Exterior Exposed to Elements)
Elevators (Minimum Number of Anticipated Elevators)
Interior Corridors (Cost associated with constructing int. common space)
Operations & Maintenance
Waste Management (Ease of accommodate waste infrastructure)
Snow Storage (For plowing of roads, drives & parking)
Snow Removal (Sidewalks / Exit Stairs & Catwalks)
Elevator Maintenance (Annual maintenance based on number of elevators)
Mechanical Systems (Ability to centralize systems / simplify maintenance)
Parks Dept Maintained Green Spaces
x45 x46x31Baseline
Baseline
12 20106
x2.15 x1.79 x1.44Parking (Relative cost based on mix of parking types)
Good Best BestBest
Good Best BetterBetter
Good Best Better
NoNoNo
Better
No Yes
Yes YesYesYes
NoNo
Streets Dept Maintained Streets (Paved areas likely designated as streets v. parking lots)
Better Best GoodBetter
Better Best GoodBetter
PIVOT
PROJECT FEASIBILITY
LATCH HINGE FLANGE
Community Connection
PIVOT
Buffer to Annie Mitchell (Building at within Triangle Adjacent to Annie Mitchell)
Parked Entirely on Site
GUIDING PRINCIPLES LATCH HINGE FLANGE
On-Site Daycare
Sustainability
Net-Zero Ability (Ability of on-site PV to offset energy consumption)
Stormwater (Ease of Surface Detention v. Underground Detention)
Access to Daylight (Direct Sun Hours at all S/E/W Unit Faces)
Pedestrian Friendly
Concentrated Green Space
Trail Connectivity
Public Transit Stop
Safe Site Circulation (street / driveways limited in traversing site)
Living Well
Universal Design (Units can be accessed by elevator and/or from inside)
Access to Views (Uninterrupted view >60' before adjacent structure)
Outside of Noise Buffer (Units Outside 200' buffer from Hwy 82)
Mechanical Noise (Ability for Centralized Systems vs. Individual Units)
Authentically Aspen
Design Innovative (Ability for architectural variation)
Potential for some 3-story Roofs
Mass & Scale (Option w/ Smallest Structures)
Exterior Accessed Units (Can units be access without using an interior corridor)
Parking Near Unit (Parking Distributed Proportionately w/ Units)
Storage At/Near Parking (Cover Parking w/ Room to Add Storage Space)
42.3%
0.6 acres 0.5 acres1.25 acres 1.77 acres
Mixed
Most
Best Best GoodBetter
Better Best
Most
AllAllAll Most
Half
BetterBetter
Good Best BetterBetter
Better Better GoodBest
Better Best GoodBest
Better
Unlikely Unlikely UnlikelyLikely
Best GoodGood
Best Good BetterBetter
Most Most MostHalf
MostAllAll
MixedUnderground
No No
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Some Some
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Surface
43.2%48.9%42.4%
Best Better GoodBetter
Yes
Construction Cost
Project Phasing (Does scheme allow for project to be phased)
Building Envelope (Linear Feet of Exterior Exposed to Elements)
Elevators (Minimum Number of Anticipated Elevators)
Interior Corridors (Cost associated with constructing int. common space)
Operations & Maintenance
Waste Management (Ease of accommodate waste infrastructure)
Snow Storage (For plowing of roads, drives & parking)
Snow Removal (Sidewalks / Exit Stairs & Catwalks)
Elevator Maintenance (Annual maintenance based on number of elevators)
Mechanical Systems (Ability to centralize systems / simplify maintenance)
Parks Dept Maintained Green Spaces
x45 x46x31Baseline
Baseline
12 20106
x2.15 x1.79 x1.44Parking (Relative cost based on mix of parking types)
Good Best BestBest
Good Best BetterBetter
Good Best Better
NoNoNo
Better
No Yes
Yes YesYesYes
NoNo
Streets Dept Maintained Streets (Paved areas likely designated as streets v. parking lots)
Better Best GoodBetter
Better Best GoodBetter
PIVOT
PROJECT FEASIBILITY
LATCH HINGE FLANGE
Community Connection
PIVOT
Buffer to Annie Mitchell (Building at within Triangle Adjacent to Annie Mitchell)
Parked Entirely on Site
GUIDING PRINCIPLES LATCH HINGE FLANGE
On-Site Daycare
Sustainability
Net-Zero Ability (Ability of on-site PV to offset energy consumption)
Stormwater (Ease of Surface Detention v. Underground Detention)
Access to Daylight (Direct Sun Hours at all S/E/W Unit Faces)
Pedestrian Friendly
Concentrated Green Space
Trail Connectivity
Public Transit Stop
Safe Site Circulation (street / driveways limited in traversing site)
Living Well
Universal Design (Units can be accessed by elevator and/or from inside)
Access to Views (Uninterrupted view >60' before adjacent structure)
Outside of Noise Buffer (Units Outside 200' buffer from Hwy 82)
Mechanical Noise (Ability for Centralized Systems vs. Individual Units)
Authentically Aspen
Design Innovative (Ability for architectural variation)
Potential for some 3-story Roofs
Mass & Scale (Option w/ Smallest Structures)
Exterior Accessed Units (Can units be access without using an interior corridor)
Parking Near Unit (Parking Distributed Proportionately w/ Units)
Storage At/Near Parking (Cover Parking w/ Room to Add Storage Space)
42.3%
0.6 acres 0.5 acres1.25 acres 1.77 acres
Mixed
Most
Best Best GoodBetter
Better Best
Most
AllAllAll Most
Half
BetterBetter
Good Best BetterBetter
Better Better GoodBest
Better Best GoodBest
Better
Unlikely Unlikely UnlikelyLikely
Best GoodGood
Best Good BetterBetter
Most Most MostHalf
MostAllAll
MixedUnderground
No No
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Some Some
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Surface
43.2%48.9%42.4%
Best Better GoodBetter
Yes
62
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
54CUSHING TERRELL
4.6 PATHWAYS FORWARD
Core Concepts from Hinge!
Why is Hinge the best launching pad?
• Strongest alignment to Guiding Principles per initial metrics
• A reduction of underground parking by 51 - 60% from concept design
• Best access to daylight & views / separation between buildings
• Most cost effective... energy efficiency, fewest number of elevators, shortest building
perimeter, relationship to underground parking
• Provides flexibility with further development of parking & building design
Strategies for Success
Already in place with Hinge:
• Fewer and more condensed buildings producing larger consolidated green space
• Balanced approach to parking between underground and surface
• Parking directly related to building footprint
• Centralized and public facing green space
• Buildings outside of noise buffer to highway/airport
‘Kit of Parts’ for further development:
• Use efficiency of building layout on site plan to leverage horizontal and vertical building
articulation
• Mix and Match building typologies to allow for ground level entry direct into unit
• Soften ground plan through layering landscaped areas and patios as transitions to building
• Create light-filled and dynamic interior common spaces
• Explore opportunity for more Green Space due to ability to increase underground parking
+
63
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
55CUSHING TERRELL
4.7 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
• Review of market information
• Unit mix, rent and income assumptions
• Rental and for-sale housing options
• Underwriting assumptions
• Rent and income requirements
• Comparison with APCHA standards
• Phasing and schedule provide input to
project schedule
• Flow of funds and phasing work
• Timing of outside funding resources
• Site and infrastructure development
• Optimizing funding sources to leverage
Aspen’s investment
• Opportunities to attract private investment
• Possible developer RFP
Scope & Goals
Prepare Sources and Uses Statement Identify Funding Sources from State
and Federal Programs
Development Strategy
64
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
56CUSHING TERRELL
4.7 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Schedule for City Department
Head Coordination and Input
Focus for January 11th Financial
Resources Meeting with City Council
• Budgeting - Cost estimate for all aspects of
the project
• Phasing of work and flow of funds
• Beginning with site and infrastructure
development
• Leveraging other funding sources
• Timing of city fund to support this and other
affordable housing initiatives
• Funding strategy and underwriting
assumptions
Late March 2022 June 2022January 11, 2022
Third MeetingInitial Meeting Second Meeting
65
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
57CUSHING TERRELL
COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
66
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
58CUSHING TERRELL
WHERE ARE WE GOING
67
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
59CUSHING TERRELL
WHERE ARE WE GOING
Our Ask of You Today Moving Forward
Sustainability:
• Adoption of baseline sustainability program and approach to net zero.
• Acceptance of further exploration to reach goals.
Scheme Development:
• What kit of parts can we move forward with to develop a single scheme?
• Acceptance on range of unit mix and awareness of impacts moving
forward.Mid February: Council Work Session Presenting Design Progress
The design team will look to present a single refined site scheme that will
look for the development in the areas of site infrastructure and logistics.
At this time the design team will also present preliminary building
concepts looking for feedback on final unit mix as well as a more informed
conversation on architectural character.
YOU ARE HERE
2022 2027 2028 ...20242023 2025
Complete Schematic Design, Submit Development Application forApproval Process
Remaining Phases of Housing Construction and Occupancy TBDTarget for First Phase of Housing Construction to Start
Target for Occupancy of First Phase of Affordable Housing
PD Recording,Construction Documents,Building Permit Application Process
Target for Access & Infrastructure Construction Start
68
thank you.thank you.
303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 105
Denver, CO 80203
720.359.1416
cushingterrell.com
69
ASPEN LUMBERYARD
61CUSHING TERRELL
APPENDIX
70
Aspen Lumberyard Communication Plan
What:When:Who:
Establish Ultimate Goal + Identify Key Audience (and adjust timing/content accordingly)complete TEAM
On-line/Hybrid/In-Person Meeting TBD 10-Dec-21 TEAM
Back of House Set Up Sep 2 - Oct 1 C1D/DENISE
Social Media Platforms: Twitter, FB, Instagram, YouTube)
Website: city of aspen.com/lumberyard and https://www.aspencommunityvoice.com/lumberyard.com
Access & Ready Aspen Community Voice for updated content complete Denise
Aspen Community Voice (C1D to provide content)25-Oct Denise/C1D
Aspen Community Voice (Denise to upload content)25-Oct Denise/C1D
Obtain Email List complete Denise work with Chris
Liase w/ local newspapers (Aspen Times (Carolyn) , Daily News (Megan Weber), Snowmass Sun, and radio stations Sept 1 - ongoing Denise
Check with Chris on the Lumberyard.com and work on transition plan 24-Sep Denise
Check with Chris on budget for printed fact sheet update Denise
Review other City of Aspen campaigns so we can adjust our schedule as needed for optimal timing complete Denise
Identify and organize stakeholders for internal, smaller meetings to be scheduled 25-Oct TEAM
Develop SD Options August 19 - Oct 22 TEAM
Work Session #1 w/ Council 1-Nov-21 TEAM
50% SD Parking Alternative Options to be presented to Council
Production of Graphics & Content Messaging for Outreach 15-Oct-21
Design Content to Aspen Community Voice (Bang the Table) Account 25-Oct CT/C1D
Upload Content to Aspen Community Voice (Bang the Table) Account 25-Oct Denise
Format digital flyer to be embedded into email TBD C1D
Format digital flyer to be used in Social Media platforms 15-Nov C1D
Create email blast 25-Oct C1D
Identify Influencers 15-Oct C1D/Denise
Create Transparency for Council Worksession 15-Oct-21
C1D Share through our channels as
well
Aspen Community Voice and City Website Content goes Live 29-Oct Denise
Update SD materials to Aspen Community Voice (provided in council packet is posted)25-Oct C1D
Email Blast TBD Denise
Social Media Blast (1 day before Council Work Session)29-Oct Denise
Campaign Launch + Request for Feedback for PUBLIC MEETING (30 days before Public Meeting)Nov 4 - Dec 9
Media pitch or press release in this window - share AVC site and info on public meeting 23-Nov Denise
Email Blast Sent (2 weeks before Public Meeting) 1-Dec Denise/C1D
Social Media Blast (2 weeks before Public Meeting) 1-Dec Denise
Newspaper Ad Sent (2 weeks before Public Meeting) 1-Dec Denise
Press Release 6-Dec Denise
71
Newspaper Ad Sent (1 week before Public Meeting) 8-Dec Denise
Radio Ad (1 week before Public Meeting)8-Dec Denise
Tricolor: facebook and radio to target the latino community 8-Dec Jen/Denise
Social Media Blast (1 week before Public Meeting)6-Dec Denise
Aspen Times Article 13-Dec Aspen Times
Social Media Blast (1 day before Public Meeting)14-Dec Denise
Newspaper Ad Sent (1 day before Public Meeting) 14-Dec Denise
Email Blast Sent (1 day before public meeting)14-Dec Denise
Radio Ad (1 day before Public Meeing)14-Dec Denise
Tricolor: facebook and radio to target the latino community 14-Dec Jen/Denise
11x17 Store Front Posters in Aspen and Up and Down the Valley
In-Person Meeting at Limelight (12-2pm and 6-8pm) + Mirror Bang the Table Site 15-Dec-21 TEAM
Open House Style Event(what we heard previously/what feedback specifcally we are looking for now/why we need to take action and
make decisions now).
Digital Survey to be translated to Survey Monkey with link to ACV 12/15/2021 C1D
All ACV Materials to be updated due to C1D 12/10 12/10/2021 CT
Survey Push Nov 4 - Dec 9
5x7 Postcards are out and about at gas stations, bus stops, etc. up and down the valley for SURVEY 20-Dec C1D
Email Blasts (ACV, ACRA, APCHA, KIDS FIRST) and Social Media to push the survey 22-Dec-21 Denise
Email Blast Sent 22-Dec Denise (include C1D)
Social Media Blast 22-Dec Denise
Tricolor-Samuel facebook + radio (ongoing?)TBD Denise
Email Blast Sent (1 week before survey closes) 5-Jan Denise
Social Media Blast (1 week before survey closes) 5-Jan Denise
Aspen Times Article 12-Jan Aspen Times
Email Blast Sent 12-Jan Denise
Social Media Blast 12-Jan Denise
Social Media Blast (1 day before survey closes)14-Jan Denise
Newspaper Ad Sent (1 day before survey closes) 14-Jan Denise
Email Blast Sent (1 day before survey closesg)14-Jan Denise
Ad/info in the Aspen Chamber Resort Association newsletter 1/5-1/15 Denise
Ad/info in the Pitkin County Newsletter 1/5-1/15 Denise
CGTV add on the local TV station with QR code to take the survey 1/5-1/15 Denise
Nudge to Council to Push 1/5-1/15 Denise
Door Hangers to advertise survey?1/5-1/15 Denise/C1D
Google Advertising 1/5-1/15
Data Collection Dec 21-Dec 30
Close data collection 10 days after Public Meeting 31-Dec
Compile data in excel - Summary Report/ACV - summary report (feedback loop throughout process is critical)Dec 21-Jan 5 C1D
Eblast prior to council so interested parties know to watch Denise
Present Outreach Results to Council 10-Jan-22
Post updated design to Aspen Voice Denise/C1D
72
Refine SD option(s)Jan 13- Feb 3
Post updated design to Aspen Voice Denise/C1D
Present Updated SD Option(s) to Council 9-Feb-21
Refine Preferred SD Option Feb 9 - Mar 1
Post updated design to Aspen Voice- POSSIBLE 2ND PUBLIC OUTREACH IF NECESSARY Denise/C1D
Present Final SD Plan to Council 10-Mar-21
Final SD Graphic Output 24-Mar-21
Animated flythrough of the final design option & other still renderings posted to the website
73
CUSHING TERRELL / 1
74
CUSHING TERRELL / 2
ASPEN LUMBERYARD SUSTAINABILITY OUTLINE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Goal of Document
Existing Targets and Adaptions
Climate Action Plan
Definitions
Goal Setting
Developing Guiding Principles
Must-Haves/ Nice-To-Haves
Targeted Goals
Net Zero
Electrified Buildings
EV Charging
On-Site Storage
Design for Enhanced Resilience
Comparison of Must-Have List and Climate Goals
Implementation
Creating a Path
Standards-
LEED BD+C Multifamily
LEED Neighborhood Development
Enterprise Green Communities w/ WELL Plague + Zero Energy Ready Home
Living Building Challenge Petal
PHIUS- Passive House
Net Zero Energy
WELL Certification
Summary
Recommended Path Forward
References
Appendix
75
CUSHING TERRELL / 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Aspen has placed itself as a leader when it comes to its commitments around sustainability.
Home of the Ideas Festival, Aspen has stated that it sees tackling climate change as a moral imperative
and wants to lead the way on what can be done to address the issue. And the community agrees in
setting the bar high for sustainability, as they have expressed in community engagement surveys. As
such, the City of Aspen developed a detailed Climate Action Plan in 2017 that serves as the guiding
framework for the cities ambitious goal to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050 to meet global climate
reduction targets. These targets contribute to meeting the 2 degrees Celsius limit as set by the Paris
Climate Accords and reduce the potential local impacts as outlined in the 2014 Climate Change and
Aspen Executive Summary. Aligning with the targets and community goals above, the Aspen Lumberyard
project aspires to meet these demands and be an example for the community for sustainable
development
The outline below is intended to take the information received from key stakeholders, city sustainability
action plans, and evaluate the potential solutions to the communities’ climate goals and ideas of project
success. This will be done by evaluating the benefits, challenges, and impacts of these solutions. Below
we have outlined what are the most important goals for the project from the stakeholders, how it aligns
to the GHG Reduction Kit, and provide a deeper dive analysis of the key goals. Given the early stage of
this project there are some unknowns that may impact some of the goals, primarily the coordination
needed with Aspen Electric.
Due to the very long lifespans of buildings, there is a very significant lock-in risk pointing to the urgency
of ambitious and immediate measures. Looking at the above targets set by the city & organizations-
designing to Net Zero Energy operation and no fossil fuel use for a project with a construction timeline
of later this decade will fit within what is required for climate goals and code. Some of the proposed
goals in this outline will be considered standard practice in the future. However, that does not mean this
project’s recommendations are not considered sustainable, as what we are proposing is currently rare.
