HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sp.Rio Grande.81A89
~
-.
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
city of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 8/18/89
DATE COMPLETE: if/liT! ry
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
81A-89
STAFF MEMBER: /"13
,
PROJECT NAME: Rio
Project Address:
Legal Address:
Grande SPA Amendment for Snow Melter
,-<::;~~ marc I;' If elll-e.v
(J
Facilitv fJ
APPLICANT: city Enqineerinq Department
Applicant Address:
REPRESENTATIVE: Jim Gibbard
Representative Address/Phone:
PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: N/A
NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED:
1
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
P&Z Meeting Date VI q
9/d,::;-
1 STEP:
2 STEP:
/
PUBLIC HEARING:
@~
NO
VESTED RIGHTS:
CC Meeting Date
PUBLIC HEARING:
YES NO
YES @
YES NO
Paid:
Date:
VESTED RIGHTS:
~,,~
Planning Director Approval:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption:
REFERRAL<; :
City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Dir.
Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir. Hlth.
Aspen Consolo
S.D.
Mtn. Bell
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
Fire Marshall
Building Inspector
Roaring Fork
Energy Center
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
Other
DATE REFERRED:
INITIALS:
FINAL ROUTING:
DATE ROUTED:
INITIAL:
___ city Atty ____ City Engineer ___ Zoning
___ Housing Other:
Env. Health
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
~ ., , ,0<)' ~ {{
? x..:> -'
_, /16
f S
MEMORANDUM AEC : :
To: Mayor and Council JUL t g egg/
THRU: Carol O' Dowd, City Manager
' E�1GI�
THRU: Amy Margerum, Planning Directorat
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning
DATE: July 22, 1991
RE: Conceptual SPA Review for the Art Park /Theatre, Trolley
Car Barn and Snow Melt Facility
SUMMARY: The above entities have requested an SPA review to either
expand, locate, or continue operating their particular activities
on the Rio Grande parcel. Staff wanted to review all the
applications at once to facilitate a comprehensive review of the
remaining land on the Rio Grande.
Although a conceptual review of the entire Rio Grande parcel was
completed in 1988, the only specific land uses reviewed were the
library, parking garage, and Youth Center. It is necessary to
conceptually review the remaining "undeveloped" area of the parcel
at this date because the new uses are a revision of the original
conceptual review. In addition, the Code requires final SPA review
within two years of conceptual approval and it has been about three
years since conceptual approval. Final SPA review will occur when
individual applicants submit a separate application for their
particular use within their own time frame.
Conceptual SPA review is a two step process. The Planning and
Zoning Commission has reviewed the applications and recommends to
Council conceptual approval of the Art Park program, Theatre
building, and Trolley Car Barn. The Commission also recommends
denial of the continued use of the Rio Grande parcel for the Snow
Melt facility. Please see the attached Resolution 18 (attachment
A) from the Commission for specific recommendations and conditions
of approval.
Staff had anticipated presenting a review of all the proposed uses
on the parcel. However, the County still needs to provide more
information for the recycle facility before the Commission will
conceptually review the facility. Therefore the Planning and
Zoning Commission is forwarding conceptual approval for the
remaining undeveloped area as it exists and is proposed. This
includes the existing recycle facility. Any proposed changes to
the uses would be an amendment to the SPA requiring review by the
Commission and Council.
COUNCIL GOALS: Conceptual review of the land uses proposed for the
Rio Grande are consistent with Council's goals #3 - to make public
transit more convenient and 17 - to increase public access to all
the arts and humanities.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has granted approval for all the
entities to submit conceptual SPA applications for proposals on
the Rio Grande property.
BACKGROUND: In the early 1970's the Rio Grande property came into
public ownership. In 1977 an "Interim SPA Plan" was adopted by
the City identifying recreation and parking as the key uses for
the property, recognizing certain key out - parcels, and providing
for a land trade to build the Eagle's Lodge. In 1983 the City and
County completed a land exchange that provided the County with the
parcel to develop the Jail. Please see attached memo from Rio
Grande Property, attachment B.
In 1980 -1981 the Rio Grande Task Force completed a report listing
potential uses for the property and a general configuration for
such uses. Key facilities included a performing arts center, jail,
parking structure, transit facility, recreation, library, greenway
and restaurant. According to the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission Resolution 84 -9:
"Despite the long history of planning for this property, a
consensus has never been reached as to the optimal mix of uses
and the best development plan for this land...The intent of
the SPA designation is to provide the design flexibility
within which open space, cultural and transportation needs can
be met through a plan which is sensitive to the Roaring Fork
Greenway Plan and the desire for pedestrian and mass transit
access to this site from the downtown area."
Pursuant to 1988 conceptual review the Library, Parking Garage and
Youth Center have all been approved and developed based upon final
plan approval.
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP: As shown on the attached map, (Attachment C)
the three specific sites to be reviewed are City owned. The Rio
Grande property was purchased with 7th penny transportation funds
in the early 1970's. Those funds were later reappropriated by the
use of the 6th penny open space funds to allow the interim use of
the playfield. Sites 1 and part of 3 are part of that purchase
and Site 2 was appropriated by a land exchange with the County.
The City Attorney's office is currently researching the issues
involved with development of land that was purchased for a public
purpose and the funds that were used for that purchase. A
preliminary conclusion is that voter approval would be required for
a change in use of land used for a public purpose.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The area under review has been divided into
three sites (attachment C) which correspond to the three
2
,4 t '• 1
applications that have been submitted. The rest of the memo will
be formatted in the following manner:
A. Trolley
1. proposal
2. referral comments
3. staff review
4. issues
5. Planning and Zoning Recommendation
B. Snow Melt /Snow Dump Facility
1. proposal
2. referral comments
3. staff review
4. issues
5. Planning and zoning Recommendation
C. Art Park /Theatre
1. proposal
2. referral comments
3. staff review
4. issues
5. Planning and Boning Recommendation
D. General Commission Recommendations
E. Designated Site for Community Oriented uses
A. Trolley Car Barn
1. Proposal - The Trolley Group proposes to develop a
trolley rail system to include a car barn facility, tracks and
poles following a north /south corridor along Galena Street, and
several trolley cars. This review will focus on the operation that
occurs on the Rio Grande parcel and conceptual routing issues. The
actual signage, and other route related issues will be discussed
in full during final SPA review.
