Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout090214worksession CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 02, 2014 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA I. Council Goals Update II. Storm Water Plan Update City Council Top Ten Goals 2014-15 DRAFT 1. Create a list of concepts by May 1st 2015 that can be used as “test projects” to illustrate what a Initiate and complete a “walkable city plan” in the downtown area might look like by May 1st, 2015. (public spaces and rights-of-way) that prioritizes pedestrian access and safety; and emphasizes the overall enjoyment and well-being for residents and guests alike. (Scott Miller, Chris Bendon, Randy Ready, Jeff Woods, Mitzi Rapkin, Richard Pryor, Barry Crook, and Karen Harrington) 2. In conjunction with Pitkin County and the APCHA Board of Directors, complete a review of the Housing Guidelines as they pertain to the following areas: a. Asset/Income Limits – what counts as income, what is discounted as “not really disposable income” b. Ability to qualify for more bedrooms than you can currently – so you can “grow in place” as your family grows c. AirBNB – short-term rentals as an option for deed-restricted owners/renters d. Product mix – what are we building and for whom? (Barry Crook, Don Taylor, Jim True) 3. Re-do of the Malls: (Randy Ready, Jeff Woods, Chris Bendon, Mitzi Rapkin, Dave Hornbacher, Scott Miller) a. Design – use of the malls, how much outdoor dining, utilities, brick pavers, drainage, features, furniture, lighting, water ditches, etc. b. Public Outreach c. Construction and timing Proposed for Postponement P1 I. 4. Develop policies and procedures by March 1st that would reduce the duration and intensity of construction impacts in residential areas and the downtown. (Scott Miller, Chris Bendon, CJ Oliver) 5. Implement Propose creative additions to the economic fabric of the community by May 1st, including (a) new or enhanced uses on the North Mill property and a redefinition of the SCI zone; and (b) the development of a framework for an “uphill economy”. (Chris Bendon, Barry Crook, Karen Harrington, Don Taylor) 6. Create a financial plan for Wheeler RETT revenues, determine the available funding level for a Community Investment Fund, and decide on a methodology for a community discussion and decision about repurposing and extending the Wheeler RETT. (Randy Ready, Steve Barwick, Jim True, Don Taylor) 7. Complete a review of HHS funding that identifies the purpose of the city’s involvement in funding of HHS services, how we will participate in that funding effort, and the amount and source of the city contribution. (Steve Barwick, Barry Crook, Karen Harrington, Don Taylor) 8. Achieve direction from city council on a solution for the loss of downtown Police and municipal office spaces. (Scott Miller, Randy Ready, Barry Crook, Don Taylor, Alissa Farrell, Richard Pryor, Mitzi Rapkin, Ashley Perl) 9. By July 1, 2015 identify carbon reduction opportunities in transportation and lay out a pathway that in fuses appropriate and forward thinking technologies into the Aspen community. (Ashley Perl, Randy Ready, Steve Barwick, Dave Hornbacher) 10. Engage the community in the creation of a resiliency plan that identifies Aspen's climate related vulnerabilities and establishes a plan for reducing those risks and monitoring progress. The resiliency plan will focus on energy, water, recreation, ecosystems, health, and infrastructure. (Ashley Perl, CJ Oliver, Dave Hornbacher, Karen Harrington) P2 I. Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Long, P.E. – Stormwater Manager THRU: Trish Aragon, P.E. – City Engineer Scott Miller – Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: August 28, 2014 MEETING DATE: September 2, 2014 RE: Update of Master Plan Models and Detention Analysis REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that Council provide direction on detention requirements for private development, the capital improvements plan for the stormwater program and the development of water quality treatment goals for the City. BACKGROUND: In May of this year, Council approved a contract with Wright Water Engineers for $31,000 to update the models used in the existing Surface Drainage Master Plan (Master Plan) that was developed in 2001 and to analyze the extent of detention required on private developments given the available capacity and goals for our existing stormwater system. The 2001 Master Plan was developed to identify major surface drainage systems in the City that convey runoff from the mountain and urbanized portions of the City via storm drains, pipes, and streets to the Roaring Fork River. It also analyzed the stormwater system to determine its condition and the portions of the system that would be overwhelmed during certain storm events. For example, most of the stormwater system in Garmisch would flood in an event as small as the 2-yr storm, which has a fifty-percent chance of occurring in any given year. From this Master Plan, the City developed a capital projects list to address flooding concerns, and developed regulations for detention and conveyance for developing and redeveloping properties in the basin. The City’s goal is to have a stormwater system that can carry the 10-year storm (ten-percent chance of occurring in any given year) through the piping network without flooding streets or properties. DISCUSSION: With the increasing costs of designing and installing detention and water quality facilities on each private property, and the frustration from our customers over the time needed for engineering department review of these designs, staff felt it was important to evaluate ways to streamline the design and review processes. Therefore, one goal for this project was to determine if the City can and would like to assign a standard detention volume and release rate that could be applicable to every property within a certain P3 II. Page 2 of 3 basin. The other goal of the project was to determine if water quality treatment requirements are lessening the demand on our stormwater system, and therefore, providing more allowable capacity in the system than was calculated in 2001. During the analysis required for the project staff discovered that NOAA – the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – recently released new hydrology (rainfall records) for the Aspen area. Staff requested that WWE review the new data and compare it to our existing data. The previous data available for the Aspen area was based on NOAA Atlas 2 which included a period of record from 1948-1973 (roughly 25 years). The new NOAA Atlas 14 provides data for this area through 2010 – 40 more years of rainfall record that wasn’t previously available to us. This new data shows smaller rainfall events than in the previous Atlas, and describes return storms as smaller events than in the previous Atlas. Design Storm Event URMP/NOAA Atlas 2 Depth (inches) NOAA Atlas 14 Depth (inches) Percent Change 10-yr, 1-hour storm 1.20 0.77 35% 100-yr, 1-hour storm 1.69 1.23 28% Per the Urban Runoff Management Plan, development and redevelopment projects must design detention to meet the historic runoff rates (i.e. sites cannot discharge runoff at rates higher than what was discharged when the area wasn’t a city). WWE analyzed existing runoff rates and historic runoff rates for all of the sub-basins in the Aspen Mountain Drainage Basin. WWE then modeled scenarios of providing detention to the historic rate for every development within a sub-basin to determine the effects this might have on the pipe network downstream of that basin. It was determined that the upland portion of the watershed, which includes practically all of Aspen Mountain, produces much greater flows than those detained here in town. So, providing detention for the relatively small developed area here in the City had fairly insignificant impacts on decreasing the demand on the stormwater system, especially during the 10 year storm. Additionally, changing the timing of the flow with detention does not gain any decreased chance of flooding in the river. WWE also analyzed the effects of implementing water quality treatments (infiltration and green infrastructure) in each basin at different levels of implementation – 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%. At 100% implementation, the first quarter-inch of runoff from all impervious surfaces in the basin would be infiltrated into the ground. This analysis showed significant effect during small storm events (up to the 10-year event) on decreasing the demands on our system. Infiltration and green infrastructure also have the added benefit of recharging groundwater, therefore delivering more water to the river in the months after the “rainy season,” which is when the river is at its lowest flow levels for the year. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff is requesting direction from Council regarding: 1. Adoption of the new NOAA Atlas 14 hydrology (which would guide drainage design) 2. Adoption of decreased detention requirements, especially for those properties that discharge directly into the City’s stormwater system Adoption of this new information will require changes to the URMP that could be approved by Resolution in the September 22 Council Meeting. P4 II. Page 3 of 3 NEXT STEPS: Staff plans to return to Council in work session to present recommendations for a reprioritized capital improvements plans for regional detention projects, pipe upgrades and replacement (including updated estimates in 2014 dollars), and a water quality project implementation plan by basin. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: None. P5 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Clean River Initiative 2008 City of Aspen The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Clean River Initiative 2008 – 2012 Summary August 2014 City of Aspen Engineering Department 130 S Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 1 P6 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Program Inception and Goals In 2005 and 2006, two local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River (Roaring Fork Conservancy State of the Watershed Report, 2005 and Roaring Fork Stre Initiative, 2006). It is generally understood areas contribute significant amounts of pollutants to receiving waters Aspen is no different. The adverse effect riparian vegetation as a result of development and channelization of the riparian areas along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced river flows due to diversions upstream further comp problem. Additionally, in 2001 the City completed a Surface Drainage Master Plan Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area was not capable of carrying even minor storm Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud accumulating more than 2 feet deep in several areas of town. In response to these reports and the loom municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a more aggressive approach to river protection and restoration and City Council, through an extensive planning process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. The Stormwater Business Plan provided guidelines for a quality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15 period. The primary objective of the Clean River Initiative and mitigate the impacts of urbanization on the Roaring Fork River. following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the City’s impacts to the River. • Develop a stormwater management year-to-year • Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the • Coordinate stormwater-related responsibilities from a unified front • Protect human health, safety and • Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, riparian habitat, and hydrology • Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed • Practice stormwater management techniques that mimic natural hydrology The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative oals local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River (Roaring Fork Conservancy State of the Watershed Report, 2005 and Roaring Fork Stre Initiative, 2006). It is generally understood across the nation that stormwater discharges from urban areas contribute significant amounts of pollutants to receiving waters, and these reports found that Aspen is no different. The adverse effects of these polluted discharges are exacerbated by the loss of riparian vegetation as a result of development and channelization of the riparian areas along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced river flows due to diversions upstream further comp Additionally, in 2001 the City completed a Surface Drainage Master Plan (Master Plan) Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area was not capable of carrying even minor storm events without flooding properties and buildings. This Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud accumulating more than 2 feet deep in several areas of town. In response to these reports and the looming federal and state standards placed on municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a river protection and restoration. A Citizens Review Committee, City staff, Council, through an extensive planning process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. The Stormwater Business Plan provided guidelines for a Clean River Initiative that would focus on water quality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15 ary objective of the Clean River Initiative for the City of Aspen is to prevent, reduce, ization on the Roaring Fork River. To accomplish this objective, the following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the management program that is comprehensive, cohesive, and consistent Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the related responsibilities from a unified front Protect human health, safety and property by reducing stormwater impacts Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, riparian habitat, and hydrology Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed Practice stormwater management techniques that mimic natural hydrology The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 2 local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River am Health that stormwater discharges from urban and these reports found that s of these polluted discharges are exacerbated by the loss of riparian vegetation as a result of development and channelization of the riparian areas along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced river flows due to diversions upstream further compounds the (Master Plan) for the Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area events without flooding properties and buildings. This Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud ing federal and state standards placed on municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a . A Citizens Review Committee, City staff, Council, through an extensive planning process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. that would focus on water quality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15-year for the City of Aspen is to prevent, reduce, To accomplish this objective, the following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the gram that is comprehensive, cohesive, and consistent Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the C Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed P7 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative • Reduce the amount of pollutants that have the potential to enter the tributaries via stormwater runoff • Reduce impervious surfaces groundwater • Reduce the demand on the City’s storm system and the cost of cons systems • Increase urban green space and areas for stormwater infiltration • Foster positive connections between people an • Address requirements of federal and state regulations to protect protect watershed