Being in alignment with climate goals and reduction targets sets an example that it is possible to achieve
these ambitious goals in affordable housing and creates a path to follow for other projects.
With a project of this magnitude, complexity, and aspirational goals- having a well-developed
framework for success will help the client, design team, and contractor stay on course. Using a
certification system that has already laid out the path for many of the goals the project is looking to
achieve will help simplify the process. With ambitious and complex goals- having performance tracking,
third party verification and review gives the City some peace of mind. It allows issues to be noticed early
and provides proof of success.
76
CUSHING TERRELL / 4
The two main types of building standards are Performance-Based and Design/Construction review
based. We have selected six different certification systems for evaluation. The three wholistic building
certifications are:
LEED- is the most well-known and widely used whole building certification system in the world
Enterprise Green Communities- is a whole building certification program that is specifically design for
affordable multi-family housing projects
Living Building Challenge- is a performance-based certification system that is the most stringent and
considered the highest level of green certification in the world today
The LEED and Enterprise Green Communities rating systems are mostly design review-based with some
3rd party verification. The three other certifications that will be mentioned are more narrow in focus and
not as holistic as above are:
WELL- focuses on setting standards for healthy buildings
Passive House (PHIUS)- focuses solely on envelope construction
Net Zero Certification- verifies project site is a 100% powered by renewable energy
All three are complimentary to the whole building certification and certification is solely based on
meeting set performance based criteria.
For a project that will be built later this decade, this design team must look to the future and design a
community that will align with what is needed when the project is constructed from a GHG emissions,
resiliency, and equity standpoint. It must align with local goals, climate change targets, Climate Action
Plan Requirements, and stakeholder requests.
The ten items a below are the recommended key sustainability goals for the project:
• Near Net Zero On-Site Energy
• Fully Electrified Buildings
• Minimum of 15% full EV charging for parking spaces and additional 15% of EV-Ready Spaces
• Battery Storage for partial back-up power of site*
• Equity in project design and in material sourcing
• Resilient Design to protect against wildfire, power outages, and higher temperatures
• Focus on healthy spaces through filtration, material selection, daylight, acoustics and ventilation
• Diversion of construction waste & On-Site Recycling and Composting
• Requiring Third party commissioning and site verification
• Metering of individual resident utility use
Meeting these goals will be a challenge but is achievable. There but a handful of small projects
nationwide that have completed a Net Zero Affordable Housing development. In order to meet the 10
listed goals above and others listed in the must-have list, which are included as part of our
recommended path. We recommend a whole building certification system that can provide a framework
and path to aid the city and design team in being successful in our sustainability strategy. Based on the
77
CUSHING TERRELL / 5
information on the certification listed above, the scoring based on alignment, and the review of
certification prerequisites- we would recommend the Enterprise Green Communities Plus Certification
with Achieving Zero Energy as our target. Achieving this certification prerequisites and select optional
points will meet a majority of the listed goals above and in the “must-have” list.
We believe the recommendations outlined will help meet local climate targets, meet the wishes of
residents, provide quality affordable housing to occupants, and lead the way for a what is possible in
sustainable affordable housing.
*Further study is needed for this goal. See Design for Resilience section for more informati on
78
CUSHING TERRELL / 6
INTRODUCTION
Goal of Outline: To take information received from key stakeholders and present potential solutions to
communities’ ideas of project success for the Aspen Lumberyard project. Let them know the potential
challenges, impacts and benefits of these solutions. By end of report, provide a recommended path to
meet their goals and provide additional solutions to go above and beyond in regards to sustainability.
This report aims to develop on the goals and feedback of the community to create guidelines and
ultimately solutions to the needs of community regarding sustainability for the Lumberyard project. The
City of Aspen has set ambitious sustainability targets – committing to the following reduction targets from
2004 baseline:
• 30% reduction in GHG emissions by 2020
• 47% reduction in GHG by 2030- *Approximately based on GHG reduction chart interpolation*
• 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050
The residential building sector currently makes up 31% of GHG emissions in Aspen. Following modeling
exercises done as a part of the Climate Action Plan (CAP), if all GHG Reduction Toolkit measures were
implemented, GHG emissions could reduce by 71% by 2050 . This means that most or all of the project
relevant measures listed related to residential energy, waste, and transport sector s of the GHG reduction
toolkit should be implemented to be on track for CAP goals. These measures will be described in more
detail later.
As stated in the City of Aspen Climate Plan-
“As history has shown, Aspen has a civic responsibility to act on behalf of its constituents, a
moral imperative to take the steps necessary to meet the challenge of climate change, and the
potential to be a catalyst for meaningful and effective action around the state, country, and
world.”
The community is strongly aligned with the City's climate goals as revealed through the following
community engagement surveys results–
“The public is strongly supportive of raising the bar in energy efficiency and sustainability, and
a majority are also supportive of pursuing a sustainability certification, such as LEED or
similar programs”
These desires and commitments come on the heels of the very real impacts that climate change currently
poses and the future impacts that need to be taken into account for a project that is expected to be
around for generations. According to the 2014 Climate Change and Aspen Executive Summary Report
current climate trajectory puts Aspen 3 degrees Fahrenheit warmer by 2030 and 10 degrees Fahrenheit
warmer by 2090 compared to the 1980-1999 baseline.
79
CUSHING TERRELL / 7
This change in climate will:
• Put greater pressure on existing water sources
• Increased fire risk
• Reduced Hydroelectric generating potential
• Alterations to air quality
• Increased cooling load and reduction in heating load of buildings
• Lengthened and growing allergy season
These impacts are the reason that resiliency and anticipating future needs is one the three guiding
principles for the project and will be expanded upon later in the document.
The City of Aspen Climate Action Plan has six main categories that it addresses. These categories and the
information above will be taken into account when making recommendations. We will outline
recommendations based on alignment with project “must-haves”, City climate goals, and anticipated
impacts to the site from climate change.
• Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Promotes Equity
• Fosters Economic Sustainability
• Improves Local Environmental Quality
• Enhances Public Health and Safety
• Builds Resilience
80
CUSHING TERRELL / 8
DEFINITIONS
DEFINING SUSTAINABILITY
The City of Aspen Environmental Health & Sustainability department and the Community Office for
Resource Efficiency (CORE), and the design team has defined sustainability through three pillars:
Environment, Economic, and Social. All three are needed to create a strong and long-lasting community.
Environmental Sustainability - The ability to avoid depletion and degradation of natural resources while
allowing for long term environmental quality.
Economic Sustainability - The ability of an economy to support an appropriate level of economic capacity
and activity to serve societal needs.
Social Sustainability - The capacity to create healthy, accessible, livable places for all.
These three pillars are the foundation for how we will define sustainability and serve as the basis for
evaluating project success.
81
CUSHING TERRELL / 9
GOAL SETTING
DEVELOPING GUIDING PRINCIPLES
It is important for a project to identify keys areas of importance that the design team and client keep in
focus so that we can prioritize design directions in line with what the community wants. Below we have
developed three guiding principles that will be the focus of the project’s sustainability efforts. All solutions
listed below are intended to meet atleast one of the three principles.
Energy & Environment: To move on from current practices to design buildings that benefit people without
sacrificing the ecosystem or needs of future generations. A design that takes current UN SDG (United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals) goals into consideration. A design that not only reduces
operational impacts, but also impacts during the construction process.
Equity: To create a development that enables all people to participate, prosper, and reach their full
potential. To create a positive impact for people who have historically been disadvantaged or excluded.
Resilience: The ability to adapt to changing conditions and maintain functionality when faced with known
environmental and infrastructural vulnerabilities. Resilient design to deal with warming climate, wildfires
and drought.
82
CUSHING TERRELL / 10
MUST-HAVES LIST
In conversations with key stakeholders during our September 2021 Sustainability Charette, they provided
Cushing Terrell with a list of “must-haves” that are deemed critical to the project and an additional list of
“nice-to-haves” to include in the product design. This list is provided in the table below. We will describe
in further detail what are the benefits, challenges, risks, and impact of different must-have list items. We
will describe only the most impactful and potentially most costly of the “must-have” goals.
MUST-HAVES RELATED ASPEN CAP GHG REDUCTION KIT
ACTION ITEM
Energy
Net Zero energy (On-site renewable) • Support low-income housing with energy
upgrades and on-site renewable energy.
(e.g., Colorado’s Affordable residential
energy program)
• Require Net Zero (or near Net Zero) for all
new development
• Pilot micro grid infrastructure to create
districts that produce the same amount of
energy they consume
• Adopt net zero energy conservation code
• Incentivize above code buildings and
adopt latest codes with specific local
requirement to exceed minimum
standards
• Provide regulatory and zoning relief for
projects that meet verifiable high energy
standards (LEED, Net Zero Energy
Building, etc.)
Fully electrified buildings • Convert natural gas space and water
heating to electric or renewable energy
• Coordinate with efforts to adopt high
efficiency electric heating systems
Battery Storage • Invest in energy storage to address the
intermittency of wind and solar
Install meters to provide aggregated utility data • Implement sub-metering for multi-family
buildings for more granular building
energy data
• Partner with utilities to improve tenants’
access to energy-usage date
MEP
Heat Recovery Ventilators (HRVs )
83
CUSHING TERRELL / 11
Cooking venting to outside
Garage pollutant protection (if garage is
underground)
Radon resistant construction
Water
Building level water metering
Highly efficient indoor water systems
Transportation
EV Charging Stations
• Level 2 EV charging stations (number of
stations to correlate with projected EVs on
the market in ~2030)
• Minimum 2 fast chargers
• Make additional EV ready spaces for easy
expansion of charger installation
• Require EV charging stations (or EV
readiness) in all new multifamily
developments
Bike rack / storage / parking / “fix-it” station • Expand bicycle network to better connect
neighborhoods and work centers to
public transit
Architecture
Passive Orientation
Daylighting and Quality Views
Acoustic performance
• proximity to airport and highway;
neighbor to neighbor; building plumbing
and mechanical systems
Sustainable building materials
• Environmental Product Declarations
Site/Civil
Use native landscaping / xeriscaping
Light pollution reduction
Construction
Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
Fundamental System Testing and verification • Require and incentivize measurement and
verification
Building commissioning
Contractor training
Training for building managers post-construction
Waste Management
Outdoor and indoor storage and collection of
recyclables and compost
• Require composting through codes or
regulations
84
CUSHING TERRELL / 12
C&D waste management & planning
Resilience & Equity
Social equity within the supply chain
• Other social/racial equity project
integration
Design for enhanced resilience
• Heating/cooling ventilation for wildfire
smoke
• Integrate AC into projects if future AC
need is anticipated
85
CUSHING TERRELL / 13
NET ZERO CAPABLE ON-SITE ENERGY
Recommended Goal: To provide on-site solar PV to meet near a 100% of the buildings electrical needs
averaged through the year. Provide solar PV on all buildings and potential parking garages.
Opportunities: Lower resident utility bills to near zero, reducing strain on grid, ensuring a carbon neutral
operation, resiliency in face of grid failure
Challenges: Potential challenges with implementing a PV installation of this size on the Aspen Electric grid.
More discussion with utility needed, large upfront cost for PV panels and modification to buildings to
achieve low EUI, all roofs and covered parking will need to be covered in Solar PV to be within reach of
goal, building orientation will need to align if ideal solar production angle.
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
• Well insulated building envelope above code minimums
• Passive building orientation maximizing southern exposure and limiting West/East windows
• High Performance windows well above code minimums
• Tightly sealed envelope limiting air infiltration that requires non-standard construction techniques
• High efficiency HVAC systems above code minimums
• High Efficiency appliances
In order to achieve Net Zero Energy for a project site, the total source energy delivered must be equal to
the total energy consumed during a one-year time period. Times of seasonal over production of
renewables will be balanced out by periods of production. The goal for this project is for 100% of the
energy needs to be taken care of by on-site production. The constraint of on-site production limits the
amount of PV that is produced, which places a cap on how much energy the site can use. Thus, the design
layout and systems used are critical for being able to meet this goal. When loo king at designing a Net
Zero project, the metric of energy use intensity (EUI) for the building is used to determine how efficient
the building is and how much solar is needed. EUI is the energy usage on a per square foot basis over the
course of a year. Having a low EUI design allows for the reduction in solar PV needed, thus saving on
capital expenditure. The steps to creating a low EUI design is to first look at optimizing the architecture -
improving the layout, limiting unnecessary fenestration, and improving envelope performance. Based on
the climate, location and building type the strategies th at could be most impactful are a passive solar
design with majority of windows south facing, highly efficient windows, selectively placed thermal mass,
pitched roof, and super insulation. After architectural evaluations and optimizations are performed, the
next step is to optimize efficiencies in the MEP systems. Common comparisons are reviewing biggest
impact equipment or systems first and investigating how those could be reduced. Then moving into to
the smaller impact items for efficiencies. For multi-family housing, over 60% of energy consumption is
86
CUSHING TERRELL / 14
through space heating and water heating. So that should be the first focus for efficiency improvements ,
followed by air conditioning.
A high-level analysis of the site looking at potential PV production yielded a shortfall of solar production
using just the residential roofs alone with code baseline design and equipment. Based these findings, it is
estimated that the site will need to cut energy usage in half from baseline code and provide additional PV
on parking stalls or a parking garage. Therefore, achieving Net Zero On-Site design is not impossible, but
designing a net zero capable building will require a dedicated focus on optimizing building design and all
energy uses on the site.
As mentioned above, achieving Net Zero means there is a balance in production and consumption of
electricity. Solar production is typically at its peak during mid-morning to mid-afternoon whereas, peak
household energy consumption occurs early morning and evening. This imbalance means that there will
be times when solar production is exported to the grid due to over production and times when the site
will be pulling from the grid to meet energy demands. Having a utility that allows for net metering is
needed for a net zero project if battery storage is not used.
There are many benefits associated with achieving an on-site net zero energy project. First, it allows for
Aspen Lumberyard the opportunity for Fixed vs Variable Energy Utility Rate energy utility costs for
residents which provides them with greater financial security not having to pay that expense and deal with
fluctuating bill prices based on the season. It creates energy independence from the grid which shields
residents from the impact or raising utility prices, power outages, and reduced hydroelectric production.
And lastly it falls in line with local and international climate goals.
IMPACTS
However, there are some impacts to the project that should also be taken into account. The obvious first
impact is the cost to install a PV system and design changes to lower the building EUI. A PV system of this
size will have substantial cost implications to the project. There will also be architectural considerations,
such as, the visual impact of the PV panels on the site, changes to massing to be optimized for PV
production, and a number of design decisions being driven by energy consumption.
The anticipated utility company for the project is Aspen Electric which since 2015 has maintained a 100%
renewable electricity profile and competitive rates. By showing the economic viability of renewable energy
integration, Aspen Electric hopes this model will be adapted worldwide. Aspen Electric procures wholesale
energy from Nebraska windfarm and biomass in Iowa. So even if solar PV is not pursued, electricity is
coming from renewable sources. The strategy for potential PV integration needs further review as Aspen
Electric has unique requirements regarding PV production that can create challenges for the project.
87
CUSHING TERRELL / 15
FULLY ELECTRIFIED BUILDINGS
Recommended Goal: To provide a fully electrified building that does not rely on gas or fuel for heating,
cooking or back-up power. To use heat pumps and all electric equipment for building needs
Opportunities: To Decarbonize the project, and to eliminate local source of pollution.
Challenges: Heat pumps have limits on how low of operating temperatures they can perform at. Creates
one source of energy for the whole facility.
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
• Heat pump technology for domestic water heating
• Back-up source of heat during peak winter conditions
• Increased electrical infrastructure to support additional electrical equipment
• All Electric appliances
A fully electric building does not rely on natural gas, propane or other on -site combustible gas or fuel to
provide space heating, domestic hot water heating, and cooking. This design principle has gained a lot of
attention in the last few years as decarbonization has gained momentum and electrical grids have
increased their percentage of renewables with the expectation that grids will comprise a high percentage
of renewables in the next 30 years. A number of municipalities on the west coast have introduced rules
that no new buildings are allowed to provide natural gas service to site. Whether a project decides to go
fully electric should depend on the utility company’s current fuel mix and proposed plan for utility
production source. This is important to analyze as heavy coal reliant grids can have higher carbon
production than natural gas. This is one of the reasons engineers moved away from electric resistance
heating to natural gas boiler heating in the 80s and 90s as natural gas has a lower carbon footprint than
coal. For this project, the expected utility-Aspen Electric, operates on 100% renewable energy via
hydropower and wind. Therefore, pursuing building electrification will lead to decarbonization of the
project. An additional benefit of electrification is that moving away from gas stoves will eliminate carbon
monoxide, formaldehyde, and other harmful pollutants into the air, which can be toxic to people (1).
BENEFITS AND TRADEOFFS
Moving towards electrification offers some benefits and tradeoffs. Not having to pay to install gas piping
and venting throughout the building will save on first cost, but a portion of this cost savings is offset by
increased cost in electrical service needed to the site and associated wiring. The use of gas for heating has
a good energy value because it’s cheaper to heat a home with natural gas than electricity. Thus, switching
to electric heating can increase utility costs for tenants if only electric resistance heating is used. This can
be offset to be equal or even cheaper than natural gas heating by using heat pump technology. Utilizing
heat pump technology for space and domestic hot water heating with a Coefficient of Performance (COP)
88
CUSHING TERRELL / 16
of 3 or greater will reduce electrical energy costs by ½ to 1/3 when compared to electric resistance
heating. Heat pumps have gained significant popularity in recent years due to their efficiency, installation
flexibility, and ability to operate in cold environments. However, due to extreme cold that can occur at the
site is advised to install supplemental electric backup to maintain setpoints during peak cold events.
89
CUSHING TERRELL / 17
EV CHARGING STATIONS
Recommended Goal: To provide 15% of parking spaces with full Level 2 EV charging capability. Provide
30-50% of parking spaces pre-wired for chargers. Provide two Level 3 fast charger spaces.