The Group proposes to develop a car barn on the current recycle
site (Site 1) on Rio Grande Drive. The barn will be approximately
7,000 sq. ft. which includes 1,000 sq. ft. for accessory office,
storage, and related uses. The building is also being designed to
enable 5,700 sq. ft. of affordable housing on a second level.
According to the application, the Group cannot fund the cost of
the housing but will make the structure available for future
housing development. This is a threshold issue because approval
as a GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities does pot exempt
employee mitigation.
Pursuant to a request from staff, the Group has incorporated the
recycling facility in the site plan. Staff and the applicant are
3
( 1 1' r
consulting with Jim Duke to ensure that the existing level of
recycling services will not be compromised.
According to the plans, a trolley will leave the barn, cross the
pedestrian /bike trail and Rio Grande Drive and travel in between
the Youth Center and Jail to Main and Galena Street. The trolley
will utilize the north /south corridor of Galena Street to take
passengers to and from the parking garage and Durant Street.
The Group also proposes to encircle the ball field providing stops
at the Art Park, Mill Street across from Clark's, and the entrance
to the parking garage.
2. Referral Comments: Specific referral comments are
attached at the end of this memo, attachment D. However,
significant issues are highlighted below:
a) RFTA has expressed concern with regard to funding
the operation of the proposed system.
b) The trolley may exacerbate congestion on Galena
Street with parallel and diagonal parking and
passenger loading of the Trolley.
c) Fire rescue and use of aerial equipment is inhibited
by overhead electrical lines.
d) Timing of street work for Trolley must be coordinated
with ACSD line work.
e) The tracks in Rio Grande Drive may conflict with the
sewer line.
f) Inadequate width of trail between Youth Center and
Jail and diminished solar exposure on the trail may
pose safety problems.
g) Tracks, parking and recycling center conflict with
Snow Dump Road and snow dump trucks.
h) Encircling the Rio Grande ball field with poles and
wires may cause undesirable visual impacts.
i) The weight of the Trolley on pedestrian /bicycle
trails and mall bricks must be considered.
j) The recycling facility must be accommodated.
3. Staff Review - Pursuant to Section 7 -804 (B) the review
standards for development in a Specially Planned Area are as
follows:
a. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or
enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture,
landscaping and open space.
RESPONSE: 1) A significant portion of the Rio Grande parcel was
purchased with 7th penny funds (transportation) and the car barn
is consistent with the intention of that purchase. The site is in
the vicinity of the parking garage and is across the street from
4
' 1 r
the S /C /I zone district. Moreover, the trolley's use of the site
is consistent with the Commission's Resolution 88 -6 (approving
conceptual SPA) which stated "that a north /south, downtown shuttle
is vital to the community...It is the P &Z's opinion that this
north /south shuttle corridor should service the downtown, Rio
Grande and the post office areas."
Although design is currently schematic, the building is proposed
to be sunk into the ground and will step down as it approaches the
river to minimize the visual impacts. According to the
application, the roof height (to the peak) is approximately 35 feet
which includes the second floor housing units.
According to the referral comments from the County Manager, it is
the goal to ultimately have a full curbside recycling program, but
in the meantime the current facility should not be compromised.
The recycling facility has been incorporated into the site plan but
current plans need to be modified to facilitate the entire program.
It is important to ensure that both uses can be accommodated on
site.
2) The track alignment crosses Snow Dump Road thus requiring a
grade change on the road. The Streets Department must be ensured
that the snow dump trucks can handle the sudden grade change.
Grade changes are also required where tracks cross the bike path
in approximately 2 -3 places. Safety measures need to be
incorporated at these crossings.
The track also is intended to encircle the ball field to provide
several stops. The applicant has confirmed that the size of the
playing field will not be compromised but staff is concerned that
encircling the field with poles and wires will create a visual
impact.' Although the proposal is consistent with Council's
Resolution 88 -37 (approving conceptual SPA) that
"any downtown shuttle should service the Rio Grande site, Post
Office, pedestrian access points to the parking facility and
Rio Grande recreational and cultural areas, as well as
important activity centers in the downtown ",
staff has asked the applicant to consider making stops only at the
parking garage and across from Clark's (which would also service
the Post Office).
The trail area between the Youth Center and Jail is very narrow.
At the most narrow point, with a trolley, the pedestrian path is
only 6 feet wide. Without the trolley the path is 10 feet wide.
There are considerable safety issues in this corridor when trolley
and pedestrian /bike users vie for this space. The steep grade, the
narrow path, inadequate room for snow removal and the possible
gutter- bike -tire -trap pose some serious safety issues.
5
The applicant has developed some trail alternatives that will be
presented at the meeting. However, staff believes that proper
review of this alignment requires the entire route to be
considered. For Final SPA submission, the applicant should provide
a review of the trolley route and potential alternatives so staff
and the decision - making bodies can effectively evaluate the
problems associated with this route and perhaps make
recommendations for an alternative alignment.
b. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to
service the proposed development.
RESPONSE: The necessary utilities exist to support the trolley
system however, the Group should coordinate with the Electric
Department for special equipment and transformers.
At staff's request, the applicant has incorporated 12 parking
spaces on the site plan for employees and visitors. It was staff's
intention to ensure that parking could be accommodated on -site if
required. However, the parking is in direct conflict with Snow
Dump Road and the use of that road by snow dump trucks. Although
the this traffic would not be a problem if the snow melter is
removed, the road would still service the Theatre building. Staff
is recommending that on -site parking be eliminated given the close
proximity to the parking garage.
c. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally
suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability
and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and
flood hazards.
RESPONSE: This former impound .lot is well suited for this
proposal. There are no geologic hazards that exists.
d. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land
planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid
adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and
similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at
large.
RESPONSE: There are no designated view planes within this area.
The car barn will be sunk into the ground approximately 5 feet and
the mass will step down as it approaches the river. The building
envelope has been sited up next to Rio Grande Drive to reduce
visual impacts from the river and bike path.
According to the application, maintenance is relatively clean
compared to any automotive, bus, internal combustion engine
maintenance. The project will incorporate grease traps to prevent
lubricants or oil from impacting the environment. The
Environmental Health Department recommends the installation of an
oil and sand interceptor to prevent run -off of lubricants and the
6
finer sediments when the trolley is being washed. The trolley is
powered electrically and 50% of the electricity in this area is
hydro- electric. Because of the vehicle footprint and speed, the
small particulate pollution is expected to be minimal.