health Funding In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for the creation and operation of a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property ta limited by TABOR restrictions. Between 2008 and 2012 the operation of the stormwater program. It was the intention of the citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that the operating costs be funded by the tax community. Therefore, in 2007, Council approved a System Development for new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the stormwater program, generating $19 million and providing stormwater improvements over a 15 year period. about $800,000 annually. In 2010, amidst the recession and facing significant pressure from the development communit Council decided to withdraw the System Development Fee, replacing it with a providing on-site detention. The Fee owners that cannot or do not want to provide d of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of scale the City has in providing regional detention and conveyance approximately $215, 802 average annually to the stormwater program. In July of 2011, the City’s Community Developm supplement the costs of development review, began collected by the Engineering Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater program. In 2011, this fee contributed $14,623 to the stormwater program. contributed $126,898 to the stormwater program. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative educe the amount of pollutants that have the potential to enter the Roaring Fork River and its via stormwater runoff s so stormwater can infiltrate to remove pollutants and recharge Reduce the demand on the City’s storm system and the cost of constructing expensive pipe Increase urban green space and areas for stormwater infiltration tions between people and stormwater Address requirements of federal and state regulations to protect the public and resto In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for ration of a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property ta Between 2008 and 2012, this provided $830,000 on average annually the operation of the stormwater program. citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that the operating costs be funded by the tax-payers and the capital costs be funded by the development community. Therefore, in 2007, Council approved a System Development Fee of $2.88 per s new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the , generating $19 million and providing the ability to pay for the recommended stormwater improvements over a 15 year period. Between 2008 and 2010, the fee actual In 2010, amidst the recession and facing significant pressure from the development communit the System Development Fee, replacing it with a voluntary detention. The Fee-in-Lieu of Detention is an optional fee that is offered to property owners that cannot or do not want to provide detention on their own property. It is based on the cost of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of scale the City has in providing regional detention and conveyance on the owner’s behalf. From 2011 - 2012, this fee annually to the stormwater program. , the City’s Community Development and Engineering Departments, in an effort to supplement the costs of development review, began charging for its services. Ten percent of collected by the Engineering Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater In 2011, this fee contributed $14,623 to the stormwater program. In 2012, this fee to the stormwater program. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 3 Roaring Fork River and its utants and recharge tructing expensive pipe and restore and In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for ration of a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property tax, is not 0,000 on average annually for citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that the development Fee of $2.88 per square foot new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the the ability to pay for the recommended Between 2008 and 2010, the fee actually brought in In 2010, amidst the recession and facing significant pressure from the development community, voluntary fee-in-lieu of fee that is offered to property It is based on the cost of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of scale the City has in providing contributed ent and Engineering Departments, in an effort to charging for its services. Ten percent of the fees collected by the Engineering Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater In 2012, this fee P8 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Another small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on investments. Revenue Source 2008 Property Tax $797,535 Investment Interest $49,853 Development Fees $700,831 Permit Review Fees $0 Total $ 1,550,227 Budget and Expenses Prior to establishment of the minimal, were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after From 2009 through 2012, the stormwater program has In addition the program has provided Operating expenses include staff salaries, of the stormwater system, upkeep to equipme stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality monitoring, and general administration costs. Set-Up The program is set up as if the City were regulated by t Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach 2. Public Participation and Involvement 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Runoff Control 5. Post-Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control 6. Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accompl goals of the stormwater program The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative ther small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on Table 1. Revenues 2008 - 2012 2009 2010 2011 $797,535 $812,297 $824,296 $884,217 $49,853 $74,951 $35,299 $22,410 $700,831 $440,847 $511,805 $324,651 $0 $0 $0 $14,623 1,550,227 $ 1,330,104 $ 1,373,410 $ 1,247,912 $ 1,099,448 Prior to establishment of the Clean River Initiative, stormwater-related services were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after , the stormwater program has operated with approximately $513 In addition the program has provided approximately $1.4 million in capital projects. Operating expenses include staff salaries, staff training, public education, routine maintenance upkeep to equipment (such as street sweepers), small repairs to the stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality monitoring, and general administration costs. The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: Public Education and Outreach Public Participation and Involvement Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Construction Site Runoff Control Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accomplish tasks related to these minimum measures and the overall goals of the stormwater program. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 4 ther small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on 2012 Averages $834,700 $830,609 $28,885 $42,280 $106,953 $417,017 $126,898 $28,304 1,099,448 $1,320,220 related services, which were were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after that. ximately $513,000 annually. routine maintenance nt (such as street sweepers), small repairs to the stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality he State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: inimum measures and the overall P9 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Operations Overview The Clean River Initiative and the majority of its operations are housed in the Engineering Department, with the following staff members dedi Stormwater Manager: Dedicated Manager ensures the successful achievement stormwater staff members, capital projects, the the stormwater system. The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwater industry and in stormwater technology, stays abreast of change monitors the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative procedures, guidelines and educational materials, and for both the public and City employees. Development Engineer: The D in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review includes grading and drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, and site functionality. Additionally, he reviews as ensure that what is built in the field meets the intent of the approve the long term. He writes policy and assists in writing technical guidelines and education materials. He meets regularly with the development community to provide education and training. Civil Engineer I: This position reviewing civil plans and plats. She also assists the Engineering Department wit projects from site design to computer programming. Project Managers: There are multiple st managed in-house. While the Stormwater Manager manages most design and planning projects, other project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Stormwater Inspector: Through regular education, inspection and enforcement, t Stormwater Inspector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, i maintenance of BMPs to keep sediment and investigates drainage complaints and illegal discharges to the stormwater system. Stormwater Intern: Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months with the main responsibility to gather samples during storm events for the stormwater monitoring program. The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the in identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative and the majority of its operations are housed in the Engineering Department, with the following staff members dedicated completely or in some part to its success: Dedicated completely to the Clean River Initiative, the Stormwater achievement of the Clean River Initiative’s goals. She m stormwater staff members, capital projects, the 160 Fund budget, and maintenance and operation of The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwater industry and in stormwater technology, stays abreast of changes to federal and state rules and regulations, and the Clean River Initiative. She writes policy and ordinances, plans and procedures, guidelines and educational materials, and also conducts educational projects both the public and City employees. The Development Engineer reviews the civil plans for all developments in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review nd drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, and site functionality. Additionally, he reviews as-built drawings and stormwater maintenance plans to ensure that what is built in the field meets the intent of the approved design and can be maintained in the long term. He writes policy and assists in writing technical guidelines and education materials. He meets regularly with the development community to provide education and training. This position was added in 2013 to assist the development engineer in reviewing civil plans and plats. She also assists the Engineering Department with a wide range of projects from site design to computer programming. There are multiple stormwater capital projects each year, all of which are . While the Stormwater Manager manages most design and planning projects, other project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Through regular education, inspection and enforcement, t nspector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, i to keep sediment and other pollutants on site. He also responds to and investigates drainage complaints and illegal discharges to the stormwater system. Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months with the main responsibility to gather samples during storm events for the stormwater monitoring The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the in identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 5 and the majority of its operations are housed in the Engineering Department, , the Stormwater She manages maintenance and operation of The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwater industry s to federal and state rules and regulations, and . She writes policy and ordinances, plans and projects and training ngineer reviews the civil plans for all developments in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review nd drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, and built drawings and stormwater maintenance plans to d design and can be maintained in the long term. He writes policy and assists in writing technical guidelines and education materials. He was added in 2013 to assist the development engineer in h a wide range of , all of which are . While the Stormwater Manager manages most design and planning projects, other project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Through regular education, inspection and enforcement, the nspector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, installation, and pollutants on site. He also responds to and Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months with the main responsibility to gather samples during storm events for the stormwater monitoring The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the information to identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational P10 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative materials, and participates in education understanding of the stormwater program. The stormwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of these staff members involves maintenance and operation of the stormwater system well with the purposes of those departments. Parks Department: The Parks department manages local parks including the various biological (planted) stormwater treatment sites we have around town. T of the maintenance of the open stormwater system through swales and other above ground facilities general upkeep involved with engineered natural treatment parks, maintenance of inlets, outlets and ditches. The City of Aspen Parks Department has a landscape crew, and a construction department that does a facilities including some of our more extensive biological BMP installments. these BMPs, Parks staff also provide interpretative signage and tours usefulness to aquatic ecosystems. Streets Department: Plowing streets and street sweeping are the regular responsibilities of the streets department. There is also regular maintenance that must be conducted on the storm sewer system, such as inlet cleaning and replacement of damaged inlets or manhole lids, done by the Streets Department. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative educational programs to increase the public’s awareness and understanding of the stormwater program. mwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of staff members involves maintenance and operation of the stormwater system – well with the purposes of those departments. he Parks department manages local parks including the various biological ent sites we have around town. The parks department is in charge of much stormwater system – the system that is NOT in pipes, but is carried through swales and other above ground facilities. This involves the cleaning of the sedimentation vaults, general upkeep involved with engineered natural treatment parks, maintenance of inlets, outlets and epartment has a landscape architect, a landscape crew, a restoration construction department that does a majority of the design and construction of Parks including some of our more extensive biological BMP installments. After the installment of these BMPs, Parks staff also provide interpretative signage and tours to highlight the functions and Plowing streets and street sweeping are the regular responsibilities of the ts department. There is also regular maintenance that must be conducted on the storm sewer , such as inlet cleaning and replacement of damaged inlets or manhole lids, some of The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 6 al programs to increase the public’s awareness and mwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of tasks that align he Parks department manages local parks including the various biological he parks department is in charge of much , but is carried . This involves the cleaning of the sedimentation vaults, general upkeep involved with engineered natural treatment parks, maintenance of inlets, outlets and architect, a landscape crew, a restoration majority of the design and construction of Parks installment of to highlight the functions and Plowing streets and street sweeping are the regular responsibilities of the ts department. There is also regular maintenance that must be conducted on the storm sewer some of which is P11 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008-2012 Highlights The years of 2008 – 2012 provided for really interesting Initiative. 