Opportunities: To allow residents to charge their fully or partially electric vehicles. Creates easier pathways
for EV ownership. Reduces local air pollution, reduces causes of inversion, and reduces neighborhood
noise.
Challenges: EV vehicles require are large amount of electricity. Substantial electrical infrastructure will be
needed to support the demand. Additional space required to support electrical transformers on an
already compact site
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
• Multiple electrical services to the site
• Space for large transformers
• Enlarged parking spaces to support charging ports and stands
Decarbonization goals for the project do not end with the building. Providing Level 2 charging to the site
will aide in reducing emissions for internal combustion engines (ICE) vehicles. Greenhouse gas emissions
from vehicles will soon be the top source of emissions in Colorado and a significant portion of the state is
classified as an ozone non-attainment area by the EPA (2). Electrification of cars can aide in meeting
climate goals. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute, 15-20 percent of global light-duty vehicles
would need to be electrified by 2030 in order to limit global temperature rise to less than 2 degrees C (3).
There have been substantial commitments by local and national government organizations to increase
electric vehicle adoption. Currently in California the 2019 CALGreen standard requires 10% of multifamily
parking stalls to be EV capable (infrastructure in place for charge stations). The 2016 Denver building code
requires charging infrastructure in place for new single-family dwellings. The state of Colorado EV Plan
2020 notes that state agencies shall have 20% of parking spaces pre-wired for charging and 5% EV
charges installed (4). Currently, less than 4% of new vehicles sales for 2021 are from electric vehicles, that
percent is higher in California with 10% of new vehicles being fully electric or plug in hybrid (9) (10).
Future plans for charging and EVs include Denver’s 80 x50 Climate plan which aims for 30% of registered
vehicles to be electric by 2030 (5). Domestic manufacturers have set targets to providing 40-50% of
vehicle sales in 2030 to come from EVs, with President Biden pushing for 50% of new vehicle sales to be
EVs by 2030 (6)(7). The Edison Electric Institute estimates that 7% of cars and light trucks on the road will
be EVs by 2030 (8). It is difficult to know exactly how many spaces will need to have EV chargers by 2030,
but planning should include a mix of installed and pre-wired spaces to allow for future flexibility. For early
stage estimates it could be calculated that providing full EV charging for 15% of spaces with 30-50% of
spaces pre-wired for charges could meet future 2030 needs. Based on estimated new car sales mentioned
90
CUSHING TERRELL / 18
above and an average car life expectancy of 12 years. It is assumed 75% of residents by 2030 will have
replaced their vehicle from present and if an average of 20% (based on averaged increased rate from 4 -
40% EV sales) of new car sales this decade are EVs then 15% of residents would have a EV Vehicle.
91
CUSHING TERRELL / 19
ON-SITE STORAGE
Recommended Goal: based on current information, more analysis is needed to determine if battery
storage for reasons outside of resilience makes sense. Further discussions with the utility company and
energy modeling are needed.
Challenges: First Cost, Utility structure, understanding grid reliability and true use case, site spacing
challenges
Opportunities: Back-up during power outages, beneficial to local utility if changes made to current
program
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
On-site storage is the use of thermal tanks or batteries to store energy for later use during times o f
emergency or to better match times of production and use. For this analysis we will look primarily at
battery storage. The main reason to install batteries are:
• Flatten peak load KW in order to reduce demand charge
• Reliable back-up power
• Charging of batteries during late at night when rates are lower to use during higher rate times
• To assist grid in demand response. Can be managed by local utility as virtual power plant for
emergency use and daily management of peak energy use.
• Decarbonize grid by extending ours of clean energy use on the grid.
Most of the economic viability of battery storage rely mainly on the rates and charges of the grid.
Electrical utilities with high peak demand charges and time of use rates appear to be ideal candidates for
battery systems. Based on the review of Aspen Electric residential billing, neither of the above advantages
apply as rate increases are based on usage. Aspen Electric does not appear to have a battery program to
use storage for demand response or ‘grid harmonization’. Outside of using batteries for resiliency, which
will be addressed later, the last strategy where batteries could be beneficial is in utilizing storage to
maximize PV output based on current understanding of PV hookup limitations. Based on current
understanding, net metering for PV is not provided. Thus, a lot of potential solar production is wasted
based on difference in production hours and usage hours. An individual battery in each unit could store
energy during the day to use at night. This scenario is being used in the Soleil Lofts multifamily project in
Herriman, UT. More analysis is needed to determine payback of such a strategy, but the quote below from
an analysis of East coast projects notes it’s not economical.
“Many customers, like multifamily affordable housing for instance, have energy usage profiles
with broad peaks lasting multiple hours that would be difficult to economically manage with
batteries.” (13)
92
CUSHING TERRELL / 20
As noted from a Medium article below, the money spent on batteries might be better used in solar PV
and more efficient equipment. However, this statement does not take into consideration unique utility
requirements.
“According to a recent study by Clean Energy Reviews, the payback period for most battery
systems is around 7 to 10 years. The study shows that it is generally more cost -effective to install
rooftop solar panels and run an efficient appliance or hot water during the day rather than
store excess energy in a battery.” (14)
Figure 1: Source: Electric and Water Rate Ordinance 2017
https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/68/Electric-and-Water-Rate-Ordinances-2017-
PDF?bidId=
93
CUSHING TERRELL / 21
DESIGN FOR ENHANCED RESILIENCE
Recommended Goal: To provide a site design that can adapt to external environment events.
Implementing strategies to protect from wildfires and power outages. Some examples of resilient design
strategies are providing advanced filtration, well insulated construction, balanced ventilation, fire resistant
site, cooling, and daylighting. Recommend developing a tailored program for resilience that addresses
main resiliency concerns.
Challenges: Further study is needed to identify greatest risks and likeliness of occurrence. Programs and
Certifications for designing for resilience are new and largely untested. So, a custom plan will likely need
to be created for this specific project that references the latest resources and guides.
Opportunities: The frequency of certain extreme events (i.e., wildfires) is on the rise. To protect to
community and residents. Resilient design can reduce the impact to extreme events and limit the
disruption and impact to people’s lives. The Lumberyard is a project meant to increase local housing
supply and it’s important to ensure external disturbances do not impact that goal.
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
Resilience is the capacity to adapt to changing conditions and to maintain or regain functionality and
vitality in the face of stress or disturbance. It is the capacity to bounce back after a disturbance or
interruption. Through resilience, we can maintain livable conditions in the event of natural disasters, loss
of power, or other interruptions in normally available services. Resilient design is the intentional design of
buildings, landscapes, communities, and regions in response to these vulnerabilities.
LARGEST VULNERABILITIES AND AREAS OF FOCUS
Wildfire risk- The Fourth National Climate Assessment published in 2018 projected the annual burned
area in the western US to increase 200-300% by 2050 (15). Thus, fires currently seen in the region are
bound to worsen. The impacts of wildfires can lead to destruction of property, poor air quality, and grid
failure. A resilient design will need to address the following three impacts:
Destruction of property- to mitigate damage to the project in the event a fire is in the vicinity-
providing a buffer zone from vegetation and effective landscape management can help protect
the buildings as well as a fire-resistant exterior constriction. There are a number of strategies that
can be used to reduce chance of project being impacted, one of the most developed guides that
can be used is the Australian Bush Fire Standard. Future studies will be conducted for specific
strategies, such as, providing clear egress routes to and from the property as well as turnarounds
for fire trucks in driveways or yards.
94
CUSHING TERRELL / 22
Poor Air Quality- Wildfire smoke can impact air quality and impact children and those with
underlying health concerns. Providing a tightly sealed envelope with a balanced ventilation
system and advanced filtration will help reduce concentration of smoke inside the residence.
Grid failure- A nearby fire can cause the electrical grid to go offline for hours or days at a time
leaving residents without necessary systems such as heating, cooling, ventilation, hot water,
cooking, and refrigeration. The vulnerability of the Aspen grid to fires still needs to be assessed.
In addition to battery backup of critical systems, daylighting, thermal mass, and on-site
renewables will all aide in keeping the building operational during an outage.
Grid Failure- More advanced analysis is needed to determine the history of outages at Aspen Electric to
see if battery storage for grid failure is truly beneficial. Battery storage for backup is much larger than for
peak demand and time of use storage due to requirements to maintain operation for potentially days on
end. This creates a very large upfront cost. Multiple strategies can be looked at for preparing for grid
failure depending on likelihood of event. For example, if low risk of gird failure determined, but resiliency
strategies still want to be implemented. A solution that provides back up for a community area where
residents can gather instead of whole site could be more cost-effective strategy. As mentioned above,
providing a well-insulated envelope with passive design will help buildings maintain comfortable
temperatures much longer than typical construction.
Fulfilling basic human needs are also apart of resilient systems: Sanitation, potable water, energy, lighting,
air quality, food, health, and livable conditions. Creating community facilities that can be used as
gathering places during an emergency to meet these basic needs could be used as alternative to whole
building operation. Having a place to charge phones, flashlights, and get water could be critical in an
emergency.
Two other factors of resilient design are redundancy and anticipating future projections/needs. Providing
redundancy in certain core systems like heating keeps site operational in case of equipment failures.
Modeling design solutions (i.e., heating and cooling loads) based on future climatic conditions rather than
relying on past data will help the project maintain baseline performance into the future and can adapt to
future needs. Based on current information on climate change to area from past city reports cooling
demand is expected to increase. As such, a resiliency strategy to adapt to changing climate is to add
cooling for the residential units.
While more study is needed on the cost benefit of batteries for backup power. A number of other resilient
strategies are recommended that have other interactive effects and benefits to the site. Providing
advanced filtration, well insulated construction, balanced ventilation, fire resistant site, and daylighting to
improve resiliency and quality of living to the project.
95
CUSHING TERRELL / 23
Resilient Design Principles (16)
1. Resilience transcends scales. Strategies to address resilience are relevant at scales of individual
buildings, communities, and larger regional and ecosystem scales.
2. Diverse systems are inherently more resilient
3. Redundancy enhances resilience.
4. Simple, elegant, passive systems are more resilient
5. Durability strengthens resilience.
6. Locally available, renewable resources are more resilient
7. Resilience anticipates interruptions and a dynamic future
8. Find resilience in nature. Natural systems have evolved to achieve resilience; we can enhance our
resilience by relying on or applying lessons from nature
96
CUSHING TERRELL / 24
SOCIAL EQUITY
Recommended Goal: Since equity truly involves meaningful participation of all members of a community.
More research and community engagement are needed. We will layout a pathway and potential ideas for
exploration below.
Challenges: Truly understanding what is needed for residents to reach full potential. Accommodating a
potential diverse range of needs
Opportunities: Creating a stronger community that will help Aspen continue to thrive
WHAT IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT GOAL:
To create a development that enables all people to participate, prosper, and rea ch their full potential. To
create a positive impact for people who have historically been disadvantaged or excluded.
As outlined above, the Lumberyard project is looking to provide affordable, energy efficient, and healthy
spaces to residents. These three things will inherently make great strides towards equity as lower income
families generally bear an undue energy burden due to poor building construction and suffer from health
effects from poor air quality. These poor housing conditions perpetuate the cycles of poverty.
Equity can be about enabling all residents to thrive and grow. Advancing equity is critical to building a just
and resilient future. Designing around equity is more than just making a building affordable, it also
includes universal access, construction worker wages, and equity within the supply chain of products
purchased for construction.
Planning for equity includes: Engage community, Identify issues, Define goals, Set benchmarks, Measure
performance, and Evaluate & Reflect.
Potential equity strategies that will be analyzed: enhanced public realm, include diverse stakeholders in
project development, social equity in the supply chain, universal access for a variety of residents, provide
amenities such as a gym typically found in market rate apartments that lower household expenses.
Designing for equity will be a continually developing process as we engage the community and get to the
core of what is needed for the community. From there we will make recommendations and certification
pathways that could be an ideal fit.
97
CUSHING TERRELL / 25
COMPARISON OF MUST-HAVE LIST AND CLIMATE GOALS
Based on what has been proposed by CORE and the decade plus timeline for construction of the project
(2024-2035), there are some questions that need to be asked:
Is what is proposed Must-Have List going to meet climate reduction targets and by the time project is
built will it still be considered as setting an example for sustainable affordable design or just meeting
code?
“In order to achieve the target set by the Paris Agreement – to limit the rise in global average
temperature to below the 2 degree C threshold – all new construction must be designed to high
energy efficiency standards and use no CO2-emitting fossil fuel energy to operate; by 2050 the
entire built environment must be carbon neutral.”(18)
“President Joe Biden recently solidified his greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets as part of a
major global summit. The national goal is to reduce GHG emissions to 50% of the amount
emitted in 2005 by 2030, with an even bigger goal of net-zero emissions by 2050.” (17)
The Aspen CAP has a target of 47% reduction in GHG by 2030 from 2004 baseline
The City of Denver has set targets of Net Zero Energy and all-electric new homes in the 2024 Building
Code, and Net zero energy, all-electric new buildings in the 2027 Building Code.
The AIA architecture 2030 challenge establishes that all new buildings be carbon neutral by 2030, (using
no fossil fuel GHG emitting energy to operate) by implementing innovative sustainable design strategies,
generating on-site renewable energy, and/or purchasing (20% maximum) off-site renewable energy.
Cushing Terrell is a proud signatory of this 2030 AIA commitment. (18)
Due to the very long lifespans of buildings and retrofits, there is a very significant GHG lock-in risk
pointing to the urgency of ambitious and immediate measures. Looking at the s tatements above on
targets and goals set by the city & organizations- designing to Net Zero Energy (On-site & Offsite source)
operation and no fossil fuel use for a project with a construction timeline of 2024 -2035 will fit within what
is required for climate goals and code. What is being proposed as goals today will be considered standard
practice in the future for specific goals. That does not mean this project is not considered sustainable as
we have mentioned that sustainability is more than just about energy. Being in alignment with climate
goals and reduction targets sets an example that it is possible to achieve these ambitious goals in
affordable housing and creates an example to follow for other projects.
98
CUSHING TERRELL / 26
IMPLEMENTATION
Create a path for Implementation:
Now that we have done a dive into the principles and goals regarding sustainability for the project- how
can we achieve these ambitions? For a project on this scale and this long of a time horizon there needs to
be a framework in place to help guide the project to keep all team members on track and working
towards the project goals. Depending on the specific goal, setting a performance target is sufficient. For
example, stating a % of parking to have EV chargers is straight forward and limited room for differing
interpretations. Whereas a more multi-disciplinary goal may require a detailed program to give a path on
how to achieve and provide verification of outcome. Programs and standards also assist in defining goals
that could have differences in interpretation and differing measures of success. A few other benefits of
having a program or certification to follow is that it provides accountability for the g oals and verification
of success to the city. An example of this would be potentially having the goal of a “Well insulated and
tight building envelope”- without a certification or program to follow it is left up to the design team to
interpret what that looks like and leaves how to verify success open ended. Whereas, using the Passive
House Standard for certification creates a path for success and a clear result through testing post -
construction that the goal was achieved. Below, a number of certifications, programs, and codes will be
outlined. These will be summarized at the end to list what is potentially the most compatible
methodology for achieving the Lumberyards sustainability goals.
Benefits of Pursuing Certification
• Needed for CHFA funding
• Expressed as a desire by community in surveys
• Creates project accountability for goals
• Aids team in providing framework on meeting goals
• Helps better define goals that may have different interpretations of what success mans
• Visual representation to community of sustainability commitment
• 3rd party certification and inspections very information and performance
• Certified buildings used less energy and are healthier
• Qualify for tax rebates and other incentives
Below we will outline what the certification is, what are the requirements, what are the challenges, and
how it aligns to project goals.
99
CUSHING TERRELL / 27
LEED FOR MULTIFAMILY
LEED is the most widely used green building rating system in the world for the design, construction, and
operation of high-performance buildings. There are currently 93,000 LEED registered projects in the world.
LEED is a series of rating systems aimed at increasing the environmental and health performance of
buildings' sites and structures. LEED emphasizes integrative design, integration of existing technology,
and state-of-the-art strategies to advance expertise in green building practices. LEED certified multifamily
buildings have lower occupancy rates and higher lease rates. LEED homes are also designed, constructed,
and operated to be resilient in adverse conditions and are developed with proactive design planning for
potential impacts of catastrophic weather. The certification rating system is a points-based system that
relies on third party review for accountability. LEED for multifamily focuses on location and construction of
the building itself, emphasizing water consumption, energy use, materials selection, and indoor air quality.
The LEED rating systems aim to promote a transformation of the construction industry through strategies
designed to achieve seven goals(11):
• To reverse contribution to global climate change
• To enhance individual human health and well-being
• To protect and restore water resources
• To protect, enhance, and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services
• To promote sustainable and regenerative material resources cycles
• To build a greener economy
• To enhance social equity, environmental justice, community health, and quality of life
Health: LEED homes are designed to maximize indoor fresh air and minimize exposure to airborne toxins
and pollutants, making it healthier and more comfortable.
Savings: LEED homes use less energy and water, which means lower utility bills. On average, certified
homes use 20 to 30 percent less energy than non-green homes, with some homes saving up to 60
percent.
Value: With proper planning, LEED homes can be built for the same cost as non-green homes. LEED
homes can qualify for discounted homeowner’s insurance, tax breaks and other incentives. And in many
markets, certified green homes are now selling quicker and for more money than comparable non -green
homes.
While there are many positives with LEED, a few drawbacks are that many points are prescriptive and not
field verified i.e., energy performance. Focusing solely on chasing points can force certain design decisions
that may not necessarily make sense for the project and can stifle creativity. LEED has tried to be a “One -
size-fits-all” solution in the past, but the latest Version 4.1 has made some changes to better
accommodate a specific site.