Wherever a track crosses a trail or a road there is potential for
conflict. The applicant should explore various devices to prevent
pedestrian /bike interference in the tracks. At best, these
crossings should be minimized.
The visual effects of surrounding the ball field with poles and
wires is of great concern to staff and the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The applicant has submitted two alignments for the
northern portion of the field which will be presented at the
meeting of which both have impacts. In the alternative, service
. may only be provided on half of the field.
e. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: According to the application, all studies going back to
Voorhees have identified the north /south Galena Street corridor as
an essential link in the transportation system of Aspen. The 1987
Transportation Plan identified the downtown shuttle as an integral
part of any Rio Grande parking program as well as a needed
north /south connector and system through the site.
Since that time conceptual support of the trolley has been given
to the Group, please see attached letters from the City and the
County, attachment E.
f. Whether the proposed development will require the
expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities
for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood.
RESPONSE: The Group intends to finance the capital installation
of the system. According to the application, the system is planned
to be turned over to the City for operation, possibly RFTA.
However, RFTA has commented that funding the system could become
a significant problem. No clear commitment has been given to the
Trolley group from either the City or RFTA.
g. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty
percent meet the slope reduction and density requirement of Section
7 -903 (B) (2) (b) .
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
h. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the
proposed development.
7
RESPONSE: Allotments would only be required for development of
the car barn facility. A GMQS Exemption is available for projects
that are deemed Essential Public Facilities. The applicants
believe that they qualify as an essential community facility.
Formal action for GMQS Exemption would be approved by Council at
final SPA review. However, the question of employee housing at
this site is a threshold issue. Currently, the Land Use Code does
not allow a waiver of this requirement and staff would like Council
to discuss and provide some direction to staff and the applicants.
The criteria for a GMQS Exemption considers the public purpose,
growth generation, availability for general public use, servicing
the needs of the City and whether the development is a not -for-
profit venture. Although exemption occurs at final Council review,
a GMQS Exemption is an issue that should be discussed at
conceptual.
4. Issues
a) The trail between the Youth Center and the Jail is
extremely narrow posing a safety issue. Trolley tracks crossing
the trail is also a safety issue. Prior to final submission, a
review of the proposed routes and consideration of alternative
routes should be included in the final application. Staff cannot
make a recommendation without reviewing the whole system.
b) The site plan has identified (based upon staff's
recommendation) 12 parking spaces. However, they are in direct
conflict with Snow Dump Road and the snow dump trucks. Staff
recommends eliminating the parking due to the close proximity of
the parking garage which is approximately 1/2 a block away.
c) It is unclear whether the Trolley Barn, as shown on the
site plan, will accommodate the current recycling efforts. The
applicant should continue to work with Jim Duke to ensure that his
efforts are not compromised by the new car barn.
d) It is staff's understanding that the trolley track
alignment encircles the ball field providing a stop for the Art
Park /Theatre site and the Art Museum. As has been discussed
earlier in this memo, poles and wires surrounding the field could
have an undesirable visual effect. Perhaps the alignment could be
relocated down into the trees below the edge of the field or the
stop could be eliminated.
e) GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities does not
exempt employee mitigation and this issue should be resolved prior
to final review.
5. Commission Recommendation: Conceptual SPA approval of the
Trolley Car Barn with the following conditions:
8
a. Prior to final submission the applicants shall provide a
thorough review of the trolley routes in order for staff and the
review bodies to make a sound recommendation regarding the use of
the Jail /Youth Center corridor and shall also consider and identify
the best safety measures possible to prevent user conflicts at
trail crossings and shall incorporate snow removal procedures. The
applicant shall eliminate the track encircling the ball field and
provide an alignment only around the north side of the field.
b. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall include in the
plans to be reviewed by the Environmental Health Department the
installation of an oil and sand interceptor to prevent run -off of
lubricants and the finer sediments.
c. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall identify
employee housing mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the P &Z
and Council.
d. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall explore various
devices to prevent pedestrian /bike interference at track crossings
and these crossings should be minimized.
e. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall identify how
the system will be funded, operational and maintenance budgets and
what entity will operate the system.
f. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall coordinate, all
activities with Electric, Streets, Fire and Water Departments and
the ACSD and incorporate their referral comments within the final
application.
g. The applicant shall include in the final submission potential
signage, pole and light features for review.
h. Prior to final submission the applicant shall revise the site
plan eliminating the parking and conflicts with Snow Dump Road,
and incorporating the recycling center's operations.
B. snow Melt /Snow Dump Facility
1. Proposal - This site (Site 2) has been used for 14 years
as the snow dump for the City. The existing facility includes one
snow melter and pit which are about 1000 square feet, an effluent
treatment facility (pond and sand filter) which occupy a 1/4 of an
acre, and a snow storage area that occupies about 5/8 of an acre.
In September of 1989, the Engineering Department amended the
original 1988 conceptual SPA plan to develop the effluent treatment
ponds. One of the conditions of approval was the attempt to
relocate the entire operation. The City Manager and Public Works
Department continue to seek an alternate site. Until an effective
9
relocation can occur it is staff's vision that the snow melt
activities be incorporated with the landscape plans of the Art
Park, utilizing the sedimentation ponds as a summer water feature.
The most recent application submitted by the Engineering Department
represents the existing conditions reflected in the 1989 SPA
amendment.
Because the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend discontinuing
the use of the site for the snow melt activities (see P &Z
recommendation) the Engineering Department and City Manager have
been pursuing alternate locations. The Engineering Department will
make a full alternative site presentation to Council during this
conceptual SPA review of the Rio Grande property at a separate
meeting.
2. Staff Review - Pursuant to Section 7 -804 (B) the review
standards for development in a Specially Planned Area are as
follows:
a. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or
enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture,
landscaping and open space.
RESPONSE: Given the movement to rehabilitate this lower portion
of the Rio Grande parcel, it would be difficult to find that the
snow melt facility "enhances the mix of development..." Although
the snow dump is a winter use it appears to conflict with the Art
Park's plans to begin extensive revegetation of the site. In
addition, it could conflict with the theatre plans because the
storage of snow encompasses such a large amount of land. The
Engineering Department believes that if six snow melters are in
operation then the need for snow storage is unnecessary (this would
not increase the amount of natural gas necessary for melting) but
would potentially increase the water treatment element of melting
snow.