2008 was an epic water year, with one of the largest snow has ever seen. Both 2009 and 2010 were fairly average y huge bringing us very near flood levels but holding off with a long runoff season. saw one of the worst droughts on record. Economically, 2008 was the end of began in 2009, with construction decreasing to recovery in 2012. Other accomplishments of the program during that time Program and Funding Established. five years of existence. The program and an additional yet small funding source via review fees hired and the stormwater program was established. The program resides in the Engineering Department and coordinates stormwater Departments, and at times works with Environmenta aspects of stormwater management. Because the program is set up State permit, it is a comprehensive stormwater program that is consistently managed and expanding each year. Stormwater Added to Municipal Code. Municipal Code to house stormwater “Therefore, the City of Aspen establishes this set of stormwater reasonable guidance for the regulation of stormwater runoff for the purpose of protecting local water resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff discharges from construction and deve control and minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, and nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public i will prevent threats to public health and safety. Construction Site Impacts Inspected Construction Mitigation Program in 2007 noise, parking, dust, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) began to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC) measures to prevent sediment from leaving the dirt during storms and snowmelt. The CMOs also inspect for tracking onto City’s roads from The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative provided for really interesting and educational times in the Clean River . 2008 was an epic water year, with one of the largest snow season and runoff season Aspen and 2010 were fairly average years in hydrology terms, but 2011 was huge bringing us very near flood levels but holding off with a long runoff season. Then, in 2012 the city saw one of the worst droughts on record. 2008 was the end of a boom and development in Aspen was skyrocketing. with construction decreasing to minimal levels. The City began to see evidence of Other accomplishments of the program during that time: tablished. The Stormwater Program has accomplished a lot in the five years of existence. The program secured one stable funding source via the dedicated property tax and an additional yet small funding source via review fees. In May of 2008, a Stormwater Manager was hired and the stormwater program was established. The program resides in the Engineering Department and coordinates stormwater-related efforts between the Engineering, Parks and Streets Departments, and at times works with Environmental Initiatives and Community Development for other aspects of stormwater management. Because the program is set up as if the City were regulated by a State permit, it is a comprehensive stormwater program that is consistently managed and expanding Stormwater Added to Municipal Code. In 2010, the City created a separate section of the Municipal Code to house stormwater-related regulations. Title 28, states the following purpose: Therefore, the City of Aspen establishes this set of stormwater management policies to provide reasonable guidance for the regulation of stormwater runoff for the purpose of protecting local water resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff discharges from construction and development activities and other construction activities in order to control and minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, and nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public i will prevent threats to public health and safety.” Construction Site Impacts Inspected. The City’s Engineering Department began a igation Program in 2007 to ensure that impacts from construction sites, such as dust, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) began to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention ment control (EPSC) measures to prevent sediment from leaving the dirt-exposed sites during storms and snowmelt. The CMOs also inspect for tracking onto City’s roads from The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 7 Clean River season and runoff season Aspen 2011 was again Then, in 2012 the city boom and development in Aspen was skyrocketing. The Recession The City began to see evidence of The Stormwater Program has accomplished a lot in the first stable funding source via the dedicated property tax rmwater Manager was hired and the stormwater program was established. The program resides in the Engineering related efforts between the Engineering, Parks and Streets l Initiatives and Community Development for other as if the City were regulated by a State permit, it is a comprehensive stormwater program that is consistently managed and expanding the City created a separate section of the states the following purpose: management policies to provide reasonable guidance for the regulation of stormwater runoff for the purpose of protecting local water resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff lopment activities and other construction activities in order to control and minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, and nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public interest and The City’s Engineering Department began a to ensure that impacts from construction sites, such as dust, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) began to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention exposed sites during storms and snowmelt. The CMOs also inspect for tracking onto City’s roads from P12 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative construction site equipment, proper storage and disposal of materials such as concre stabilization and revegetation at project completion. URMP Updated, Water Quality Standards Adopted. regulations, and requirements for each new and re own stormwater runoff before releasing from their prope the River. The updated URMP provides principles for Low Impact Development and a menu of Best Management Practices to meet the City’s new water quality standards. across the state and is referenced by other mountain towns. Development Review Improved program, the City had already begun to ramp up the review of new development and re development plans to ensure proper adoption of the updated URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development review has really improved. And therefore, c has increased and impacts to the City’s stormwater system and the River 2013, one additional FTE was added with focus on assisting which should result in a reduced backlog of project reviews and quicker review times. As-Builts and Maintenance Plans management requirements during design, construction and post that many sites were not actually installing stormwater facilities as designed. In some cases, stormwater facilities were completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property the Engineering Department developed requirements for the submission of As completed at the end of construction and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative construction site equipment, proper storage and disposal of materials such as concre stabilization and revegetation at project completion. URMP Updated, Water Quality Standards Adopted. In 1973, very much so ahead of its time, Aspen adopted the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) which established regulations and guideline stormwater management from all new development in effort to reduce the impacts on the Roaring Fork River. Unfortunately this document was rarely used or enforced. In 2009, City staff working with a team of consultants, updated the URMP to include new hydrology based on Aspen data, more explanation and guidance for meeting stormwater management regulations, and requirements for each new and re-development to remove pollutants from their own stormwater runoff before releasing from their property into the City’s stormwater system or the River. The updated URMP provides principles for Low Impact Development and a menu of Best Management Practices to meet the City’s new water quality standards. The URMP is well erenced by other mountain towns. Improved. Even before the establishment of the stormwater program, the City had already begun to ramp up the review of new development and re development plans to ensure proper drainage and stormwater management techniques adoption of the updated URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development review has really improved. And therefore, compliance with stormwater management regulations impacts to the City’s stormwater system and the River have been reduced. In 2013, one additional FTE was added with focus on assisting the Development Review Engineer, in a reduced backlog of project reviews and quicker review times. Builts and Maintenance Plans Required. While sites were meeting stormwater management requirements during design, construction and post-construction inspections showed re not actually installing stormwater facilities as designed. In some cases, stormwater facilities were completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property the Engineering Department developed requirements for the submission of As-Builts completed at the end of construction and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 8 construction site equipment, proper storage and disposal of materials such as concrete, and site In 1973, very much so ahead of its time, Aspen adopted the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) which established regulations and guidelines for stormwater management from all new development in effort to reduce the impacts on the Roaring Fork River. Unfortunately this document was rarely used or enforced. In 2009, City staff working with a team of consultants, updated the URMP to include ew hydrology based on Aspen-specific data, more explanation and guidance for meeting stormwater management development to remove pollutants from their rty into the City’s stormwater system or the River. The updated URMP provides principles for Low Impact Development and a menu of Best The URMP is well-known Even before the establishment of the stormwater program, the City had already begun to ramp up the review of new development and re- management techniques. With the adoption of the updated URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development management regulations have been reduced. In the Development Review Engineer, in a reduced backlog of project reviews and quicker review times. While sites were meeting stormwater construction inspections showed re not actually installing stormwater facilities as designed. In some cases, stormwater facilities were completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property). Therefore, Builts - surveys completed at the end of construction and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built P13 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative and will function as intended by the design legally binding documents that follow the deed of the property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be properly operated and maintained per the Maintenance Plan. Agreements, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department will sign off on a Certificate of Occupancy. Jenny Adair Wetlands Constructed Although this project was completed the inception of the stormwater program, is one of the most successful components of Aspen’s stormwater program and is an award-winning stormwater management facility. The wetlands were completed in 2007. The entire project encompasses three underground vaults that remove large particles and debris, oil and grease engineered wetlands that join together before entering a water quality settling that discharges through a controlling orifice plate into the Roaring Fork River. Almost the and 7th, drains to this regional stormwater facility. On average, removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and water quality pond remove an additional 10.8 tons of sediment annually, resulting each year. Over the period from 2007 being prevented from reaching the River. Associated Landscape Contractors of Colorado’s highest award. It was determined that the Jenny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacity for stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe near the intersection of Mill Street and Puppy Smith Road to Street system into the Jenny Adair wetlands for treatment. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative and will function as intended by the design – and Operations and Maintenance Agreements legally binding documents that follow the deed of the property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be properly operated and maintained per the Maintenance Plan. As-builts, Maintenance Plans, and Maintenance Agreements, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department will sign off on a Certificate of Occupancy. Constructed. Although this project was completed before ption of the stormwater program, it is one of the most successful components of Aspen’s stormwater program and is an winning stormwater management facility. The wetlands were completed in 2007. The entire project encompasses three nderground vaults that remove large particles and debris, oil and grease; two engineered wetlands that join together before entering a water quality settling pond controlling orifice plate into the Roaring Fork River. Almost the entire western side of the City, between Mill Street drains to this regional stormwater facility. On average, 13.4 tons of sediment and debris are removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and water quality pond of sediment annually, resulting in an average removal 2007 – 2012 that equates to approximately 145.2 tons being prevented from reaching the River. This project received the President’s Award which is the Associated Landscape Contractors of Colorado’s highest award. enny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacity for stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe near the intersection of Mill Street and Puppy Smith Road to divert 4 cfs of runoff from the Mill Street system into the Jenny Adair wetlands for treatment. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 9 perations and Maintenance Agreements – legally binding documents that follow the deed of the property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be properly operated and uilts, Maintenance Plans, and Maintenance Agreements, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department will sign entire western side of the City, between Mill Street tons of sediment and debris are removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and water quality pond in an average removal of 24.2 tons that equates to approximately 145.2 tons of sediment This project received the President’s Award which is the enny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacity for stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe from the Mill P14 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Rio Grande Park Improved. project for the entire stormwater program. O another major pipe network – the Mill Street system represents 30% of the City’s runoff began to redevelop. Recognizing the opportunity and the area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater management facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time improved the park for its wide variety of users. Through a grant in 2006, a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe system that drains most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe daylighted into Rio Grande Park. This vault is located in the Rio Grande Recycle Center. Improvements, completed in 2012, under-utilized stormwater ponds into a state of Parks and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into these settings – land adjacent to a ri public and nature. The result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland on one side and a sand infiltration area that mimics a river sand b the other side. These two areas are inundated during storm events to infiltrate runoff and remove pollutants. They combine into one small pond before tent. Beyond this bridge is Phase 2 of the project, t will divert another large portion of flow from the Mill Street stormwater system into the western The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Rio Grande Park Improved. The Rio Grande Park area was identified as the highest priority project for the entire stormwater program. One major pipe network discharges into this the Mill Street system – runs adjacent to this park. Together this ’s runoff. In 2012, Theater Aspen, located within the heart of the park, began to redevelop. Recognizing the opportunity and the decreased impact of only disturbing this area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater anagement facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time improved the park for its wide variety of users. a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe ins most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe daylighted into Rio Grande Park. This vault is located in the Rio Grande Recycle Center. Phase 1 of the Rio Grande Park , completed in 2012, started from this daylight point and worked to redesign two utilized stormwater ponds into a state-of-the-art stormwater facility. Two of the major goals of Parks and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into land adjacent to a river – and one that would allow for close interaction of the public and nature. The result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland on one side and a sand infiltration area that mimics a river sand b the other side. These two areas are inundated during storm events to infiltrate runoff and remove pollutants. They combine into one small pond before passing under a bridge to the Theater Aspen tent. Beyond this bridge is Phase 2 of the project, to be completed in 2014. Phase 3 of the project will divert another large portion of flow from the Mill Street stormwater system into the western The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 10 The Rio Grande Park area was identified as the highest priority into this park and Together this . In 2012, Theater Aspen, located within the heart of the park, of only disturbing this area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater anagement facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe ins most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe daylighted into Rio Phase 1 of the Rio Grande Park ked to redesign two art stormwater facility. Two of the major goals of Parks and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into and one that would allow for close interaction of the public and nature. The result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland on one side and a sand infiltration area that mimics a river sand bar on the other side. These two areas are inundated during storm events to infiltrate runoff and remove passing under a bridge to the Theater Aspen o be completed in 2014. Phase 3 of the project will divert another large portion of flow from the Mill Street stormwater system into the western P15 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative side of the Rio Grande Park. All three phases join together before discharging into the Roaring Fork River just downstream of the pedestrian bridge near John Denver Sanctuary. Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, ca 19 cfs (larger flows are bypassed directly to the River). The western side of the park, Phase 3, can carry 9 cfs. In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through facility, pollutants will be removed, and a muc the river. Water Quality Demonstration Projects. demonstration projects are in the design phase. In addition to those designed and City, private developments have designed and installed best management practices, such as green roofs and paver systems that combined with snowmelt, that City staff will be watching as well. Inspected Entire Roaring Fork and Engineering Department and supporting staff have walked a section of river that flows through town, including the Roaring Fork River, Castle Creek, and Maroon Creek. Staff inspect the river for illegal pipes, discharges, intakes, or diversions; dry weather flows; algae blooms and other unusual circumstances; streambank erosion; unnatural sediment build up; trash and debris; manmade bank stabilization; and bridge scour. Staff has noticed the health of the river change depending on the proximity to development and The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative side of the Rio Grande Park. All three phases join together before discharging into the Roaring Fork st downstream of the pedestrian bridge near John Denver Sanctuary. Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, ca 19 cfs (larger flows are bypassed directly to the River). The western side of the park, Phase 3, can carry 9 cfs. In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through facility, pollutants will be removed, and a much cleaner stormwater runoff will be discharged into Water Quality Demonstration Projects. In addition to the large facilities mentioned above, several water quality demonstration projects have been installed in the City to test the methods for pollutant removal ability and to demonstrate for private developments the options available for stormwater treatment. Demonstration projects include rain gardens, biofiltration areas, and permeable paver systems. Much was learned during the design and installation of the projects that will guide future installations. These installments will be monitored for effectiveness and durability in the coming years. Several other demonstration projects are in the design phase. In addition to those designed and City, private developments have designed and installed best management practices, such as green roofs and paver systems that combined with snowmelt, that City staff will be watching as well. Inspected Entire Roaring Fork and its Tributaries. Each year for the past four years, the Engineering Department and supporting staff have walked a section of river that flows through town, including the Roaring Fork River, Castle Creek, and Maroon Creek. Staff inspect the river for pipes, discharges, intakes, or diversions; dry weather flows; algae circumstances; streambank erosion; unnatural sediment build up; trash and debris; manmade bank stabilization; and bridge scour. Staff has noticed the the river change depending on the proximity to development and The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 11 side of the Rio Grande Park. All three phases join together before