100
CUSHING TERRELL / 28
Additional Stats:
• Holistic in nature
• Can penalize less urban projects in terms of higher levels of achievement with Site/Location
requirements
• Has great public recognition
• Does not give credit for energy cost savings beyond 50% - a disadvantage for net zero projects
LEED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT (ND)
LEED for Neighborhoods looks beyond the building to place more emphasis on the overall wholistic
community to foster more sustainable and well-connected neighborhoods. LEED for ND gives building
owners and operators the tools they need to immediately impr ove both building performance and the
bottom line. While also providing healthful indoor spaces for a building’s occupants. LEED for
Neighborhood Development can be achieved in addition to LEED BD+C Multifamily. Achieving LEED
certification or other approved certification is a prerequisite to pursuing LEED for ND. There are many
overlapping credits between LEED for ND and LEED Multifamily, but additional emphasis is placed on
neighborhood planning and creating opportunities that can come with a large develo pment. For example,
using the point for tree-lined and shaded streetscapes to help reduce urban heat island. With the high-
level analysis that the standard provides, some requirements or credits may not be able to be achieved
due the site location already being set. While conversely there are several credits that will match well with
the goals of the project.
LEED-certified developments are designed to deliver the following benefits:
• Lower operating costs and increased asset value
• Reduced waste sent to landfills
• More healthful and productive environments for occupants
• Qualification for tax rebates, zoning allowances, and other incentives in many cities
Due to the longevity of a neighborhood that may persist for a hundred years, it can pay dividends for
generations that will cumulatively have a much larger return than other green investments.
ENTERPRISE GREEN COMMUNITIES (EGC)
Enterprise Green Communities is the nation’s only green building program designed explicitly for
affordable housing. With a strong focus on energy efficiency, resiliency, and human-centered design, EGC
certified projects meet the most pressing needs of the developer, the operator, and the residents. They
promote equitable development by ensuring residents have a voice in designing their homes and creating
communities connected to transportation, quality food and critical services. To ensure the success of the
project, Enterprise requires teams to engage with a multitude of stakeholders throughout the design and
construction process, including future residents, onsite staff, and local neighbors. This process allows the
project to be responsive to the community it serves, to be ecologically, socially, a nd historically relevant,
and to provide a space that not only helps people to heal, but to actually thrive . (12).
101
CUSHING TERRELL / 29
Today, 27 states and Washington D.C. require that affordable housing developments receiving public
funds comply with the Green Communities Criteria.
“We believe, because it is true, that people are affected by their environment, by space and scale,
by color and texture, by nature and beauty, that they can be uplifted, made to feel important.”
Jim Rouse, Enterprise Co-Founder
Five themes are central to the 2020 Enterprise Green Criteria (20):
1. Integrative design approaches that give residents a voice in the design process
2. A path to zero energy with strategies to help all developments move closer to zero emissions
3. Healthy living practices such as ample ventilation and healing-centered design
4. Water standards that promote efficiency and protect against lead poisoning
5. Resilience requirements that prepare homes for local climate hazards.
There are two levels of certification: Enterprise Green Communities and Enterprise Green Communities
Plus. Green Communities Plus is available to affordable housing teams making an extra effort to reduce
emissions. This elite designation recognizes developers who are moving toward or achieving zero -energy
homes. A project can meet EGC Plus by meeting “Moving to Zero Energy” or “Achieving Zero Energy”
Criteria. Enterprise Certification has alignment with Zero Energy Ready Homes (ZERH) and Passive
House(PHIUS).
The program has also aligned with the WELL building standard offering a dual certification path through
collaboration between the International WELL Building Institute (IWBI) and Enterprise Community Partners
that combines the best part of Enterprise Green Communities criteria and the WELL Building Standard. In
addition to the partnership with WELL, Enterprise Green Communities aligns its advanced energy
performance credits with the International Living Future Institute’s energy approach. Specially, projects
can use the Living Building Challenge’s Zero Energy Petal as a compliance option. Because Enterprise
Green Communities was developed and is managed by a non-profit, the cost to certify is much lower than
other green building certifications
Here is a more detailed explanation of the Zero Energy Ready Home (ZERH) Certification as the other
certifications are mentioned in more detail in this document.
ZERH is the Department of Energy’s most advanced energy performance standard. ZERH requires, at a
minimum, 30% better energy design than 2012 IECC and 15% better than Energy Star v3.1. In addition,
ZERH has a strong focus on water management, indoor air quality, and field testing of envelope, HVAC,
and lighting systems. Specific requirements include:
• HERS rating of 48-55
• Water management design and installation checklists
• Construction Phase verification of ventilation, envelope, heating, cooling, domestic hot water, and
lighting system performance by a third-party green rater
• Best practice domestic hot water distribution design
• Optimized framing and duct location
102
CUSHING TERRELL / 30
• Solar Ready
• EPA Indoor Air Quality Package
•
ZERH also pairs well is the International Living Future Institute’s Zero Energy Petal. Affordable housing
projects with Net Zero Energy goals often benefit from blending the EGC 2020, ZERH, and Zero Energy
Petal certification requirements.
NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD (NGBS)
The National Green Building Standard ICC-700 (NGBS) is the first residential green building rating system
approved by ANSI, the American National Standards Institute, as an American National Standard. (21)
It provides a flexible, expansive point-based system for certification. It also offers builders and developers
an affordable process to build green homes that meet their goals, are appropriate for their specific
climate, and meet the needs of their market. There are very little mandatory requirements which allows for
team to meet points as we see fit. The NGBS Green Certification is a tiered certification (Bronze, Silver,
Gold, Emerald) system that requires increasing points in all categories to move up to next level. One
advantage that NGBS has over LEED is that it has lower program fees, but not dramatically less. In a
comparative analysis NGBS and LEED, it was found that NGBS buildings are quicker to certify, they lack
some of the mandatory site and inspection requirements the LEED requires (22).
This certification is a Design/Review based certification. Every NGBS Green Certified home is inspected in-
person at least twice by an experienced NGBS Green Verifier; an inspector independent from the builder
who has been accredited by Home Innovation. Before a verifier can award the home points for the green
practices claimed by the builder, he or she must visually inspect nearly every one of the green practices,
products, and technologies to ensure they are installed correctly (21).
PASSIVE HOUSE (PHIUS)
The Passive House standard (PHIUS) is a high-performance building standard that challenges the
construction industry to maintain a comfortable indoor environment with very low operating energy.
Passive House buildings consume up to 90% less heating and up to 80% less cooling energy than typical
existing buildings, depending on climate. At the same time, they provide healthy, high quality living and
working conditions-comfortable temperatures all year round, no drafts or mold, good indoor air quality.
With very low operating costs and high temperature stability, these buildings also provide resilience
against rising energy prices and changing climate conditions.
The PHIUS standard focuses primarily on reducing operational energy and does not address embodied
energy or site considerations. Achieving certification is based on pass/fail performance testing and energy
modeling. The most recent revision to the standard (PHIUS + 2021) has new provisions which incentivize
building electrification. Certification also emphasis moisture mitigation, durability, and improved air
quality as other quality assurance metrics. The standard also has several accountability systems in place
such as 3rd party design review, 3rd party on-site assurance checks, and independent certification verifiers.
103
CUSHING TERRELL / 31
Passive House design is most common in colder climates such as Canada due to its highly insulative
design. Benefits of Passive House include:
• 3rd Party verification
• Lowering of EUI through design principles which will help achieve Net Zero goals
• Risk Management-special attention paid to moisture control and ventilation which will be
reviewed by PHIUS experts to identify potential problems. Can be another set of eyes on the
design
• Guidebook uses past experience to build knowledge base to increase success of project
• Rigorous Quality Assurance
• Earn US DOE Zero Energy Ready Status
• Earn US EPA Indoor airPLUS label
• HERS Index Score
Potential Challenges with Certification:
• Very strict air tightness requirements. Additional effort and care needed in construction
and detailing.
• First costs increase due to added insulation and construction methods needed
• Limits on fenestration area and orientation (if prescription method used)
Overall, this is a well-established program with a good track record and strong fit for the project. The
challenges come with meeting the stringent performance targets, but with the goal of net zero energy
this provides a solid framework for helping get the building performance in line with what is needed to
achieve net zero energy. The downside to this is that is not as widely adopted as other certifications and
does not address all the project goals.
THE LIVING BUILDING CHALLENGE PETAL
The Living Building Challenge is the highest level of green building certification in the world today. It
provides a framework for design, construction, and the symbiotic relationship between people, our
community, and nature-using nature as the ultimate measuring stick. Projects that achieve Living Building
can claim to be the greenest anywhere and serve as role models to their communities. There are only 30
projects worldwide that have met the entirety of this rigorous standard to date. We are aware of two
projects currently seeking the entirety of the Living Building Challenge in Colorado; the Pikes Peak
Summit Complex and the Aspen Distillery. The RMI Innovation Center in Basalt has achieved the Energy
Petal under an older iteration of the standard.
The LBC aims to transform how we think about all facets of design and construction as an opportunity to
impact the greater community and local cultural fabric. The standard asks the question of instead of
creating a slightly less bad version of what we have- what does good look like? The certification pushes
for project to move past being less bad into being truly regenerative.
Nested within the Living Building Challenge are other opportunities for certification. See the below table
to demonstrate the various levels of commitment.
104
CUSHING TERRELL / 32
The Living Building Challenge offers an adapted framework specific to affordable housing projects which
allows for a unique opportunity for our project type. Regardless, the Living Building Challenge remains a
challenge as the name implies. Based on a metaphor of a flower, the LBC includes seven “petals” – Place,
Water, Energy, Health & Happiness, Materials, Equity, and Beauty. Within these petals are imperatives –
criteria for meeting each Petal. Under this rating system, rather than select credits – all listed imperatives
are required for certification.
Achieving Living Building Petal Certification is more viable and perhaps better aligned with our project’s
goals. Achieving Petal Certification means meeting all of the CORE imperatives of the Living Building
Challenge and one Full Petal such as Net Positive Energy. Petal Certification has good alignment with our
project’s sustainability since it is holistic in nature including language for equity and responsible materials.
The CORE imperatives define the 10 essential requirements that the International Living Future Institute
recognizes as best practices for all green buildings. CORE can be seen as a competitor in the marketplace
to LEED Platinum. Certification is based on 12-month actual performance that is tested a full year after
occupancy. This ensures that LBC and CORE projects operate as the standard requires opposed to being
met with modeled predications.
The Living Building Challenge provides a framework for affordable house project specifically to provide
pathways and identify strategies to assist affordable housing developers in overcoming social, regulatory,
and financial barriers to achieving Living Building Challenge Certification. This is particularly valuable to
105
CUSHING TERRELL / 33
achieving the Water Petal in the State of Colorado which remains the biggest hurdle to more projects
adopting the LBC standard.
In creating the Living Building Challenge v4.0, the current standard, the International Living Future
Institute deliberately aligned their requirements with the UN Sustainable Development Goals which we
recognize as a guiding principle for this project.
Petal Certification Requirements- a project that has achieved all CORE imperatives, and one or more of
the three primary Petals—Water, Energy, or Materials
Living Futures Institute Mission: to reconcile the built environment with the natural environment, into a
civilization that creates greater biodiversity, resilience and opportunities for life with each adaptation and
development.
WELL
The WELL building standard is the first building standard to focus exclusively on the health and wellness
of people in buildings. Since we spend 90% of our time indoors, the quality of the indoor space can have
a significant effect on our wellbeing. This is a performance-based standard that focuses on features that
directly impact human health in a building. The standard uses a body of research to look at the impact
and provide recommendations to the following seven categories:
• Clean Air
• Clean Water
• Access to Healthy Food
• Circadian Light
• Exercise
• Comfort
• Mental Peace
WELL certification uses third party verification and is designed to seamlessly align with LEED certification.
There is also alignment with some of the categories in Living Building Chall enge which means that
achieving a credit in one, integrates into the requirements of the other certification. Practical applications
of this standard include:
• Ensuring Clean Water
• Monitoring and filtering air for improved IAQ
• Selecting Low Toxic Products & Equipment
• Sensory Delight
o Biophilia
o Circadian Light Design
o Verified Thermal Comfort
o Better Humidity Control
o Improved Acoustics
o Occupant Controls
106
CUSHING TERRELL / 34
WELL goes above LEED and Living Building Challenge in many wellness categories. This standard can be
used as a compliment to these other more wholistic standards. While their standard is most used in
offices, it has been adapted for use in residential projects as well. Certification is provided after a 12-
month verification that ensures metrics are met; this provides peace of mind to the owner that the project
meets intended goals. While many of the categories and requirements of this standard are not directly
mentioned as a stated goal. The practices should be considered in order to provide a quality environment
that improves the wellness of its occupants.
NET ZERO ENERGY & ZERO CODE
The term Net Zero Energy can carry different definitions and meaning for buildings, but it quite generally
means:
Net Energy Balance Definition =
(Total Source Energy Delivered) – (Total Non-Renewable Source Energy Displaced)
Depending on which program is followed will change how NZE strategy is implemented. Here are four
certification or future code adoptions and their definition of what a Net Zero Energy Building looks like
ILFI- Zero Energy Certification- One hundred percent of the building’s energy needs on a net annual basis
must be supplied by on-site renewable energy. No offsite production and combustion allowed. This
certification is achieved based on actual, not modeled performance. * See above under Living Building
Challenge
LEED Zero Energy- LEED Zero Energy considers both site and source energy. Can meet with on-site or off-
site renewable energy. Certification allows for more off-site strategies than ILFI and LEED BD+C is needed
to qualify for certification.
City of Denver future codes- Denver defines “Net Zero Energy (NZE)” as a new building or home that is
highly energy-efficient and fully powered from on-site and/or off-site renewable energy. This means that
new buildings and homes will be: (1) Highly Energy Efficient, (2) All-Electric, (3) Powered by Renewable
Energy, and (4) Providers of Demand Flexibility for the Grid. (19)
Architecture 2030-Zero Code- buildings shall meet minimum energy efficiency of ASHRAE 90.1-2019, no
gas or fossil fuel equipment, on-site or off-site renewable energy.
The two main themes of a NZE building are no on-site combustion and energy from renewable sources
either on-site or off-site. This should be used as the guiding principle moving forward for what defines a
NZE building. There are several pathways to getting NZE certified, the certifications above can be used or
there are credits in EGC or ILFI that outline NZE goals. Following a code or standard for NZE will ensure a
project is net zero and provide verifiable proof as such.
107
CUSHING TERRELL / 35
Looking at reference projects that have achieved certification there are quite a few similar projects that
have been successful in the certifications listed above with some that have no reference projects based on
how new the rating system is:
LEED Multifamily Certification in Colorado: 43 projects, 3 platinum projects, 1 mixed income housing
projects
LEED Zero Energy: no residential projects
LEED ND: 7 in Colorado
Living Futures- a lot of examples of Zero Energy Certification and Energy
Petal. A fair number of housing and multifamily projects There was formerly an affordable housing
pilot program which has since become a working group that supports project teams around the
world.
WELL: Four well residential projects in Colorado and hundreds in the US.
Passive House (PHIUS): Hundreds of buildings certified, only single family certified in Colorado so far
Enterprise Green Communities: 100,000 plus homes certified Enterprise Green. No information on how
many have achieved EGC Plus certification
108
CUSHING TERRELL / 36
SUMMARY COMPARISON OF CERTIFICATIONS
Below is a summary comparison of the certifications that most align with the Lumberyard project. These
ranks are based on the information mentioned above and a deeper dive comparison of each certification
against the seven categories listed below. The deeper dive comparison which is the basis for this ranking
can be found in the Appendix. Please note that while one certification may score higher than another,
there is more that goes into picking the best suited certification. *
*Please note that these rankings are subjective and intended to generally represent project alignment
109
CUSHING TERRELL / 37
RECOMMENDED PATH FORWARD
Based on the information provided from key stakeholders at the city, community feedback, and the
Climate Action Plan, there is very good alignment between all groups. Meaning that the
recommendations provided below have good correlation and give the design team confidence that this is
the appropriate path to follow. Almost all the recommendations below have come from ideas expressed
to us from the City of Aspen. We have identified 10 big ideas that should be the focus of the project’s
sustainability efforts. They are as follows:
• Near Net Zero On-Site Energy
• Fully Electrified Buildings
• Minimum of 15% full EV charging for parking spaces and additional 15% of EV -Ready Spaces
• Battery Storage for partial back-up power of site*
• Equity in project design and in material sourcing
• Resilient Design to protect against wildfire, power outages, and higher temperatures
• Focus on healthy spaces through filtration, material selection, daylight, acoustics and ventilation
• Diversion of construction waste & On-Site Recycling and Composting
• Requiring Third party commissioning and site verification
• Metering of individual resident utility use
In addition to the ten goals above, we also suggest the “must-have” list items not listed as a priority for
the project. Outside of potentially battery storage, these goals all seem feasible and will support the ten
main goals above.
The ten main items align with the “must-have” list, community feedback, and ambitious climate reduction
target. Achieving these ten items for the Aspen Lumberyard project will showcase the city’s commitment
to sustainability, focus on meeting GHG reduction targets, and setting the standard on what high quality
affordable housing can look like.
Achieving these goals will not be easy, however, with the right programs and certifications in place early
in the project it will help guide the project team to a successful implementation. As described in detail
above there are many certification pathways that can be followed. Laid out in more detail in the Appendix
is a deeper dive comparison of the different certifications and provides more information on the reasons
for the scoring of the Summary on the previous page. Based on the scoring in the summary and our
experience with the different certifications we believe that the Enterprise Green Communities Plus + Net
Zero Energy certification has the best alignment with the project goals. This certification encompasses
many of the project goals we have and provides a good wholistic framework for sustainable building
design. The Enterprise Green Communities (EGC) has attributes that have a lot of similarities to the other
programs. Besides its similarities with LEED BD+C, which it is often most compared to, achieving 2020 EGC
Certification also receives WELL Certification through a partnership with the International WELL Building
110
CUSHING TERRELL / 38
Institute (IWBI). Regarding Net Zero Energy Certification, there are many pathways provided to achieving
this credit. The project may qualify using Passive House PHUIS+ Source Zero, ILFI Zero Energy Petal, Zero
Carbon Petal, or DOE Zero Energy Ready Home (has similarities to PHIUS). In addition to this overlap with
other certifications, EGC Plus has a few prerequisites and credits that align with LEED for Neighborhood
Development. Thus, this program has a lot of overlap with other programs and provides a wide ranging
wholistic program to advise the project team. While this is a great program, it does not have the same
notoriety as LEED or high standard as the Living Building Challenge.