A settling pond and sand filter are required for treatment of the
water before it enters the river. The pond and filter are only
used during the winter but there is a possibility that they could
be made into a water feature for the summer. The Engineering
Department, during the SPA amendment process in 1989, agreed to
clean out the pond and work with interested parties to incorporate
the pond into a landscape plan for the site. The Department will
continue to work with others interested in rehabilitating the site
to create a water feature for the park. The Department should also
update the Urban Runoff Management Plan to determine the Pian's
effect upon the lower Rio Grande parcel and the proposed land uses
for this site.
10
b. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to
service the proposed development.
RESPONSE: This site has been used as a snow dump for eleven years.
According to the applicant, the facilities that exist are
sufficient to service the operation.
c. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally
suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability
and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and
flood hazards.
RESPONSE: The flat nature of the site and the absence of other
geologic hazards confirm the suitability of this site for snow
dumping purposes.
d. Whether the proposed development creatively employs' land
planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid
adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and
similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at
large.
RESPONSE: From a pure cost perspective this is an ideal location
for snow melt operations because the central location reduces the
haul costs. In addition, access to the site does not impact
residential uses and noise and visual impacts are reduced given
its relative isolation. The snow dump and snow melter are not
viewed as the ideal land use for this site because of the central
location, the proximity to the river, and the Art Park's interest
in rehabilitating the site.
Although, recent efforts have been made to treat the water before
it enters the river and the bike trail has remained open during
snow melting operations there are no amenities associated with the
facility. But, as discussed during the snow melt SPA amendment in
1989 and at work sessions with the Art Park, the seasonal nature
of the snow melt operation does not necessarily preclude the use
of the site as a park during the summer. Perhaps the sediment
ponds could be designed as a summer water feature.
The relocation of the bike trail was also discussed during the 1989
amendment for safety reasons. The road from the snow dump to the
snow melter is crossed by the bike path. Relocation was ultimately
not viewed as necessary because an additional trail is proposed
down by the river. However, the City Manager's office has
requested that the Engineering Department reconsider moving the
trail for safety reasons.
e. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
11
RESPONSE: Snow removal is an integrated aspect of Aspen as a
quality resort and until a more suitable location is identified,
this operation will remain at this site.
f. Whether the proposed development will require the
expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities
for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood.
RESPONSE: The operation is funded by the City and increased
funding would be required if additional snow melters were
purchased. An alternative location may increase the haul costs.
g. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty
percent meet the slope reduction and density requirement of Section
7 -903 (B)(2)(b).
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
R. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the
proposed development.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
3. Issues
a) Currently an alternative location does not exist and
without additional snow welters the land area devoted to snow
storage is essential for the operation of the facility. The
purchase of more melters will decrease the need for snow storage
but could increase the need for greater water treatment capacity.
b) The water treatment /sediment pond could hopefully be
integrated into the Art Park landscape plan as a summer amenity.
However, the treatment capacity could be increased given a high
snow year or if more melters were put into operation.
•
c) Purchasing more melters would require a considerable one-
time expenditure but would not increase our natural gas needs.
However, ongoing efforts to relocate the facility may forestall the
purchase of more melters.
d) If a permanent theatre was built on -site, staff is unclear
whether the site could accommodate both uses. Although the Art
Park /Theatre site plan specifically does not include patron or
resident parking, drop -off and delivery parking should be provided.
However, a large area for snow storage area is required for
maneuverability of the front end loader and dump trucks and the
necessity for snow storage appears to compromise the theatre site
plan.
12
e) Because of the uncertainty of the ideal capacity of the
water treatment operation, a safe and aesthetically pleasing
integration of this water feature into the Art Park site plan may
be problematic.
f) The Commission recommended to discontinues the use of the
site for snow melting purposes before the 1991 -1992 season. The
Public Works Department will be making an alternative site
presentation to Council at a separate meeting. Council may want
to determine the feasibility of other locations and the ability to
locate the facility before next season prior to adopting the
Commission's recommendation. Staff is concerned that a conceptual
denial will render the facility a non - conforming use.
4. Planning Commission Recommendation - the Commission
recommends to discontinue the use of the Rio Grande Parcel for snow
melt /dump purposes and the snow melt facility shall be relocated
before the winter season of 1991 -1992.
C. Art Park /Theatre
1. Proposal - The proposed plans for Site 3 lay out a five
year improvement plan. The plan includes a new trail along the
river and the connection of the trail to an island in the river,
extensive planting and placement of sculptures throughout the site
and a picnic shelter.
The application also includes an approximately 6,400 sq. ft.
permanent theatre facility (200 seats) and approximately 4,400 sq.
ft. of affordable housing. This proposed structure is intended to
replace the seasonal (badly damaged) tent that The Aspen Theatre
Company has been operating out of since 1987.
Commission's Resolution 88 -6 stated that a proponent of the then
Performing Arts Center proposal, Richie Cohen, "indicated that his
group would be willing to relinquish all claims to the property
known as the Oden parcel if they could get some assurances that the
Performing Arts Center could have another portion of the Rio Grande
site. Mr. Cohen proposed a seasonal (tent) facility on the snow
dump portion of the Rio Grande and it was the P &Z's opinion that
an appropriately scaled tent -like structure near the river and Art
Museum could be very exciting for the community."
In addition, Council's Resolution 88 -37 states that as a condition
of approval for conceptual SPA "the City shall reserve the area
known as the Snow dump for future Arts Usage..."
Subsequent to the 1988 conceptual SPA review, the Art Park /Theatre
groups have had several work sessions with the Commission. At the
work sessions in 1990, the Commission questioned the
13
appropriateness of employee housing on the site and discussed at
length a permanent structure on the site.
Following the Commission's recent conceptual review, the Theatre
Company has submitted an interim plan for the Theatre building
(please see attached letter and site plan dated July 11, 1991, F).
Due to improper storage of the existing tent, the group must buy
a new tent for next year. In addition, the Theatre's professional
fund raiser has recommended postponing a large fund raising effort
(for the new building) until the Theatre has become more
established and their fund raising effort is not competing against
others. Therefore, the group proposes to replace the current tent
(40' by 60') with a larger tent (60' by 80') and construct a small
storage shed (250 sq. ft.) and provide two "Clivus Multrum"
composting toilets and a greywater sewer system. The new tent will
be seasonal in nature, will not add more seats, and will provide
more backstage room so performers will not have to wait outside.