discharging into the Roaring Fork Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, can carry 19 cfs (larger flows are bypassed directly to the River). The western side of the park, Phase 3, can carry 9 cfs. In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through h cleaner stormwater runoff will be discharged into In addition to the large facilities mentioned above, several water quality demonstration projects have been installed in the City to test the pollutant removal ability and to demonstrate for private developments the options available for stormwater treatment. Demonstration projects include rain gardens, biofiltration areas, and permeable paver systems. Much was learned during the design nstallation of the projects that will guide future installations. These installments will be monitored for effectiveness and durability in the coming years. Several other demonstration projects are in the design phase. In addition to those designed and installed by the City, private developments have designed and installed best management practices, such as green roofs and paver systems that combined with snowmelt, that City staff will be watching as well. Each year for the past four years, the Engineering Department and supporting staff have walked a section of river that flows through town, including the Roaring Fork River, Castle Creek, and Maroon Creek. Staff inspect the river for P16 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the presence of a healthy riparian buffer. Staff has removed trash and debris ranging from bottles and cans and construction materials to bicycles and rubber duckies. Roaring Fork Listed on 303d List. Health and Environment (CDPHE) issues two comprehensive lists of the state of water in Colorado. The two lists, 305b and 303d, give detailed analysis of the major waterbodies and their individua compliance with water quality standards. According to the CDPHE Division of Water Resources the designated uses for the Roaring Fork River are Primary Contact Recreation, Water Supply, Aquatic Commission is to protect waterways and return them to a measure of health that supports their designated uses. An antidegradation rule has been adopted in Colorado to maintain and protect water quality levels. This law states that waters should not be allowed to deteriorate below existing or anticipated uses. Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected that a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) will be issued that with. Goals for 2013 - 2017 • Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development fee. • Define and begin a long-term monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of the river the effectiveness of the stormwater program. 1 The 303 (d) List of Impaired Water can be found in Appendix D of the Assessment Report prepared by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the presence of a healthy riparian buffer. Staff has removed trash and debris ranging from bottles and construction materials to bicycles and rubber duckies. 303d List. Every two years the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) issues two comprehensive lists of the state of water in Colorado. The two lists, 305b and 303d, give detailed analysis of the major waterbodies and their individua compliance with water quality standards. According to the CDPHE Division of Water Resources the designated uses for the Roaring Fork River are Primary Contact Recreation, Water Supply, Aquatic Life (cold), and Agriculture. Sections along the Roaring Fork River, along with a handful of its tributaries, have been placed on the 2012 Colorado Section 303(D) List of Impaired Waters first time river stretches along the Roaring Fork have been listed. The impairments in river stretches pertaining to listed as aquatic life (provisional). This means that the standards set for healthy aquatic life are not met in these reaches. One goal of the Water Quality Control Commission is to protect waterways and return them to a measure of health that supports their designated uses. An antidegradation rule has been adopted in Colorado to maintain and protect w states that waters should not be allowed to deteriorate below existing Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected that a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) will be issued that the City of Aspen will have to comply Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development term monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of the river the effectiveness of the stormwater program. The 303 (d) List of Impaired Water can be found in Appendix D of the 2012 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report prepared by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 12 the presence of a healthy riparian buffer. Staff has removed trash and debris ranging from bottles Every two years the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) issues two comprehensive lists of the state of water in Colorado. The two lists, 305b and 303d, give detailed analysis of the major waterbodies and their individual compliance with water quality standards. According to the CDPHE Division of Water Resources the designated uses for the Roaring Fork River are Primary Contact Recreation, Water Supply, Aquatic Life (cold), and Agriculture. Sections along River, along with a handful of its tributaries, have been placed on the 2012 Colorado Section 303(D) List of Impaired Waters1. This is the first time river stretches along the Roaring Fork have been listed. The impairments in river stretches pertaining to Aspen are listed as aquatic life (provisional). This means that the standards set for healthy aquatic life are not met in these reaches. One goal of the Water Quality Control Commission is to protect waterways and return them to a measure of health that supports their designated uses. An antidegradation rule has been adopted in Colorado to maintain and protect w states that waters should not be allowed to deteriorate below existing Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected the City of Aspen will have to comply Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development term monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of the river and Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and P17 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative • Complete master planning for the remainder of the City’s large basins implementation strategy for each basin • Identify and construct water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing basins. • Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City properties/facilities and to provide better support and guidance for private developments. • Research and create a program(s) to degraded riparian areas along the River in the City limits. • Improve the collection systems leading to Jenny Adair wetlands and Rio Grande Park. • Improve understanding and comp The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Complete master planning for the remainder of the City’s large basins and develop and implementation strategy for each basin. water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City properties/facilities and to provide better support and guidance for private developments. rch and create a program(s) to protect existing riparian areas and to improve the degraded riparian areas along the River in the City limits. Improve the collection systems leading to Jenny Adair wetlands and Rio Grande Park. Improve understanding and compliance with the URMP and the EPSC requirements. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008- 2012 13 and develop and water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City properties/facilities and to provide better support and guidance for private developments. improve the Improve the collection systems leading to Jenny Adair wetlands and Rio Grande Park. liance with the URMP and the EPSC requirements. P18 II.