The City of Aspen aims to be a leader and a catalyst for change as quoted in the intro. If the city wishes to
truly push the envelope regarding sustainability and bring national attention to the project. Here are a few
highly ambitious above & beyond goals that could be brought under consideration. The first is to utilize
the new grey water plant that is near the project. This is not currently mentioned as a must have, but due
to the ideal location of the grey water plant we could use some of this recycled water for irrigation and
possibly toilet flushing. While providing grey water for toilets would be a first in the area (to our
knowledge) this would increase resiliency for the project as snowpack is expected to decrease this century.
The second reach goal would to be to achieve Zero Carbon Certification. Zero Carbon is defined as
reducing operational and embodied carbon emissions. Embodied Carbon are the emissions created to
build the Lumberyard project. Embodied Carbon is a large contributor to GHG emissions in buildings and
due to its disproportionate impact at the outset of the project it has a significant impact on global CO2
reduction goals. Since we are already proposing eliminating the operational carbon emissions, achieving
Zero Carbon certification is a matter or reducing some embodied carbon through the design process and
procuring carbon offsets for the remainder of emissions. And lastly, a very ambitious goal to put the
project on the map in terms of sustainability would be to change from achieving EGC Plus Certification to
Living Building Challenge (LBC) Petal Certification. As mentioned previously, LBC is the highest level of
green certification in the world. Regardless if any of these reach goals are pursued, the Aspen Lumberyard
project would be setting itself apart by pursuing the ten main goals and certification mentioned above.
*Further study is needed for this goal. See Design for Resilience section for more information.
111
CUSHING TERRELL / 39
REFERENCES:
1. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/indoor-air-pollution-cooking
2. https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/zero-emission-vehicles/colorado-ev-plan-2020
3. https://evadoption.com/can-the-us-reach-50-million-evs-in-operation-by-2030/
4. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-z-lNQMU0pymcTQEH8OvnemgTbwQnFhq/view
5. https://www.denvergov.org/files/assets/public/climate-
action/denvervehicleelectrificationactionplan.pdf
6. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a37232112/biden-target-50-percent-evs-
2030/#:~:text=President%20Biden%20is%20expected%20to,new%2Dcar%20sales%20by%202030.
7. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-automakers-say-they-aspire-up-50-ev-sales-
by-2030-sources-2021-08-04/
8. https://www.eei.org/resourcesandmedia/newsroom/Pages/Press%20Releases/EEI%20Celebrates%201%2
0Million%20Electric%20Vehicles%20on%20U-S-%20Roads.aspx
9. https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1133143_us-ev-sales-have-been-record-breaking-so-far-in-
2021-despite-supply-chain-issues
10. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/26/americans-are-buying-teslas-not-evs-heres-why-thats-about-to-
change.html
11. https://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/section/files/v4-guide-excerpts/Excerpt_v4_ND.pdf
12. https://www.greencommunitiesonline.org/introduction
13. https://www.utilitydive.com/news/a-new-program-is-making-battery-storage-affordable-for-affordable-
housing/596335/
14. https://medium.com/batterybits/batteries-for-affordable-housing-f9073f0fdee3
15. https://energynews.us/2020/09/30/colorado-utilities-fear-wildfire-risk-and-liability-amid-warming-
climate/
16. https://www.resilientdesign.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/RDI_Benchmarking_Resilience_summary-
1.pdf
17. https://www.brookings.edu/research/we-cant-beat-the-climate-crisis-without-rethinking-land-use/
18. https://architecture2030.org/zero-code/
19. https://denvergov.org/files/assets/public/climate-action/documents/denver-nze-implementation-
plan_final_v1.pdf
20. https://www.enterprisecommunity.org/impact-areas/resilience/green-communities
21. https://www.ngbs.com/the-ngbs-green-promise
22. https://www.architectmagazine.com/technology/cincinnati-aia-compares-leed-and-ngbs_o?o=0
112
CUSHING TERRELL / 40
APPENDIX
GHG Toolkit Applicable Objectives
Transportation and Location
Expand bicycle network to better connect neighborhoods and work centers to public transit
Expand pedestrian infrastructure to better connect neighborhoods and work centers to public transit
Expand bike share network to better connect neighborhoods and work centers to public transit**
Use zoning and transit-oriented development to site new development near jobs and transit
Improve winter bike and pedestrian options
Materials & Resources
Expand number of cool roofs to reduce cooling needs***
Expand number of green roofs***
Require composting through codes or regulations****
Mandate deconstruction
Water Efficiency
Energy & Atmosphere
Pilot micro grid infrastructure to create districts that produce the same amount of energy they consume ****
Invest in energy storage to address the intermittency of wind and solar****
Convert natural gas space and water heating to electric or renewable energy
Promote energy efficiency improvements such as adding insulation and pipe wrap to water heaters.
Incentivize above code buildings and adopt latest codes with specific local requirement to exceed minimum
standards.****
Move towards net zero energy and adopt net zero energy conservation code****
Require and incentivize measurement and verification
Provide regulatory and zoning relief for projects that meet verifiable high energy standards (LEED, Net Zero)
Support low-income housing with energy upgrades and on-site renewable energy. (e.g. Colorado’s Affordable
residential energy program)****
Partner with utilities to improve tenants’ access to energy-usage data
Implement sub-metering for multi-family buildings for more granular building energy data
Coordinate with efforts to adopt high efficiency electric heating systems
Require net zero (or near net zero) for all new development
Site
Require EV charging stations (or EV readiness) in all new multifamily developments
Indoor Environment
Resiliency
Integrate AC into projects if future AC need is anticipated
*Not Currently noted to be included in project
**Partially applicable to project scope, may not be directly relevant
113
CUSHING TERRELL / 41
***Current design may not be able to accommodate action
****Not a project requirement, but a city goal that would showcase setting an example for action
COMPARISON OF CERTIFICATIONS
LEED for Multifamily LEED for Neighborhood
Development
Enterprise Green
Level of Difficulty to
Achieve
Difficulty Difficult Difficult
Location &
Transportation
Points for reduced
parking and off-street
parking, EV and Biking
infrastructure.
Score: 4/5 already in
alignment with a
number of goals. Some
compromise due to
parking constraints. A
lot of points correlated
to site location which
we cannot change.
Location based points
to encourage
development in existing
communities.
Required to locate on a
site served by existing
water infrastructure or
city planned service
area.
Consult with Wildlife
Agencies to determine
ecological impact
Do not build on
wetlands.
Pt: Restore sloped land
greater than 15%
Pt: 50% of units within
1/4 mile of public
transit or 1/2 mile from
rapid transit stop.
Restoration of habitat
and wetlands.
Score: 4/5- Further
detailed study needed
to determine feasibility
with site prerequisites.
Several points such as
compact development,
mixed-use
neighborhood, and
housing affordability fit
well with project.
Mandatory: Limit
building on sensitive
sites such as
floodplains, wetlands,
and farmlands.
Mandatory: Locate site
with access of existing
roads, and sewers.
Connect to street every
800 feet
Mandatory: Build to
residential density of
block group. 15 units
per acre for multifamily
Mandatory: 0.5 mile to
transit
Mandatory: Proximity
to Services and Public
Transportation Access
114
CUSHING TERRELL / 42
Materials & Resources Prerequisites include
recycling collection, and
construction waste
plan. Points for
performing building
life-cycle impact,
procuring EPDs and
Diversion waste credits.
Score: 5/5- alignment
with three of the
project goals.
Not apart of program
(Credit for achieving a
LEED for building
certification)
Score: N/A, based
primarily on LEED BD+C
pt.
Mandatory: Healthier
material selection per
certification
specification.
Mandatory: Durable
surfaces in bath,
kitchen, and laundry
Mandatory: Provide
drainage away from
building and vapor
protection at
foundation
Mandatory:
Construction waste
management plan
Water Efficiency Indoor and Outdoor
water use reduction.
Points based on %
reduction.
Score: 5/5 Good
alignment with project
goals. Relatively
straightforward to
achieve points.
A few points available
for indoor and outdoor
water reduction. More
focus on water
infrastructure, rainwater
management,
wastewater
management, and
preserving site
hydrology.
Score: N/A, based
primarily on LEED BD+C
pt.
Mandatory: 20%
reduction in water
consumption baseline.
Monitor water
consumption and leaks
Energy & Atmosphere Points based reduction
in energy use from
ASHRAE standard.
Modeling only required
for points. Requires
fundamental
commissioning of
systems. Additional
credits to renewable
energy generation.
Less points focus on
Energy. Points achieved
for solar orientation,
renewable energy
production, and
building performance
Score: N/A, based
primarily on LEED BD+C
pt.
Mandatory: Certify
through Energy Star
Residential New
Construction Program.
Provide predicted EUI.
Four steps from
Mandatory to Moving
to Zero Energy to Zero
Energy to Moving to
Zero Carbon
115
CUSHING TERRELL / 43
Score: 4/5 Good
alignment goals,
follow-up verification is
not needed.
Site Protect and restore
habitat, reduce
pollutants from
rainwater runoff and
practice LID.
Score: 5/5 Good
alignment with project
goals
Required: 90% of new
buildings open onto
public space or
sidewalk, not parking
lot.
Required: Density
requirement based on
distance from transit
Pt: Walkable streets
defines overall
circulation, layout and
ratios.
Pt: Meeting certain
density goals. Increased
density yields more
points
Pt: Walking distance to
mixed-use spaces
Pt: Diversity in housing
types and housing
affordability relative to
AMI
Pt: Add neighborhood
gardens
Pt: Tree-lined blocks
and shaded sidewalks
Score: 4/5- Good
alignment with
prerequisites while
several points are not a
good fit for project
such as building reuse,
district heating, and
infrastructure energy.
Mandatory: Project
within 0.25 mile walk to
minimum of 0.75 acres
or 10% of project space
to open space
Mandatory: Native
plantings, surface
stormwater
management, efficient
irrigation
Indoor Environment Prerequisites based on
construction methods,
points for balanced
Not a part of program
(Credit for achieving a
Mandatory: radon
mitigation and garage
116
CUSHING TERRELL / 44
whole building
ventilation, thermal
comfort, daylight, and
acoustic performance.
Score: 4/5 Good
alignment with several
goals but achieving
some points will drive
certain design decisions
ie. Walk off matts and
daylight requirements.
LEED for building
certification)
Score: N/A, based
primarily on LEED BD+C
pt.
isolation from dwelling
unit.
Mandatory: ASHRAE 62
Pt: Construction
pollution management
and noise reduction
Mandatory: Integrated
Pest Management and
Smoke-Free Policies
Mandatory: Focus on 1
of 3 human-centered
design elements,
includes: Active Design,
Universal Design,
and/or Healing Design
Equity & Beauty Various parts of equity
are addressed through
pilot credits which can
be applied for the
innovation credit in
LEED. Several helpful
pilot credit guides can
be used to help
navigate this topic.
Score: 4/5
Credit for community
and resident
participation in the
development process.
Optional Healing
Design focused on art,
beauty, and biophilia
Optional Cultural
Resilience design
process
117
CUSHING TERRELL / 45
EGC supports the projects must haves via numerous pathways:
• Net Zero Energy: c5.2 Near Zero Certification, c5.4 Achieving Zero Energy
• Electrification: c5.5 Moving to Zero Carbon: All Electric
• Renewables and Energy Storage: c5.3 PV Ready and Renewable Energy, c5.10 Resilient Energy
Systems: Critical Loads
• Garage Pollutant Prevention: c7.4 Garage Isolation
• Radon: c7.1 Radon Mitigation
• Air Quality: c7.3 Combustion Equipment, c7.1 Radon Mitigation, c7.5 IPM, c7.6 Smoke-Free
Policy, c7.7 Ventilation
• Energy and Water Metering: c4.4 Monitoring Water Consumption and Leaks, c8.5 Energy and
Water Data Collection and Monitoring
• Efficient Water Use: c3.7 Efficient Irrigation and Water Reuse, c4.1 Water-Conserving Fixtures,
c4.5 Efficient Plumbing Layout and Design, c4.6 Non-potable Water Reuse
• Alternative Transportation: c2.8 Proximity to Transit, c2.9 Improving Connectivity to the
Community
• Passive Design: c2.10 Passive Solar Heating/Cooling
• Acoustics: c7.10 Noise Reduction
• Health and Environmentally friendly Material Selection: c6.1 Ingredient Transparency, c6.2
Recycled Content, c6.3 Chemical Hazard Optimization, c6.4 Healthier Materials, c6.5
Environmentally Responsible Materials, c6.7 Regional Materials
• Native Landscaping, Low-Impact Design: c2.1 Site Sensitive Protection, c3.3 Ecosystem Services,
c3.4 Stormwater Management
• Construction Activity Pollution Prevention: c1.4 Construction Management, c7.9 Construction
Pollution Management
• Commissioning: c5.1 Building Performance Standard
• Construction Waste Management: c6.10 Construction Waste Management
• Ongoing Waste Management: c6.11 Recycling Storage,
• Resilient Design: c1.6 Multi-Hazard, Vulnerability Assessment, c4.7 Access to Potable Water
During Emergencies, c5.9 Floodproofing, c5.10 Resilient Energy Systems
• Social Equity and Human-Centered Design: c1.1 Project Priority Survey, c1.2 Charrettes and
Coordination Meetings, c1.5 Design for Health and Wellbeing, c1.7 Strengthening Cultural
Resilience, c2.12 Access to Fresh, Local Foods, c2.14 Local Economic Development and
Community Wealth Creation, c7.11 Active Design, c7.12 Universal Design, c7.13 Healing-
Centered Design, c8.3 Resident Manual, c8.4 Property Orientations
118
CUSHING TERRELL / 46
COMPARISON OF CERTIFICATIONS
PHIUS (Passive
House) Certification
Living Future Petal
Certification
National Green Building
Standard (NGBS)
Type of Certification Performance Based Performance Based
Level of Difficulty to
Achieve
More Difficult Most Ambitious Less Difficult
Location &
Transportation
N/A (Core Imperative-Human-
Scaled Living) Focus on
walkable, pedestrian-friendly
communities, gathering
places, impervious surfaces.
Score- 4/5 we are already
following a lot of this criteria.
Some requirements around
reduced transportation
measures to be discussed.
Preferred infill, greyfield
or brownfield lot
Points for proximity to
mass transit and
community services
Materials &
Resources
N/A (Responsible Materials)-
Declare Label on some
products, 50% wood FSC,
20% materials from within
300mi, 80% of construction
waste diverted.
Score: 5/5- Good alignment
with goal, sourcing could be
challenge. But Denver meets
“local sourcing” requirement.
Not sure how modular fits in
with requirements. Further
investigation needed.
"Pt: Building dimensions
designed to reduce
waste
Pt: Stacked units and no
additional site applied
finishing material for
various pieces (trip,
windows, coverings)
Pt: Foundation
waterproofing,
crawlspace, termite
barrier, building
envelope assemblies
design for moisture
control
Pt: Construction Waste
Plan, recycling E-waste
Pt: FSC wood and bio-
based products"
Water Efficiency N/A (Responsible Water Use) All
projects must not use
potable water for irrigation
and meet a 50% reduction
for flow and flush fixtures.
Stormwater treated on site.
Exceptions can be made for
affordable housing through
Pt: Reducing distance from
water heater to fixture or
demand-controlled pump
priming with circulation
system.
Pt: Water metering and
ENERGY STAR appliances
Pt: Reduction in fixture gpm
Pt: Drip irrigation, smart
controller, and/or
119
CUSHING TERRELL / 47
the use of “handprinting”.
Score: 5/5-creative solutions
needed to hit 50% reduction
measure
commissioning of irrigation
systems
Pt: Rainwater collection
Energy &
Atmosphere
Score: 5/5 for
relevant fit and
alignment with
project
(Energy + Carbon
Reduction)- 70% reduction
from an equivalent baseline,
no combustion, on-site
renewables can count
towards reduction.
Score: 5/5- Good alignment
with project goals.
Minimum for Bronze: Qualify
for Energy Star Multifamily
High-Rise Version 1.0. Higher
levels require air tightness
testing and Performance path
targets.
Mandatory: A number of
mandatory basic building
requirements apply to Ch7
Energy efficiency: air leakage,
insulation installation, and air
barrier sealing.
Prescriptive or Performance
Path Option
Site N/A (Ecology of Place) Good fit
with goals. Imperative limits
building on pristine
greenfield, wilderness or
farmland. Must contribute
positively to ecology of
place.
Score: 4/5
Pt: Preserve natural
vegetation, create "no
disturbance" zone, removed
topsoil is reused on site.
Pt: Bike paths and bike racks
Pt: Natural resources are
conserved, consult arborist if
impacting trees, minimize
slope disturbance and erosion
Pt: Support wildlife habitat
through gardens and lighting
techniques
Pt: Stormwater management
to maintain pre-development
hydrology of site
Indoor Environment Score: 3/5 Good
alignment and fit
with project goals,
but does not
address all aspects
on indoor air quality
(Healthy Indoor
Environment)-Provides views
outside and daylight for 75%
of regularly occupied spaces.
Score: 5/5 follows anticipated
design measures and similar
to LEED IAQ credits
Pt: Requirements for
combustion appliances
Pt: Standards applied for
wood materials, flooring
materials, and wall coverings.
Pt: Carbon Monoxide alarm
Pt: Bathroom fan with
humidistat and timer.