The storage shed will provide a year round secure place to store
equipment and materials that are currently stored off -site. The
composting toilets will eliminate the need to tap into the sewer
lines in Mill or Spring Streets and will replace the current
portable facility.
The new tent would serve The Theater Company for five years a time
frame is compatible with the SPA review. Upon receiving conceptual
review, an applicant has two years to submit a final SPA
application for review. Following final approval an applicant may
vest their rights for another three years by which time a building
permit must be pulled to commence construction.
It is recommended that Council still review the land use issues of
whether a permanent facility is appropriate for this site and also
review the interim proposal.
2. Referral Comments
a) An all weather driving surface is needed if housing
is provided within the theater building.
b) The application must address the provision of sewer
and water services for the proposed building.
c) A close, cooperative work plan with the Parks
Department is critical as is identification of budget
matters if the Department is involved.
d) The location of the bridge to the island must be
reviewed.
3. Staff Review - Pursuant to Section 7 -804 (B) the review
standards for development in a Specially Planned Area are as
follows:
a. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or
enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the
14
parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture,
landscaping and open space.
RESPONSE: 1) The non - profit, community oriented, Art Park group
has begun extensive work in the area to rehabilitate the site.
Existing activities and future plans incorporate trails, open
spaces, and cultural attractions. The trails connect with Herron
Park, the Art Museum, Rio Grande trails and Jenny Adair Park. The
group proposes to continue their efforts developing a "destination"
open space with a strong connection to the river thus complimenting
the goals of the Roaring Fork Greenway plan.
2) The Aspen Theatre Company's proposal is intended to be an
additional cultural attraction. The theatre will replace a
deteriorating tent structure and provide a year round presence for
The Aspen Theatre Company within close proximity to the downtown.
The development of a permanent theatre building raises several
issues. First, the ball field has always been considered the
future site of the Rio Grande train station. The field and parking
lot in front of the parking garage would accommodate the station
and it's auxiliary uses. Development of the train station, a
theatre building and a trolley car barn could effectively eliminate
usable open space on the entire Rio Grande site.
Secondly, a permanent theatre may not be appropriate for this site
because a year round facility would intensify the use of the land.
Additionally, drop off and delivery will be necessary to service
the theatre. Both uses are inconsistent with the Roaring Fork
Greenway plan. The Greenway Plan identifies this parcel as a
Greenway area and states that it would be desirable to manage the
flow of human traffic in a way to minimize congestion and conflict
of activities.
Staff believes that the applicant should demonstrate the need for
another theatre building in the community and explore alternative
sites for a year round theatre. For example, the new elementary
school is incorporating an approximately 500 seat facility and the
MAA's rehearsal facility will accommodate approximately 500
patrons. There may be the potential to combine efforts with other
facilities such as the Arts Council. Or, an addition onto the
Wheeler Opera House would serve The Theatre Company's needs and
provide existing support services.
The Company does propose an interim measure for a larger tent and
storage shed to be used for 5 more years. A tent on this site is
consistent with the original approval granted by the P &Z and CC for
a temporary theatre use in that location. The Planning and Zoning
Commission's original concept was a "tent -like structure near the
river and Art Museum that could be very exciting for the
community."
15
3) The theatre building is proposed to include housing for theatre
employees. Although a GMQS Exemption for Essential Public
Facilities does not exempt employee housing, staff believes it is
a threshold issue that should be discussed at this conceptual
stage. The issue is whether this site is appropriate for employee
housing. Year round housing on the site will change the intensity
of use on the site - a continued residential presence verses public
open space. Secondly, housing with an all weather road appears to
be inconsistent with the Roaring Fork Greenway plan.
b. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to
service the proposed development.
RESPONSE: According to the referral comments, if housing is
located on the site an all weather driving road (22 ft. wide with
shoulders) for emergency vehicles must be provided for life /safety
issues. A fire hydrant must also be provided. •
There is not a sewer collection system on -site and new lines will
have to be provided if a permanent structure is built. Similarly,
new water service lines would have to be supplied. The application
did not identify the source of funds for these improvements and
these details must be included in the final submission.
In the interim, the theatre plans to provide 2 "Clivus Multrum"
composing toilets because of the expense to tie into the sewer
lines. According to the Environmental Health Department a permit
is required from their Department, a waiver from the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District Board, and a waiver from City
Council to install a' temporary sewage disposal system. For
example, six or seven years ago Council allowed the Physics
Institute to install a septic system because their old system had
failed and a connection to existing sewer lines was economically
unfeasible. Prior to the installation of the temporary composting
toilets (which are proposed for installation next summer) the
applicant will seek a waiver from the Council.
c. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally
suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability
and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and
flood hazards.
RESPONSE: The only real hazard is flooding. According to the
application, a spring runoff threatened the Art Museum resulting
in considerable embankment work to refortify the bank. The group
is planning extensive work along and within the river including
trails and a bridge to the small island. Other interested parties
are planning to enhance the riparian habitat and possibly construct
a kayak course.
Stream margin review will be required for any work done within
proximity to the flood plain or flood way. Location of the bridge
16
will also be reviewed during stream margin review. A full stream
margin review will be conducted during final SPA review.
d. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land
planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid
adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and
similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at
large.
RESPONSE: The Art Park aspect of this proposal incorporates
trails, art, and sculpture. The plan also emphasizes riparian
enhancement and public access to the river. All these features
are consistent with the Roaring Fork Greenway plan, rehabilitating
a public parcel for the enjoyment of the community.
According to the application, the theatre structure is a relatively
low profile building. The height to the peak of the roof is
approximately 28 feet. The massing of the building has been
minimized while using the City Council's Resolution 88 -37 (granting
conceptual SPA for the Rio Grande parcel) as guidance: "Important
public buildings such as the library and arts buildings should be
attractive and designed in a manner which indicates the building's
importance to the community. Hiding the development or minimizing
its impact may not be appropriate."
The proposed new tent, shed and toilets do not appear to greatly
impact the site (see site plan, F).
e. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: The 1973 Land Use Plan is fairly irrelevant for review
of this project. However, the group has proceeded with the program
attempting to remain consistent with the 1988 conceptual SPA plan
for the Rio Grande site. The intent of the plan was "to provide
the design flexibility within which open space, cultural and
transportation needs can be met through a plan which is sensitive
to the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan and the desire for pedestrian and
mass transit access to this site from the downtown area." The
program of trails, open space, and a theatre appear to be
consistent with the above statement.
The group also reviewed the 1989 Council Goals and is proposing
employee housing, encouraging a strong sense of community through
a community /volunteer based program, proposing an arts program that
connects with the existing trails system within close proximity of
downtown, the Art Museum, parking garage and future trolley route,
planting trees in an area that has been void of vegetation,
increasing and enhancing public awareness for the arts, and pulling
together many people and organizations of the Roaring Fork Valley.
17
Although the conceptual SPA plan reviewed the possibility of a
theatre on the Rio Grande parcel, it was in a completely different
location. At the two work sessions with the Commission in 1990,
the Commission expressed a reluctance to encourage a vermanent
structure on this parcel given the eventual build out of the Rio
Grande parcel.
f. Whether the proposed development will require the
expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities
for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood.
RESPONSE: There has been a tremendous amount of community
volunteer work poured into this site. Both the Art Park and The
Aspen Theatre Company have spent an enormous amount of time
rehabilitating the physical elements of the site and developing a
community theatre program. The only direct expenditure from the
City was $5,000 from Council for 1990/1991. Other City Departments
have provided in -kind services during the past year.
As was noted above, the provision of a permanent structure will
require new sewer and water lines and if housing is built on -site,
a full service road with a fire hydrant would be required. The
application does not identify how these services will be funded.
These details are typically found in the final SPA application.
For final review, the group must clearly identify funding sources
for the programs and what support is anticipated from the City's
budget.
g. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty
percent meet the slope reduction and density requirement of Section
7 -903 (B) (2) (b) .
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
h. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the
proposed development.
RESPONSE: Allotments would only be required for development of a
permanent theatre structure. A GMQS Exemption is available for
projects that are deemed Essential Public Facilities. The
applicants believe that they qualify as an essential community
facility, but that does not negate the requirement to mitigate
employee housing (the Land Use Code does not allow the waiving of
this requirement). Formal action for GMQS Exemption would be
approved by Council at final SPA review however the question of
employee housing at this site is a threshold issue. Currently
The criteria for a GMQS Exemption considers the public purpose,
growth generation, availability for general public use, servicing
the needs of the City and whether the development is a not -for-
profit venture.
18
4. Issues
a) Although the 1988 conceptual SPA plan discussed a
performing arts center, the location was on the south portion of
the Rio Grande parcel. As stated in the application, "there should
be little debate as to the importance of having a theatre in
Aspen..." However, a permanent structure on this site may not be
appropriate. Staff questions whether the vision for the Rio Grande
parcel considered a developed parcel with very little open space.
b) Employee housing incorporated into the theatre building
would solve a very problematic issue for The Theatre Company and
mitigate employee housing requirements. From a land use
perspective housing would intensify the use of the site including
the necessity for an all weather road. Although the snow miter
has operated on a 24 hour basis during the winter, employee housing
. would be a year round presence in this public open space which may
not be appropriate.
c) The applicant has not yet demonstrated the need for this
type of structure or that other existing or planned facilities are
not available. Staff is not questioning the need for a community
theatre for Aspen. The issue is whether or not other facilities
can accommodate a theatre of this size and whether another parcel
could accommodate a theatre building while sharing support
services.
d) Any work that is done along the river must be reviewed
via stream margin review. Stream Margin will be addressed during
the final SPA review. •
e) The theatre group's interim strategy to purchase a larger
tent, provide storage and bathroom facilities is temporary and
appears to be consistent with the P &Z and CC's original intent when
granting approval for a theatre tent in this location. The new
tent and upgraded facilities would improve the theatre patron's
experience, enhance the production capabilities, and provide an
opportunity for the theatre to either become established at this
location or seek out better accommodations elsewhere in the
community. However, for The Theatre Company to consider permanence
on this site and pursue fund raising, conceptual approval for a
theatre building must be received by both the Commission and
Council.
5. Planning Commission Recommendation - Conceptual SPA
approval of the Art Park /Theatre program with the following
conditions:
a. The Commission recommends denial of housing on the site.
However, prior to final submission the applicant shall provide
employee mitigation plans to be reviewed and approved at final
review pursuant to the Land Use Regulations.
19
•
b. Prior to final submission, the group must clearly identify
it's ability to provide funding for program development including
capital, operational, and maintenance costs and what specific
support and sources are anticipated from the City's budget.
c. No further site work is to be initiated, except as provided
by item (d) below, until stream margin review has been accomplished
and incorporated into final review.
d. For those activities that would occur outside of the 100 year
flood plain or within 150 feet of the flood plain, a stream margin
exemption may be granted prior to further work.
e. Prior to final SPA submission, the gazebo and other permanent
structural features associated with the Art Park shall be
identified as to size and location on the final plans.
f. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall work with the
Commission to develop an oper plan and policy of multiple -
use for the Theatre building.
g. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall identify the
structure of ownership, funding, and establish performance bonds
and default contingencies for the Theatre building and program.
h. Prior to final submission the applicant's shall address the
provision of sewer and water services and other public facilities
for the proposed building.
D. General Recommendations - The Planning and Zoning Commission
has made the following General Recommendations and Conditions of
Approval for the Rio Grande parcel:
1. The City Attorney's office has recommended that voter approval,
pursuant to Section 13 -4 of the City Charter, is necessary for the
expansion or location of these programs on the Rio Grande parcel.
In addition, for long term activities on Municipal property, terms
of agreements should be worked out with the City. These conceptual
approvals and conditions of approval do not set forth the terms and
conditions that the use shall be established.
2. Each applicant shall submit their final application for a two
step final SPA review within two years of conceptual approval.
3. GMQS Exemptions shall be reviewed at final SPA review.
4. Staff shall provide information regarding the alignment and
terminal for the valley rail and shall include this information in
future SPA submissions for review to prevent conflicts with other
proposed uses e.g. the trolley and other uses.