Pt: Radon Testing
Pt: Heat recovery ventilator
(HRV)
Pt: Ventilation designer to
ASHRAE 62
Equity & Beauty N/A (Universal Access)-The intent
is to allow equitable access
to and protections from
negative impacts resulting
from the development of
Living Building projects.
(Inclusion)- The intent is the
N/A
120
CUSHING TERRELL / 48
help create stable, safe, and
high paying job
opportunities for people in
the community.
Score: 5/5- Very good
alignment with Equity piece
and overall project goals.
(Beauty + Biophilia)- focuses
design on including elements
that nurture the innate
human/nature connection.
Score: 5/5- great alignment
with motto of design a space
that feels “authentically
Aspen” and fosters a
connection with the beautiful
surroundings.
Review of Certification alignment with Pre-Requisites.
Below we will outline the certification pre-requisites to find if any certifications are not achievable based
on current goals, site, and location. These will only be represented for certifications with pre-requisites.
Performance based certifications such as Living Building and Passive House were discussed earlier.
Alignment between project and certification will be represented as follows.
Full Alignment (FA): Project intends or is able to fully align with the credit requirement
Partial Alignment (PA): Based on current information, it appears project may align with
requirement, but more investigation or project development is needed
No Alignment (NA): Project is not able to meet pre-requisite
121
CUSHING TERRELL / 49
LEED BD+C Multifamily
CATEGORY PREREQUISUTE ALIGNMENT NOTES
Sustainable Sites Construction Activity Pollution
Prevention
FA Create and implement an erosion and
sedimentation control plan for all construction
activities
associated with the project. The plan must conform
to the erosion and sedimentation requirements of
the 2017 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Construction General Permit (CGP) or local
equivalent, whichever is more stringent. Projects
must apply the CGP regardless of size. The plan
must
describe the measures implemented.
Water Efficiency Water Use Reduction FA Reduce aggregate water consumption by 20% from
the baseline, or earn 3 points in WE credit Water
Use Reduction.
Building Level Water Metering FA Install permanent water meters that measure the
total potable water use for the building and
associated
grounds. Meter data must be compiled into monthly
and annual summaries; meter readings can be
manual or automated.
Energy And
Atmosphere
Fundamental Systems Testing
and Verification
FA Complete the following commissioning (Cx) process
activities for mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and
renewable energy systems and assemblies, in
accordance with ASHRAE Guideline 0-2013 and
ASHRAE Guideline 1.1–2007 for HVAC&R Systems,
as they relate to energy, water, indoor
environmental quality, and durability:
Develop OPR & BOD, Thermal Enclosure Inspection,
Duct heating and cooling, fundamental Cx of mixed-
use projects
Minimum Energy Performance FA Complete unit by unit load calculations for each
unique unit type. Select equipment sizes for all
individual systems serving dwelling units to meet
listed equipment selection sizing guidelines and
122
CUSHING TERRELL / 50
Comply with ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1–
2016, with errata or a USGBC-approved equivalent
standard
Energy Metering PA Install an electricity meter for each residential unit.
This meter need not be utility-owned/utility-grade.
Fundamental Refrigerant
Management
FA Do not use chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-based
refrigerants in new heating, ventilating, air-
conditioning,
and refrigeration (HVAC&R) systems.
Materials and
Resources
Storage and Collection of
Recyclables
FA Provide dedicated areas accessible to waste haulers
and building occupants for the collection and
storage of recyclable materials for the entire
building
Construction and Demolition
Waste Management Planning
FA Develop and implement a construction and
demolition waste management plan:
- Establish waste diversion goals for the project by
identifying at least five materials (both
structural and nonstructural) targeted for diversion.
-Specify whether materials will be separated or
comingled and describe the diversion strategies
planned for the project. Describe where the material
will be taken and how the recycling facility
will process the material including expected
diversion rates for each material stream.
Provide a final report detailing all major waste
streams generated, including disposal and diversion
rates.
Indoor
Environmental
Quality
Minimum Indoor Air Quality
Performance
FA Design and install a dwelling-unit ventilation system
that complies with Section 4, Section 6.7,
and Section 6.8 of ASHRAE 62.2-2016 (with errata)
or local equivalent, whichever is more
stringent.
Combustion Venting FA Do not install any unvented combustion appliances
(ovens and ranges excluded).
Install a carbon monoxide (CO) monitor on each
floor of each dwelling unit, hard-wired with a
battery backup. CO monitors are required in all
types of units, regardless of the type of equipment
installed in the unit.
123
CUSHING TERRELL / 51
Garage Pollution Protection FA Place all air-handling equipment and ductwork
outside the fire-rated envelope of the garage.
Ductwork
that serves the garage itself, or elevator vestibules
or storage areas that are directly attached to or
inside the garage are exempt from this requirement,
as are ducts that are positively pressurized that are
run continuously.
Radon Resistant Construction FA For projects in high-risk areas for radon, EPA radon
zone 1 (or local equivalent for projects outside the
United States), design and build with radon-resistant
construction techniques. Follow the techniques
prescribed in at least one of the following standards:
American Association of Radon Scientist and
Technologists (AARST), Reducing Radon in New
Construction of 1 & 2 Family (CAH-2012) or Soil Gas
Control Systems in New Construction (CC-1000
2018); EPA Building Radon Out; NFPA 5000, Chapter
49; International Residential Code, Appendix F;
CABO, Appendix F; or a local equivalent, whichever
is
more stringent.
Interior Moisture Management FA To promote durability and performance of the
building enclosure and its components and systems
through appropriate design, materials selection, and
construction practices.
Environmental Tobacco Smoke
Control
FA Prohibit smoking in all common areas of the
building.
Prohibit smoking outside the building except on
private balconies or in designated smoking areas
located at least 25 feet (7.5 meters) (or the
maximum extent allowable by local codes) from all
entries,
outdoor air intakes, and operable windows.
Communicate the no-smoking policy in building
rental or lease agreements or condo or coop
association covenants and restrictions. Have in place
provisions for enforcement or no-smoking signage
Compartmentalization FA To limit occupants’ exposure to indoor air pollutants
by minimizing the transfer of air between units.
124
CUSHING TERRELL / 52
LEED for Neighborhood Development
CATEGORY PREREQUISUTE ALIGNMENT NOTES
Smart Location and
Linkage
Smart Location FA Either (1) locate the project on a site served by
existing water and wastewater infrastructure or (2)
locate the project within a legally adopted, publicly
owned, planned water and wastewater service area,
and provide new water and wastewater
infrastructure for the project. Locate the project on
an infill site.
Imperiled Species and
Ecological Communities
PA Consult with the state Natural Heritage Program and
state fish and wildlife agencies (or local equivalent
for
projects outside the U.S.) to determine if any of the
following have been or are likely to be found on the
project
site because of the presence of suitable habitat and
nearby occurrences:
-Species listed as threatened or endangered under
the U.S. Endangered Species Act or the state’s
endangered species act, or
-Species or ecological communities classified by
NatureServe as GH (possibly extinct), G1 (critically
imperiled), or G2 (imperiled), or
-Species listed as threatened or endangered
specified under local equivalent standards (in areas
outside
the U.S.) that are not covered by NatureServe data.
Wetland and Water Body
Conservation
PA Limit development effects on wetlands, water
bodies, and surrounding buffer land according to
the requirements
below.
Case 1. Sites without Sensitive Areas
Locate the project on a site that includes no
preproject wetlands, water bodies, land within 50
feet (15 meters) of
125
CUSHING TERRELL / 53
wetlands, and land within 100 feet (30 meters) of
water bodies.
Case 2. Sites with Sensitive Areas
If the site has preproject wetlands, water bodies,
land within 50 feet (15 meters) of wetlands, or land
within 100
feet (30 meters) of water bodies, select one of the
following two options: . No Development on
Wetlands and Water Bodies, Rainwater Management
and Protected Buffers
Agricultural Land
Conservation
FA Locate the project on a site that is not within a state
or locally designated agricultural preservation
district (or
local equivalent for projects outside the U.S.), unless
any changes made to the site conform to the
requirements
for development within the district (as used in this
requirement, “district” does not equate to land-use
zoning).
Flood Plan Avoidance PA To protect life and property, promote open space
and habitat conservation, and enhance water quality
and natural hydrologic systems.
Compact Development FA For projects with existing or planned transit service
(i.e., service with the funding commitments as
specified in SLL Prerequisite Smart Location) that
meets or exceeds the 2-point threshold in SLL Credit
Access to Quality Transit, build at the following
densities, based on the walking distances to the
transit service specified in that SLL credit:
- for residential components located within the
walking distances: 12 or more dwelling units per
acre (30 DU per hectare) of buildable land available
for residential uses;
Connected and Open
Community
PA To promote projects that have high levels of internal
connectivity and are well connected to the
community. To
encourage development within existing
communities that promote transportation efficiency
through multimodal
transportation. To improve public health by
encouraging daily physical activity.
126
CUSHING TERRELL / 54
Green Infrastructure
and Buildings
Certified Green Building
Minimum Building Energy
Performance
FA Demonstrate an average improvement of 5% for
new buildings, 3% for major building renovations, or
2% for
core and shell buildings over ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA
Standard 90.1–2010
Indoor Water Use Reduction FA For new buildings and buildings undergoing major
renovations as part of the project, reduce indoor
water usage
by an average of 20% from a baseline. All newly
installed toilets, urinals, private lavatory faucets, and
showerheads that are eligible for labeling must be
WaterSense labeled (or a local equivalent for
projects outside
the U.S.).
Construction Activity Pollution
Prevention
127
CUSHING TERRELL / 55
Enterprise Green Communities Plus
CATEGORY PREREQUISUTE ALIGNMENT NOTES
Integrative Integrative Design: Project
priorities survey
FA Complete the Project Priorities Survey, which can be
found in the Appendix.
Integrative Design: Charrettes
and coordination meetings
FA Develop an integrative design process that moves
the outputs of the Project Priorities Survey
into action through a series of collaborative
meetings. Prioritize multi-benefit strategies. Assign
responsibility within your design and development
teams for accountability.
Integrative design:
documentation
FA Include Enterprise Green Communities Criteria
information in your contract documents and
construction specifications (Division 1 Section 01 81
13 Sustainable Design Requirements) as
necessary for the construction team to understand
the requirements and how they will be
verified. Ensure, and indicate, that the drawings and
specifications have been generated to be
compliant and meet the certification goals.
Integrative design:
construction management
FA Create, implement, and document your
contractor/subcontractor education plan to ensure
that all persons working on-site fully understand
their role in achieving the project objectives.
Location and
Neighborhood Fabric
Sensitive Site Protection PA All projects must:
1. Protect floodplain functions (e.g., storage, habitat,
water quality) by limiting new development
within the 100-year floodplain of all types of
watercourses.
2. Conserve and protect aquatic ecosystems,
including wetlands and deepwater habitats, that
provide critical ecosystem functions for fish, other
wildlife, and people.
3. Protect ecosystem function by avoiding the
development of areas that contain habitat for plant
and animal species identified as threatened or
endangered.
128
CUSHING TERRELL / 56
4. Conserve the most productive agricultural soils by
protecting prime farmland, unique farmland,
and farmland of statewide or local importance.
Connections to Existing
developments and
infrastructure
PA Locate the project on a site with access to existing
roads, water, sewers, and other infrastructure
and within or contiguous to (having at least 25% of
the perimeter bordering) existing
development. For sites over 5 acres,
provide connections to the adjacent street network
at least every 800 feet. Tie all planned bike
paths to existing bike paths.
Compact development FA At a minimum, build to the residential density
(dwelling units /acre) of the census block group
where the project is located. In Rural/Tribal/Small
Town locations that do not have zoning
requirements: Build to a minimum net density of 5
units per acre for single-family houses;
10 units per acre for multifamily buildings, single
and two-story; and 15 units per acre for
multifamily buildings greater than two-stories.
Proximity to services and
community resources
FA Locate the project within a 0.5-mile walk distance of
at least four, or a 1-mile walk distance of at
least seven, of the listed services. For projects that
qualify as Rural/Tribal/Small Town, locate the
project within 5 miles of at least four of the listed
services.
Preservation of and access to
open space for
rural/tribal/small town
PA Option 1: Locate the project within a 0.25-mile walk
distance of dedicated public open space that
is a minimum of 0.75 acres; at least 80% of which
unpaved.
OR
Option 2: Set aside a minimum of 10% (minimum of
0.25 acres) of the total project acreage as
open and accessible to all residents; at least 80% of
which unpaved.
Access to Transit FA Locate projects within a 0.5-mile walk distance of
transit services (bus, rail and/or ferry),
constituting at least 45 or more transit rides per
weekday, with some type of weekend service.
Access to Broadband:
connectivity
FA Incorporate broadband infrastructure so that when
broadband service comes to a community,
129
CUSHING TERRELL / 57
the property can be easily connected. Include a
network of mini-ducts or conduit throughout the
building, extending from the expected
communications access point to each network
termination
point in the building.
Site Improvements Environmental Remediation PA Determine whether there are any hazardous
materials present on the site through one of the
four methods listed. Mitigate any contaminants
found.
Minimization of disturbance
during staging and
construction
PA For sites >1 acre, implement EPA’s National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater
Discharges from Construction Activities guidance, or
local requirements, whichever is more
stringent
Ecosystem services/landscape FA If providing plantings, all must be native or climate-
appropriate (adapted) to the region
and appropriate to the site’s soil and microclimate.
Do not introduce any invasive plant species.
Plant, seed, or xeriscape all disturbed areas.
Surface stormwater
management
PA Treat or retain on-site precipitation equivalent to the
60th percentile precipitation event.
Where not feasible due to geotechnical issues, soil
conditions, or the size of the site, treat
or retain the maximum volume possible.
Efficient irrigation and water
use
FA If irrigation is utilized, install an efficient irrigation
system per the requirements listed.
Water Water-conserving fixtures FA Reduce total indoor water consumption by at least
20% compared to baseline indoor water
consumption chart. Any new toilet, showerhead, and
/or lavatory faucet must be WaterSense
certified. For all single-family homes and all dwelling
units in buildings three stories or fewer,
the supply pressure may not exceed 60 psi.
Water quality FA For multifamily buildings with either a cooling tower,
a centralized hot water system,
or 10+ stories: Develop a Legionella water
management program
Operating Energy Building Performance Std. FA Certify all buildings with residential units in the
project through either ENERGY STAR
Multifamily New Construction, ENERGY STAR
Manufactured Homes, and/or ENERGY STAR
130
CUSHING TERRELL / 58
Certified Homes as relevant. ASHRAE Option: Energy
performance of the completed building equivalent
to, or better than,
ASHRAE 90.1-2013 using an energy model created
by a qualified energy services provider
according to Appendix G 90.1-2016
Sizing of heating and cooling
equipment
FA Size and select heating and cooling equipment in
accordance with ACCA manuals J and S
OR in accordance with the ASHRAE Handbook of
Fundamentals
Energy Star Appliances FA Install ENERGY STAR clothes washers, dishwashers,
and refrigerators
Lighting FA Follow the guidance for high efficacy permanently
installed lighting and other characteristics
for recessed light fixtures, lighting controls, lighting
power density, and exterior lighting.
Materials Healthier Material Selection FA Select all interior paints, coatings, primers, and
wallpaper; interior adhesives and sealants;
flooring; insulation; and composite wood as
specified.
Bath, Kitchen, Laundry
Surfaces
FA Use materials that have durable, cleanable surfaces
throughout bathrooms, kitchens, and
laundry rooms.
Managing Moisture:
foundations
FA Install capillary breaks and vapor retarders that meet
specified criteria appropriate
for the foundation type.
Managing moisture: roofing
and wall systems
FA Provide water drainage away from walls, window,
and roofs by implementing the list
of techniques.
Construction waste
management
FA Develop and implement a waste management plan
that reduces non-hazardous construction
and demolition waste through recycling, salvaging,
or diversion strategies through one of the
three options. Achieve optional points by going
above and beyond
the requirement.
Healthy Living
Environment
Radon mitigation FA For New Construction in EPA Zone 1 areas, install
passive radon-resistant features below the slab
and a vertical vent pipe with junction box within 10
feet of an electrical outlet in case an active
system should prove necessary in the future. For
Substantial Rehab projects in EPA Zone 1, test
131
CUSHING TERRELL / 59
before and after the retrofit and mitigate per the
specified protocols.
Combustion equipment FA Specify power-vented or direct-vent equipment
when installing any new combustion appliance for
space or water heating that will be located
within the conditioned space.
Garage isolation FA Provide a continuous air barrier between the
conditioned space and any garage space to
prevent the migration of any contaminants into the
living space. Visually inspect common
walls and ceilings between attached garages and
living spaces to ensure that they are
air-sealed before insulation is installed.
Integrated pest management FA Seal all wall, floor, and joint penetrations with low-
VOC caulking or other appropriate nontoxic
sealing methods to prevent pest entry.
Smoke-free policy FA Implement and enforce a smoke-free policy in all
common area and within a
25-foot perimeter around the exterior of all
residential buildings. Lease language must prohibit
smoking in these locations and provide a graduated
enforcement policy. Make the smoke-free
policy readily available.
Ventilation FA For each dwelling unit in full accordance with
ASHRAE 62.2-2010, install:
• A local mechanical exhaust system in each
bathroom [3 points if Moderate Rehab]
• A local mechanical exhaust system in each kitchen
[3 points if Moderate Rehab]
• A whole-house mechanical ventilation system [3
points if Moderate Rehab]
Verify these flow rates are either within +/– 15 CFM
or +/– 15% of design value.
For each multifamily building of four or more
stories, in full accordance with ASHRAE
62.1-2010, install:
Dehumidification FA Design, select, and install supplemental
dehumidification equipment to keep
relative humidity <60%
Operations,
maintenance, and
resident engagement
Building operations,
maintenance manual plan
FA Develop a manual with thorough building
operations and maintenance (O&M) guidance and a
complementary plan.