20
E. Designated site for other Community Oriented uses
As part of this conceptual SPA review staff would like the Council
to consider the designation of a site on the Rio Grande parcel for
potential special community events. For example, an inquiry has
been made about the possibility of locating a farmer's market on
the parcel. Perhaps a market could occur every first Saturday of
the month on top of the parking garage. Staff realizes some
research would be required and specific criteria should be set
forth if a special event area was designated. At this point in
time, staff would encourage some discussion regarding this type of
land use and direction to pursue or not to pursue this idea.
•
The Planning Commission suggested that staff should identify
examples of programs in other communities and develop draft
guidelines for such uses for review by the Commission.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends review of the Issues presented
under 14 of each proposal.
Staff recommends approval of the new tent (60' by 80'), the 250 sq.
ft. storage shed and 2 composting toilets for the theatre site with
the following conditions: 1) prior to the installation of the
temporary composting toilets the applicant shall receive a waiver
from the Council a permit from the Environmental Health Department,
and a waiver from the ACSD; 2) a stream margin review or exemption
shall be approved before the installation of the new tent and
issuance of a building permit for the storage shed and toilets.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends, to Council, approval
of the SPA recommendations with the conditions as identified in
Resolution 18 and reiterated in this memo.
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Deny conceptual approval for a permanent theatre building and
direct the applicants to pursue other sites e.g. the Wheeler
Opera House, MAA facilities.
2) Deny the location of the Trolley barn.
3) Deny the Rio Grande ball field route for the Trolley.
4) Establish the permanent location of the snow welter in it's
current location.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to recommend conceptual SPA approval for
the:
1. Trolley Car Barn with conditions;
2. Art Park /Theatre Plan with conditions; and
3. Interim Theatre Plan for a 60x80 tent, storage shed and
2 composting toilets with conditions.
I move to deny the continued use of the Rio Grande parcel for snow
melting purposes and the facility must be removed by the 1991 -1992
winter season.
21
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Commission Resolution 18
B. Rio Grande Property memo
C. Site Map
D. Referral Comments
E. Trolley Letters
F. Trolley Car Barn Plan
G. Theatre Building Profile and Park Plan
H. Revised Theatre proposal and site plan
22
ATTACHMENT A
) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING' COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL CONCEPTUAL SPA
APPROVAL FOR THE ART PARR /THEATRE PROGRAM,
TROLLEY CAR BARN AND
DENIAL OF THE SNOW DUMP AND MEL�'TR FACILITY
Resolution No. 91- /w(
WHEREAS, the Commission and Council approved a conceptual SPA
plan for the Rio Grande parcel in 1988; and
WHEREAS, several developments have occurred on the parcel
pursuant to final SPA approval, namely the parking garage, library
and Youth Center; and
WHEREAS, several non - profit and community interests have
expressed a renewed interest in locating activities on the
remaining portion of the Rio Grande SPA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department believed that another
conceptual review was necessary for the remaining portion of the
Rio Grande because final SPA applications were not submitted within
two years of conceptual approval and a full review of all
interested parties at once was beneficial for the Commission and
Council to understand the competing interests and potential use
conflicts; and
WHEREAS, those entities, the Art Park /Theatre Group and the
Trolley Group, were asked to submit conceptual SPA applications to
the Planning Department for conceptual SPA review for their
activities on the Rio Grande parcel; and
WHEREAS, the Engineering Department amended the 1988
conceptual SPA approval to enlarge the snow dump and melter
facility and, as a condition of approval, was required to work with
the Art Park /Theatre group to incorporate the snow dump activities
into the park program; and
WHEREAS, the Engineering Department has also submitted an
application for conceptual SPA review within the context of review
of the other applicants; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7 -804 of the Aspen Land Use Code,
the Planning Department reviewed and made recommendations to the
Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission ") regarding
the applications for the Art Park /Theatre, Trolley and Snow Melt
activities; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the guidelines for conceptual SPA, the
Commission at their March 12, 1991 and March 19, 1991 meetings
reviewed the applications for the Art Park /Theatre and Trolley
programs and the snow melt /dump activity; and
�., WHEREAS, the Commission recommends conceptual approval of the
Art Park program and the Theatre building with conditions but does
not recommend approval of the proposed housing on -site; and
WHEREAS, the Commission recommends conceptual approval of the
Trolley Car Barn with conditions but does not recommend approval
of the Trolley tracks encircling the entire ball field; and
WHEREAS, the Commission recommends denial of the continued
operation of the snow melt /dump facility and recommends that it
shall be relocated before the 1991 -1992 snow season.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT, it does hereby
recommend to the Aspen City Council:
pection 1
Conceptual SPA approval for the Rio Grande parcel with the
following general conditions:
1. The City Attorney's office has recommended that voter approval,
pursuant to Section 13 -4 of the City Charter, is necessary for the
expansion or location of these programs on the Rio Grande parcel.
2. Each applicant shall submit their final application for a two
step final SPA review within two years of conceptual approval.
3. GMQS Exemptions shall be reviewed at final SPA review.
4. Staff shall provide information regarding the alignment and
terminal for the valley rail and shall include this information in
future SPA submissions for review to prevent conflicts with other
proposed uses e.g. the trolley and other uses.
section 2
Conceptual SPA approval of the Art Park /Theatre program with
the following conditions:
1. The Commission recommends denial of housing on the site. Prior
to final submission, the applicant shall provide employee
mitigation plans to be reviewed and approved at final review.
2. Prior to final submission the group must clearly identify it's
ability to provide funding for program development including
capital, operational, and maintenance costs and what specific
support and sources are anticipated from the City's budget.
3. No further site work is to be initiated, except as provided
by 14 below, until stream margin review has been accomplished and
stream margin shall be incorporated into final review.
f 4. For those activities that would occur outside of the 100 year
2
flood plain or within 150 feet of the flood plain a stream margin
i exemption may be granted prior to further work.
•
u.f 5. Prior to final submission the gazebo and other permanent
structural features associated with the Art Park shall be
identified as to size and location.
6. Prior to final submission the applicant shall work with the
Commission to develop an operational plan and policy of multiple -
use for the Theatre building.
7. Prior to final submission the applicant shall identify the
structure of ownership, funding, and establish performance bonds
and default contingencies for the Theatre building and program.