132
CUSHING TERRELL / 60
Emergency management
manual
FA Provide a manual on emergency operations targeted
toward operations and maintenance staff
and other building-level personnel. The manual
should address responses to various types of
emergencies, leading with those that have the
greatest probability of negatively affecting the
project.
Resident manual FA Provide a guide for homeowners and renters that
explains the intent, benefits, use, and
maintenance of their home’s green features and
practices. The Resident Manual should
encourage green and healthy activities per the list of
topics.
Walk-Throughs and
orientations to property
operation
FA Provide a comprehensive walk-through and
orientation for all residents, property manager(s),
and buildings operations staff.
Energy and water data
collection and management
FA For rental properties, upload project energy and
water performance data in an online utility
benchmarking platform annually for at least five
years from time of construction completion
per one of the four methods provided; grant
133
CUSHING TERRELL / 61
NICE-TO-HAVES LIST
Energy
Zero-carbon / net zero (Depends on on-site renewables)
Transportation
Electric bus charging / parking
Covered/indoor bicycle storage
Dedicated parking for carshare vehicles
Reduced parking
Architecture
Heat island reduction
Non-smoking campus
Walk-off mats
Integrative analysis of building materials
Integrative process for health promotion
Site/Civil
On-site soil and vegetation restoration
LID practice / green infrastructure
On-site recreation / play space
Construction
Commissioning / retro-commissioning (especially radon test and indoor air quality assessment)
Build for deconstruction
134
Draft Report
Lumber Yard Demographic and
Market Assessment
Prepared for:
City of Aspen
Aspen Pitkin Housing Authority
Prepared by:
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
EPS #213032
November 30, 2021
135
Table of Contents
Trends and Conditions ............................................................................... 1
Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
Population, Household, and Job Trends ............................................................ 1
Age Distribution ............................................................................................ 4
Home Prices ................................................................................................. 5
Key Demographic Finding ............................................................................... 5
2018 Greater Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study ........................................... 6
Employment Trends .................................................................................. 7
Wage and Salary Job Trends ........................................................................... 7
Supply and Demand ................................................................................ 12
Household Income ...................................................................................... 12
Household Size ........................................................................................... 13
Renters and Owners .................................................................................... 14
Housing Units by AMI .................................................................................. 15
Recent Multifamily Projects ........................................................................... 18
Recommendations .................................................................................. 23
APCHA Rental Inventory ............................................................................... 23
Analysis Findings ........................................................................................ 24
Proposed Unit Mix ....................................................................................... 25
136
List of Tables
Table 1. Household Composition, Pitkin County, 2012-2019 .................................... 3
Table 2. Wages and Incomes, Top Five Growth Sectors, Pitkin County, 2010-2019 ..... 8
Table 3. Wages and Incomes, Top Sectors, Pitkin County, 2020 ............................. 11
Table 4. Recent Apartment Developments .......................................................... 18
Table 5. Rents by AMI Levels in Recent Properties ............................................... 19
Table 6. APCHA Rental Housing Inventory........................................................... 23
Table 7. Recommended Unit Mix ....................................................................... 25
137
List of Figures
Figure 1. Pitkin County Population, 2010-2020 ....................................................... 2
Figure 2. Households vs. Housing Unit Growth, Pitkin County, 2010-2020 .................. 3
Figure 3. Age Distribution, Pitkin County, 2010-2020............................................... 4
Figure 4. Median Home Sale Price, Pitkin County, 2018-2021 ................................... 5
Figure 5. Employment, Pitkin County, 2010-2021 ................................................... 7
Figure 6. Employment Change by sector, Pitkin County, 2010-2019........................... 8
Figure 7. Change in Employment by wage quartile, Pitkin County, 2010-2019 ............. 9
Figure 8. Change in Employment AMI, Pitkin County, 2010-2019 ............................ 10
Figure 9. Change in Renter Households by AMI, 2010-2019 .................................... 12
Figure 10. Change in Owner Households by AMI, 2010-2019 .................................... 13
Figure 11. Households by Size, Market Area, 2010-2019 ......................................... 14
Figure 12. Households by Tenure, 2010-2019, Market Area ...................................... 14
Figure 13. Renter Units by AMI, 2010-2019 ........................................................... 15
Figure 14. Owner Units by AMI, 2010-2019 ........................................................... 16
Figure 15. Rental Units by Bedroom County, Pitkin County, 2010-2019 ...................... 17
138
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
213032-Lumber Yard Report 12-21-21.docx 1
Trends and Conditions
Introduction
This report was prepared for the City of Aspen and the Aspen-Pitkin County
Housing Authority, under a subcontract with DHM Design in Carbondale. The
purpose of this analysis is to provide recommendations on the unit mix in the
Lumber Yard housing development. The City is particularly interested in aligning
the development program with job growth and the associated wage and
household income levels. The study also examines demographic trends and
conditions, and the rental housing supply to address the full range of housing
demand and supply in the rental market.
The report begins with an overview of macro level growth trends and
demographics in Pitkin County. The second chapter reviews employment and
wage trends. Chapters 3 and 4 summarize housing supply characteristics
including profiles of recently constructed apartments. Chapter 5 contains
Economic & Planning Systems’ (EPS) recommendations on the mix of units by size
(bedrooms) and APCHA income categories.
Population, Household, and Job Trends
Over the past decade, the population of Pitkin County has experienced minimal
growth, increasing from 17,156 residents in 2010 to 17,363 in 2020, which is an
addition of 207 people, as shown in Figure 1. The annual growth rate over this
time period was 0.12 percent. The State Demographer estimates that the
County’s population actually declined by over 300 since 2016 when the population
was 17,691.
139
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
2
Figure 1. Pitkin County Population, 2010-2020
When looking at demographic trends in Colorado’s mountain communities, it is
also important to examine trends in the number of households, a group of people
related or unrelated living in one occupied housing unit.
Overall, growth in housing units outpaced household growth, with the overall
housing stock increasing by about 9 percent between 2010 and 2019, while the
number of households only increased by 4 percent as shown in Figure 2. However,
most housing unit growth was in “vacant units” that are largely comprised of
second homes. The share of vacant units in Pitkin County increased from 37
percent of all housing units in 2010 to 40 percent of all housing units in 2019.
The number of jobs in Pitkin County increased by 19 percent since 2010, compared to
only a 4 percent in population. With unemployment generally low after 2012, most
of the new jobs could only be filled by an increase in commuting into the county.
17,156 17,128 17,201 17,321 17,521 17,701 17,691 17,658 17,643 17,413 17,363
10,000
11,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
15,000
16,000
17,000
18,000
19,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source: DOLA; Economic & Planning Systems
140
Economic & Planning Systems
3
Figure 2. Households vs. Housing Unit Growth, Pitkin County, 2010-2020
EPS analyzed the composition of households in Pitkin County using estimates from
the American Community Survey (ACS) part of the U.S. Census. As of 2019,
approximately 42 percent of households in Pitkin County live with an unrelated
roommate, up from 39 percent in 2012, while 25 percent live with family
members, 19 percent live with a partner or spouse, and 14 percent live alone, as
shown in Table 1. This suggests that roommate arrangements are prevalent,
which is a source of demand for multi-bedroom unit types.
Table 1. Household Composition, Pitkin County, 2012-2019
104%
109%
119%
95%
100%
105%
110%
115%
120%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
% of 2010
Households
Housing Units
Vacant Housing Units
Source: DOLA; Economic & Planning Systems
Description 2012 % Total 2019 % Total
Households
Living Alone 2,648 16%2,457 14%
Living with Roomates 6,665 39%7,550 42%
Living with a partner/spouse 3,201 19%3,353 19%
Living with family 4,361 26%4,432 25%
Total 16,875 100%17,792 100%
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213032-Aspen Lumber Yard\Data\[213032-HH Characteristics.xlsx]T-Summ
141
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
4
Age Distribution
The population of Pitkin County has become older over the past decade. The
median age increased from 42.1 in 2010 to 44.8 in 2020, while the age cohort
with the most significant increase in its share of population over that period was
65 and over, growing from 11.4 percent of the population in 2010 to 19.3 percent
of the population in 2020, as shown in Figure 3. In addition, the share of the
population aged 0 to 14, 25 to 34, 35 to 44, and 45 to 54 all decreased between
2010 and 2020.
Figure 3. Age Distribution, Pitkin County, 2010-2020
14.3%
9.1%
15.3%
16.1%
17.3%
16.4%
11.4%11.9%
11.0%
13.9%13.5%14.2%
16.3%
19.3%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
0-14 15 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65+
2010 2020
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
142
Economic & Planning Systems
5
Home Prices
Pitkin County continues to have a high-priced housing market that has
appreciated significantly in recent years. From 2018 to 2021, the median sale
price increased from $2,800,000 to $5,037,000, as shown in Figure 4, with the
largest increase occurring between 2019 and 2020, when the median sale price
rose by 50 percent year-over-year. In terms of price distribution, approximately
10 percent of the homes sold in 2020 and 2021 were under $500,000, while one-
third of homes in 2020 and 2021 were under $1,000,000.
Figure 4. Median Home Sale Price, Pitkin County, 2018-2021
Key Demographic Finding
Three trends: slow growing to decreasing population, household growth outpacing
population growth, and the aging population have important implications on
affordable housing, the sustainability of the local economy and character of the
place. The decline in population since 2016 is likely comprised of a combination of
natural decreases (deaths and aging) and people moving out of the county.
The faster rate of household growth compared to population is a complex trend. It
may indicate that newer households moving into the county are smaller than the
households leaving the county. The new households could be empty nester
households and retirees. When paired with the change in age distribution
(declines in young and working age population, increase in over 65 population), a
picture emerges of an increasingly older wealthier population.
$2,800,000
$3,275,000
$5,000,000 $5,037,000
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
2018 2019 2020 2021
Median Sale Price
Source: Land Title Company; Economic & Planning Systems
143
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
6
2018 Greater Roaring Fork Regio nal
Housing Study
In 2018, EPS and RRC Associates conducted an in-depth housing study for the
Greater Roaring Fork Region lying between Aspen, Rifle, and Eagle. The study
involved extensive data analysis as well as a detailed survey. The study had the
following key takeaways:
• The region has a 2,100-unit shortfall in housing for households at 60% of area
median income (AMI) and less, and a 1,900-unit shortfall for households
between 100 and 160% AMI, the “missing middle”.
• Overspending on housing (cost burden) costs the region $54 million per year
that could be spent in the local economy or used to save for the future or pay
off debt.
• More than 26,000 workers (out of 47,000 employed residents) cross paths in
their daily commute versus just 19,000 employed residents who live where
they work. This cross-commuting impacts roads, quality of life, and the
environment.
• Year-round business has grown, which can increase the region’s resilience to
another down-turn.
• The population is aging and retiring; over the next 10 years, it is projected
that the population over 65 will increase 60 percent (7,800 people).
• Non-local property ownership and short term rentals put pressure on the
housing market by reducing supply, which impacts the local workforce and the
permanent resident population.
Many of these takeaways are confirmed by the analysis in this study, including an
aging population and a supply and demand imbalance in the housing stock below
60% of AMI.
144
Economic & Planning Systems
7
Employment Trends
This chapter summarizes trends in employment by industry and wage level in
Pitkin County. From this information we estimate the household incomes that
result from combining multiple job holders into a household.
Wage and Salary Job Trends
The Pitkin County economy has been generally strong over the past decade, as
wage and salary jobs grew by 1,724 or 1.3 percent annually between 2010 and
2019, as shown in Figure 5. The momentum slowed in 2020, when jobs contracted
by 9.4 percent due to the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. As of
early 2021, total employment has mostly rebounded to its pre-pandemic levels.
Figure 5. Employment, Pitkin County, 2010-2021
Job growth in Pitkin County was primarily driven by tourism-related sectors,
including Accommodation and Food Services, Arts and Recreation, and Retail
Trade, as shown in Figure 6. Collectively, these sectors accounted for
approximately 60 percent of total job growth from 2010 through 2019. As shown
in Table 2, the household incomes for these jobs range from 74 percent to 116
percent of area median income. It is important to note that these jobs are
essential to the Pitkin County economy and also drive demand for workforce
housing. Other sectors that grew included Public Administration (government),
Real Estate, and Health Care.
15,003 15,061
15,329
15,707
16,437
15,826
16,129
16,371 16,534
16,801
15,215
16,727
10,000
11,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
15,000
16,000
17,000
18,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: QCEW;Economic & Planning Systems
145
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
8
Figure 6. Employment Change by sector, Pitkin County, 2010-2019
Table 2. Wages and Incomes, Top Five Growth Sectors, Pitkin County, 2010-2019
An analysis by wage quartile shows the range of wage levels where job growth
has been. Between 2010 and 2019, 29 percent of new jobs in Pitkin County were
at or below the 25th percentile of wages, which equates to $47,372 per year or
below $23 per hour, as shown in Figure 7. Just over half of new jobs were in the
25th to 50th percentile of wages, at $47,372 to $61,620 per year or $23 to
approximately $30 per hour. The remaining 19 percent of jobs were above
$61,620 per year or $30 per hour.
437
433
332
205
172
150
108
100
97
55
50
47
27
14
2
-47
-53
-85
-240
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Acc. and Food Services
Arts and Recreation
Public Admin.
Real Estate
Retail Trade
Health Care
Transport and Warehousing
Professional and Tech Srvcs
Other Services
Ag & Forestry
Educational Services
Management of Companies
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Utilities
Finance
Information
Construction
Admin and Waste Services
Description % of Job Growth Avg. Wage HH Income [1]AMI APCHA Category
Pitkin County
Accommodation and Food Services 24%$43,368 $69,389 74%Category 2
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 24%$50,024 $80,038 85%Category 3
Public Administration 18%$66,352 $106,163 113%Category 3
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 11%$68,120 $108,992 116%Category 3
Retail Trade 10%$51,896 $83,034 88%Category 3
[1] Assumes 1.6 Earners per Household
Source: BLS; Economic & Planning Systems
146
Economic & Planning Systems
9
Figure 7. Change in Employment by Wage Quartile, Pitkin County, 2010-2019
While wages relate to household income, the above information is only part of the
picture as a working household is often comprised of multiple earners. The 2019
housing survey found that on average there are 1.6 earners per household.
Household income is therefore estimated by multiplying the average wage for an
industry, or the wages in the quartiles shown, by 1.6. This assumes that the
“second” 0.6th of an earner makes the same wage as the first (1.0) earner. When
thinking about the workforce in a mountain resort area, it is common for people
with similar job types to pair up as roommates.
The wage information is converted to estimated household income. As shown, 26
percent of the job growth translates to household incomes in APCHA Category 2
(50-85% AMI) and 55 percent of the job growth translates to Category 3 (85-120%
AMI). If a goal is to serve the local workforce and employers, then a significant
portion of the Lumber Yard unit mix should be in the Category 2 and Category 3
income ranges.
147
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
10
Figure 8. Change in Employment AMI, Pitkin County, 2010-2019
A more granular breakdown of sectors in Pitkin County illustrates the wages in
specific industries. As shown in Table 3, hotel jobs and restaurant jobs both
comprise approximately 10 percent of total employment. For a household with 1.6
earners, hotel jobs pay a household income equivalent to 97 percent of AMI
(Category 3) and restaurant jobs pay a household income equivalent to 82
percent of AMI (Category 2). Skiing Facilities, which comprise 9 percent of total
jobs, pay a household income equivalent to 109 percent of AMI. For a one-earner
household, hotel jobs pay an income equivalent to 74 percent of AMI and
restaurants pay an income equivalent to 63 percent of AMI, placing jobholders in
Category 2 under APCHA guidelines. In a few sectors with a sizeable presence in
Pitkin County, including Supermarkets and Temporary Help Services, incomes in
one-earner households place jobholders in Category 1.
0
(0%)
436
(26%)
913
(55%)
117
(7%)
0
(0%)
202
(12%)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Below 50% AMI 50%-85% AMI 85%-120% AMI 120%-205% AMI 205%-240% AMI Above 240% AMI
Source: QCEW; Economic & Planning Systems
148
Economic & Planning Systems
11
Table 3. Wages and Incomes, Top Sectors, Pitkin County, 2020
Description % of Total Jobs Avg. Wage AMI [1]Category HH Income AMI [2]Category
Pitkin County
Hotels and Motels 11%$57,092 74%Cat. 2 $91,347 97%Cat. 3
Full-Service Restaurants 10%$48,405 63%Cat. 2 $77,447 82%Cat. 2
Skiing Facilities 9%$63,916 83%Cat. 2 $102,266 109%Cat. 3
Executive and Legislative Offices 6%$68,979 89%Cat. 3 $110,366 117%Cat. 3
Residential Property Managers 5%$73,835 95%Cat. 3 $118,136 126%Cat. 4
General Medical Hospitals 3%$86,511 112%Cat. 3 $138,418 147%Cat. 5
Elementary and Secondary Schools 3%$56,715 73%Cat. 2 $90,743 97%Cat. 3
Temporary Help Services 2%$30,795 40%Cat. 1 $49,272 52%Cat. 2
Landscaping Services 2%$48,181 62%Cat. 2 $77,090 82%Cat. 2
Supermarkets and Grocery Stores 2%$36,052 47%Cat. 1 $57,684 61%Cat. 2
[1] Assumes a 1-person household size
[2] Assumes a 2.5-person household size
Source: BLS; Economic & Planning Systems
C:\Users\Carson\Documents\[QCEW Pitkin Eagle Garfield CLEANED.xlsx]T-6 digit Summ Pitkin
1-Earner Household 1.6-Earner Household
149
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
12
Supply and Demand
This chapter analyzes supply and demand information on housing and household
demographics in Pitkin County and the greater Roaring Fork Valley, including
Basalt, Carbondale, and Glenwood Springs – referred to as the Primary Market
Area (PMA).
Household Inc ome
EPS analyzed data on households by income range using census tract-level data
from the American Community Survey (ACS). The incomes from the ACS data
were translated into area median income using guidelines set by the Aspen-Pitkin
County Housing Authority (APCHA). The tracts in this analysis encompass the
entire Primary Market Area.
From 2010 through 2019, growth in renter households was concentrated above
85% of AMI (above Category 2). The majority of renter household growth was in
the 120-205% AMI category (mostly Category 4), as shown in Figure 9. By
contrast, the number of renter households below 85% of AMI contracted,
indicating a net loss of the lowest-income households.
Figure 9. Change in Renter Households by AMI, 2010-2019
-222
-114
190
623
22
198
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
Below 50%
AMI
50%-85%
AMI
85%-120%
AMI
120%-205%
AMI
205%-240%
AMI
Above 240%
AMI
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
150
Economic & Planning Systems
13
Owner households showed a similar pattern. New household growth primarily
occurred in the 85-120% AMI (Category 3) and above 240% AMI categories
(Category 5), while there was a significant loss of households below 85% of AMI
(Category 2), as shown in Figure 10. Overall, this analysis highlights a pattern in
which higher-income households are replacing lower-income households in the
Roaring Fork Valley, likely due to displacement of lower-income households
because of rising housing costs and scarce supply.
Figure 10. Change in Owner Households by AMI, 2010-2019
Household Size
Within the Primary Market Area, the most common household size is a two-person
household, comprising 39 percent of all households, followed a one-person
household with 28 percent, four or more-person household with 17 percent, and a
three-person household with 16 percent, as shown in Figure 11. From 2010 and
2019, the share of two-person households grew the most, increasing from 34 to
39 percent of all households, while the share of three-person households
increased marginally. The decrease in share of households with 4 or more people,
which dropped from 21 to 17 percent of all households, indicates a loss of families
and larger households.
-500
-265
-8
439
84
457
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
Below 50%
AMI
50%-85%
AMI
85%-120%
AMI
120%-205%
AMI
205%-240%
AMI
Above 240%
AMI
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
151
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
14
Figure 11. Households by Size, Market Area, 2010-2019
Renters and Owners
In terms of tenure, owner households comprise approximately two-thirds of all
households in the Primary Market Area. The share of renter households within the
Primary Market Area increased slightly between 2010 and 2019, increasing from 34
percent to 36 percent of all households, as shown in Figure 12. As such, the share
of owner households decreased from 66 to 64 percent of all households.
Figure 12. Households by Tenure, 2010-2019, Market Area
30%
34%
14%
21%
28%
39%
16%17%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1-Person HH 2-Person HH 3-Person HH 4+ Person HH
2010 2019
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
34%
66%
36%
64%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Renters Owners
2010 2019
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
152
Economic & Planning Systems
15
Housing Units by AMI
On the supply side, EPS analyzed data on units by value and units by rent using
census tract-level data from the American Community Survey (ACS). The incomes
from the ACS data were translated into area median income using guidelines set
by the Aspen-Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA). The tracts in this analysis
encompass the entire Primary Market Area.
Rental Housing
Among rental units, the vast majority of new unit growth occurred between 85%
and 120% of AMI, while there was a loss of units below 50% of AMI and above
205% of AMI, as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13. Renter Units by AMI, 2010-2019
-324
-124 -96
212
1,041
235
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Below 50%
AMI
50%-85%
AMI
85%-120%
AMI
120%-205%
AMI
205%-240%
AMI
Above 240%
AMI
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
153
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
16
On the owner side, new unit growth was distributed between units in the 50-85%
AMI category and the 120-205% category as shown in Figure 14. These trends
reflect increases in rental rates at the low end, and likely conversion of units to
ownership or second homes at the higher end.
Figure 14. Owner Units by AMI, 2010-2019
-340
-95
-513
554
89
562
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
Below 50%
AMI
50%-85%
AMI
85%-120%
AMI
120%-205%
AMI
205%-240%
AMI
Above 240%
AMI
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
154
Economic & Planning Systems
17
Number of Bedrooms
The most common type of rental unit in the Primary Market Area is a 2-bedroom
unit, comprising 40 percent of all rental units, as shown in Figure 15. One- and
3-bedroom units both comprise approximately 20 percent of rental units, while
studios and 4- and 5-bedroom units comprise less than 10 percent of rental units.
Between 2010 and 2019, the share of 2-bedroom units grew significantly,
increasing from 32 to 40 percent of all rental units, while the share of 3-bedroom
units fell from 26 to 19 percent of units, and the share of 1-bedroom units fell
from 22 to 20 percent. The increase in 2-bedroom units is attributed to
construction of new APCHA projects and other new apartments noted below.
Figure 15. Rental Units by Bedroom County, Pitkin County, 2010-2019
11%
22%
32%
26%
7%
2%
7%
20%
40%
19%
10%
4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
No Bedroom 1-Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3-Bedroom 4-Bedroom 5+ Bedrooms
2010 2019
Source: U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
155
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
18
Recent Multifamily Projects
EPS gathered information on recent multifamily projects in the Roaring Fork
Valley to gauge what the market has delivered, with a particular focus on unit mix
and rental rates. Several multifamily projects, both market rate and affordable,
have been built in the Valley over the past decade. A brief description of each
project is provided below and project characteristics are summarized in Table 4.
Newer apartment developments have rents concentrated in the Category 4 and
RO categories. These are not APCHA properties; EPS converted the rental rates to
the equivalent APCHA categories and AMI ranges for comparison. As shown in
Table 5, the only properties serving people earning less than 120 percent of AMI
(Category 4) are properties developed using low income housing tax credits
(LIHTC). The two LIHTC projects shown here have rents affordable to people
earning between 50 and 85% of AMI (Category 2).
Table 4. Recent Apartment Developments
Description Units Percent Avg. Size Avg. Rent Per Sq. Ft.Yr Built Type
Willits Seven - Basalt
1 Bedroom 18 36%624 $1,901 $3.05 2017 Affordable
2-Bedroom 17 34%909 $2,168 $2.39 2017 Affordable
3-Bedroom 15 30%1,072 $2,280 $2.13 2017 Affordable
Total 50 100%855 $2,105 $2.46 2017 Affordable
One 10 Harris - Basalt
1 Bedroom 5 10%733 $2,275 $3.10 2018 Market
2-Bedroom 20 41%947 $2,850 $3.01 2018 Market
3-Bedroom 24 49%1,114 $3,450 $3.10 2018 Market
Total 49 100%1,007 $3,085 $3.06 2018 Market
Six Canyon - Glenwood Spgs
1 Bedroom 55 47%683 $1,840 $2.69 2020 Market
2-Bedroom 61 53%980 $2,308 $2.36 2020 Market
Total 116 100%821 $2,086 $2.54
Glenwood Greens - Glenwood Spgs
1 Bedroom 28 47%708 $917 $1.30 2014 LIHTC
2-Bedroom 20 33%950 $1,095 $1.15 2014 LIHTC
3-Bedroom 12 20%1,084 $1,265 $1.17 2014 LIHTC
Total 60 100%
Roaring Fork Apartments - Basalt
1 Bedroom 45 80%N/A N/A N/A 2018 LIHTC
2-Bedroom 11 20%N/A N/A N/A 2018 LIHTC
Total 56 100%N/A N/A N/A 2018 LIHTC
1201 Main - Carbondale
1 Bedroom 15 56%660 $1,800 N/A N/A Market
2-Bedroom 12 44%1,020 $2,800 N/A N/A Market
Total 27 100%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213032-Aspen Lumber Yard\Data\[213032-Apartment Comps.xlsx]T-Summ
156
Economic & Planning Systems
19
Table 5. Rents by AMI Levels in Recent Properties
Description Units Avg. Rent
Equivalent
APCHA Category AMI
Willits Seven - Basalt
1 Bedroom 18 $1,901 Cat. 4 120-205%
2-Bedroom 17 $2,168 Cat. 4 120-205%
3-Bedroom 15 $2,280 Cat. 4 120-205%
Total 50 $2,105
One 10 Harris - Basalt
1 Bedroom 5 $2,275 RO Above 205%
2-Bedroom 20 $2,850 RO Above 205%
3-Bedroom 24 $3,450 RO Above 205%
Total 49 $3,085
Six Canyon - Glenwood Spgs
1 Bedroom 55 $1,840 Cat. 4 120-205%
2-Bedroom 61 $2,308 RO Above 205%
Total 116 $2,086
Glenwood Greens - Glenwood Spgs
1 Bedroom 28 $917 Cat. 2 50-85%
2-Bedroom 20 $1,095 Cat. 2 50-85%
3-Bedroom 12 $1,265 Cat. 2 50-85%
Total 60 $1,046
Roaring Fork Apartments - Basalt
1 Bedroom 45 N/A Cat. 2 50-85%
2-Bedroom 11 N/A RO Above 205%
Total 56 N/A
1201 Main - Carbondale
1 Bedroom 15 $1,800 Cat. 4 120-205%
2-Bedroom 12 $2,800 RO Above 205%
Total 27 $2,244
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213032-Aspen Lumber Yard\Data\[213032-Apartment Comps.xlsx]T-Summ
157
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
20
Willits Seven
Located in Willits Town Center in Basalt, Willits Seven is a 50-unit apartment
complex built in 2017. Willits Seven has a relatively even mixture of 1-, 2-, and 3-
bedroom units, and is only leased to employees in Roaring Fork Valley. Units are
income-restricted at up to 120% of area median income under current APCHA
guidelines (Category 2). Current rents are $1,901 per month for a 1-bedroom,
$2,168 for a 2-bedroom, and $2,280 for a 3-bedroom.
One 10 Harris
Also in Willits Town Center, One 10 Harris is a 49-unit market rate apartment
project built in 2018. One 10 Harris sits at the higher end of the apartment
market, with rental rates over $3.00 per square foot. Approximately half of the
units are 3-bedroom, the highest share of the comparable properties, while 41
percent are 2-bedroom units and 10 percent are 1-bedroom units.
158
Economic & Planning Systems
21
Six Canyon
Six Canyon is a 116-unit market-rate apartment project built in 2020 located
along U.S. Highway 6 in the northwestern part of Glenwood Springs. The unit mix
is evenly split between 1- and 2-bedroom units and the average rent is $2.54 per
square foot. It is one of the newest for-rent residential projects in the Roaring
Fork Valley.
Glenwood Greens
Glenwood Greens is a 60-unit affordable apartment project located in Glenwood
Springs adjacent to the Glenwood Meadows shopping center. Built in 2014,
Glenwood Greens is a low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) project with below-
market rents averaging $1.21 per square foot. The unit mix consists of 28 1-
bedroom units, 20 2-bedroom units, and 12 3-bedroom units.
159
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
22
Roaring Fork Apartments
The Roaring Fork Apartments is a 56-unit multifamily project located along State
Highway 82 in Basalt. Built in 2018, the Roaring Fork received funding from the
low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) program and contains a mixture of
affordable units (under 60% of AMI) and market-rate units. Approximately 80
percent of the units are 1-bedroom units and 20 percent are 2-bedroom units.
1201 Main
Located in Carbondale at the intersection of Main Street and State Highway 133,
1201 Main is a 27-unit market-rate apartment project. 1201 Main has a mixture
of 1- and 2-bedroom units.
160
Economic & Planning Systems
23
Recommendations
This chapter provides recommendations and considerations for the unit mix and
targeted income ranges for the rental portion of the Lumber Yard development.
For context, the chapter begins with a summary of the current unit mix in
APCHA’s rental properties.
APCHA Rental Inventory
APCHA has 1,382 units in its inventory, shown in Table 6. The inventory is
concentrated in smaller units ranging from studios (22 percent) and dorm units
(15 percent) to 1-bedroom (27 percent) and 2-bedroom units (31 percent). The
inventory includes properties built over decades when the focus was on employee
and seasonal housing, reflected in the dorm style and 1- and 2-bedroom
apartment units.
Most of APCHA’s rental inventory is in income Categories 2 and 3 (50-85% AMI
and 85-120% AMI), with 56 percent of units. There are another 8 percent of units
in Category 1 (under 50% AMI) and a third of the units as RO Category. RO units
do not have an income limit; the occupant must be a full time resident and full
time employee in Pitkin County with net assets less than $2.4 million.
Table 6. APCHA Rental Housing Inventory
Rental Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 RO Total Units % Mix
Unit Type
Studio 51 78 80 4 88 301 22%
1-Bedroom 33 144 145 6 39 367 27%
2-Bedroom 17 86 171 28 126 428 31%
3-Bedroom 1 18 43 5 9 76 5%
Dorm Units 6 0 10 0 190 206 15%
Single-Family 0 0 0 2 2 4 0%
Rental Total 108 326 449 45 454 1,382
Rental %8%24%32%3%33%100%
Source: APCHA; Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213032-Aspen Lumber Yard\Data\[213032-APCHA inventory.xlsx]APCHA summ
161
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
24
Analysis Findings
Household Income
The number of households in income Categories 1 and 2 in the PMA (Aspen to
Glenwood Springs) have declined by approximately 1,100 (renters and owners)
over about the past 10 years. Some Category 1 and 2 units should be provided to
serve this lower income population and workforce and to help mitigate the
increases in housing costs in the Upper, Mid, and Lower Valley areas.
Jobs and Economic Base
Most of the job growth in Pitkin County over the past 10 years has been in
Accommodations and Food Services ($43,368), Arts and Recreation ($50,024),
Public Administration ($66,352), and Retail Trade ($51,896). Besides public
administration, these industries have average wages ranging from $43,368 to
$51,896. For a single earner, those are incomes of 56% to 67% of AMI (Category 2).
When multiple earners are considered, the job growth translates to household
incomes in 50 to 85 % of AMI (26 percent of new jobs, Category 2) and 85 to
120% of AMI (55 percent of new jobs, Category 3). If a goal is to address
workforce and employer needs, then a focus on up to Category 3 is also
recommended. When single person households (e.g., a single parent) are
considered, targeting the traditional APCHA mix of Category 1, 2, and 3 is still a
good approach at Lumber Yard and will address multiple types of housing need.
Private Market Development
The private market is able to build rental housing in Category 4 and up as the
recent projects illustrate. For rental housing, it is recommended that Lumber Yard
continue to focus on Category 1, 2, and 3 for the time being. The County and all
municipalities should also be encouraging market rate rental housing and looking for
ways to incentivize market rate development down into Category 3 or even below.
Unit Sizes
EPS recommends that the Lumber Yard rental component include 1, 2, and 3
bedroom units. No studio units are recommended. Studio units do not offer the
living arrangement flexibility that a unit with a separate bedroom offers. None of
the recent projects in the area have included studio units; they are more typical in
urban markets. EPS does recommend that the rental component include larger
3- bedroom units.
Three bedroom units offer more options for families as well as roommates. There
is a long tradition of seasonal workers and “ski bums” pairing up as roommates,
which has social benefits and helps to save money on rent. The family market
appears to be underserved, which is important in building and maintaining
community and a middle class, as well as creating an opportunity for low income
residents to live closer to work and attend Aspen schools.
162
Economic & Planning Systems
25
Proposed Unit Mix
The recommended unit mix is shown in Table 7. The unit mix covers a wide
range of unit types and incomes, focusing mostly on Category 1, Category 2, and
Category 3 Units, which collectively comprise 93 percent of proposed rental units,
with Category 2 having the largest share of 38 percent of all rental units. On the
ownership side, more units are priced at Category 4 and above, with 26 percent
of all units are Category 4 and 17 percent of all units are Category 5. This
recommendation is for general guidance and does not need to be tied exactly to
any final project design.
Table 7. Recommended Unit Mix
APCHA Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Category 5 Category RO Total %
%AMI <50%50-85%>85-130%>130-205%>205-240%no limit Units Mix
Rental Product
Studio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
1-Bedroom 28 37 35 4 0 0 104 49%
2-Bedroom 15 31 25 7 0 0 78 37%
3-Bedroom 4 12 10 4 0 0 30 14%
Rental Total 47 80 70 15 0 0 212 100%
Rental %22%38%33%7%0%0%
Ownership Product
Studio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
1-Bedroom 0 12 12 10 6 0 40 41%
2-Bedroom 0 11 11 12 8 0 42 43%
3-Bedroom 0 0 10 3 3 0 16 16%
Ownership Total 0 23 33 25 17 0 98 100%
Ownership %0%23%34%26%17%0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213032-Aspen Lumber Yard\Data\[Draft Lumberyard Program Updated 11-19-2021.xlsx]T-Program
163
Lumber Yard Demographic and Market Assessment
26
Alternate Unit Mix
An alternate unit mix is shown in Table 8. The City of Aspen may be able to
decrease public subsidies and/or increase overall public benefit by establishing an
employer partnership to house employees who otherwise qualify at the Category
2 and Category 3 levels and who typically reside in roommate arrangements. In
this case, modification to the unit mix to accommodate such arrangements is
recommended by re-allocating some 1-bedroom units to instead be 3-bedroom
units. This alternative arrangement is consistent with the findings of this study, as
additional 3-bedroom units meet an established market need. The unit mix shifts
20 1-bedroom units to 3-bedroom units, pulling 10 from Category 2 and 10 from
Category 3. In this alternate mix, approximately one-quarter of all units are 3-
bedroom units, up from 14 percent in the original scenario.
Table 8. Alternate Unit Mix
APCHA Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Category 5 Category RO Total %
%AMI <50%50-85%>85-130%>130-205%>205-240%no limit Units Mix
Rental Product
Studio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
1-Bedroom 28 27 25 4 0 0 84 40%
2-Bedroom 15 31 25 7 0 0 78 37%
3-Bedroom 4 22 20 4 0 0 50 24%
Rental Total 47 80 70 15 0 0 212 100%
Rental %22%38%33%7%0%0%
Ownership Product
Studio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
1-Bedroom 0 12 12 10 6 0 40 41%
2-Bedroom 0 11 11 12 8 0 42 43%
3-Bedroom 0 0 10 3 3 0 16 16%
Ownership Total 0 23 33 25 17 0 98 100%
Ownership %0%23%34%26%17%0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
164