8. Prior to final submission the applicant's shall address the
provision of sewer and water services and other public facilities
for the proposed building.
pection 3
Conceptual SPA approval of the Trolley Car Barn with the
following conditions:
1. Prior to final submission the applicants shall provide a
thorough review of the trolley routes in order for staff and the
review bodies to make a sound recommendation regarding the use of
the Jail /Youth Center corridor and shall also consider and identify
the best safety measures possible to prevent user conflicts at
trail crossing and shall incorporate snow removal procedures. The
applicant shall eliminate the track encircling the ball field and
provide an alignment only around the north side of the field.
2. Prior to final submission the applicant shall include in the
plans, to be reviewed by the Environmental Health Department, the
installation of an oil and sand interceptor to prevent run -off of
lubricants and the finer sediments.
3. Prior to final submission the applicant shall identify employee
housing mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the P &Z and
Council.
4. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall explore various
devices to prevent pedestrian /bike interference at track crossings.
At best these crossings should be minimized.
5. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall identify how
the system will be funded, operational and maintenance budgets and
what entity will operate the system.
6. Prior to final submission, the applicant shall coordinate, all
activities with Electric, Streets, Fire and Water Departments and
the ACSD and incorporate their referral comments within the final
3
t application.
! 7. The applicant shall include in the final submission potential
signage, pole and light features for review.
8. Prior to final submission the applicant shall revise the site
plan to eliminate the parking, the conflicts with Snowdump Road,
and to facilitate the recycling center's operations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby
deny the continued use of the.Rio Grande Parcel for snow melt /dump
purposes and the snowmelt facility shall be relocated before the
winter season of 1991 -1992.
APPROVED by the Commission at their regular meeting on June
18, 1991.
ATTi-i: ASPEN PLANNING AND
1 ZONING COMMISSI
/ i� �. C/Q/J /TYU -.c-e 74
-' rney, 'ep City Clerk Jasmine Tygre, ice
/ Chair
s
AiL
4
ATTACHMENT B
•
j2I0 GRANDE PROPERTY
On Sept. 13, 1973 the City acquired the largest parcel (Parcel.A)
of the Rio Grande SPA. It was acquired by the City from a James R.
Trueman by Warranty Deed, Book 279, Pg. 745. (Mr. Trueman acquired
the property from the Rio Grande Western Railroad Company on June
1,, 1973.)
The 1982 City /County Agreement
In April, 1982, the City and the county entered into a "Land
Exchange Agreement ", recorded at Book 426, Pg. 249. The basic
elements of the agreement included the following:
- The City -was to convey to the County a small
tract of land (5,621 sq. ft.) for the Construction
of the County Jail (the "jail property ").
- The City agreed to vacate that portion of the
right-of -way that crossed over the jail property.
- The City agreed to "incorporate in the SPA plan
for the Rio Grande property an area sufficient and
appropriate for-future County office space; and,
further, that the land so designated will, upon
request, be conveyed to the County without
additional consideration."
- The County agreed to convey to the City
approximately 13,000 sq. ft. of land consisting of:
- Parcel C, the "Olen" parcel;
- Parcel D, the vacated portion of Bleeker
street North of the "Oden" property;
- Parcel E, the the old county stable"
property;
- Parcel F, a small triangular piece of land
consisting of a part of the vacated portion
of Sleeker street just north of the "stable
property "; and,
- Parcel G, the Aspen One property.
The "Oden" property was to be conveyed to the City
subject to the following conditions:
1) The City was to pay the County $98,553.00
representing the amount the County had previously
paid to the Oden's for their property;
•
2) The City was to assume the County's obligation
• . to continue paying on the note for the Oden
property; and,
3) "The reconveyance to the County of the Oden
property in the event a performing arts center shall
not have been constructed thereon within ten (10)
• years of the date of this agreement. At the time of
such reconveyance the County shall refund to the
City all amounts paid to the County pursuant to
paragraph 4 (c) (3) and shall also pay to the City any
additional amounts paid by the City for the Oden
property pursuant to the note subsequent to the date
of transfer. In addition, upon such reconveyance,
the City shall be released from any further .
obligation to reserve and convey additional lands
to Pitkin County pursuant [to the previous provision
of the agreement] ."
On April 26, 1982, City Council passed Ordinance 20, Series of
1982, which vacated the 16 foot right -of -way over the "jail
property" in accordance with the 1982 City /County agreement.
On August 23, 1982, City Council passed Ordinance 41, Series of
1982, -which implemented the terms of the City /County agreement.
On September 1, 1982, Warranty Deeds were executed for Parcel C
and D (Book 432, Pg. 102), Parcel E (Book 432, Pg. 117), and Parcel
G (Book 432, Pg. 114). On Sept. 3, 1982, a Warranty Deed was
executed for Parcel F (Book 432, Pg. 186).
The Warranty Deeds for Parcels C, D, E, and F contain the following
reversionary interest language:
"PROVIDED, that the purpose of this grant is to facilitate
the construction of a performing arts , center in accordfance
with the City's Rio Grande Master Plan, as it may be revised
from time to time. In the event that such a center is not
constructed by April 12, 1992, the above described real
property shall revert to the County."
The Warranty Deed for Parcels C and D, the "Oden" property,
contains the following additional language:
"at such time as the County makes payment to the City as
follows:
1. The sum of $106,598.32. representing the
amount the City has reimbursed the County for
payments under and pursuant to a promisory note in
the principal amount of One Hundred Ninety Thousand
Dollars ($190,000.00) between the County and Robert
R. Oden, M.D., and Nancy C. Oden, plus
2. Any additional amounts paid by the City
pursuant to the aforesaid promissory note between
the County and Robert R. -Oden, M.D., and Nancy C.
Oden, plus
3. Statutory interest on the above amounts paid
by the City, from date of payment."
•
era fP
•
•
ATTACHMENT C • .
s
�.. ! _ ,.. • w . •, �. ' w wx! " y'w' 5�-.R`rik' .....r.".. '43"•'
a =. •.... '(� .�... - - - 744 :‘ gy p = � .
y t r.. Z VA
i •"/ - ' 1 S • • 4 I - •
• •w / �4s 4 <. ',
* i 'S' F.
•
:
At. • /d r °• ,
fi ac
r --- L
N � ; to
° r y a 11 € : n . 0r ;i--. " s�` ■
�� rtl f 3 % ■
1 co
r '• _ — -"teJ 1
.. , . /41—arKe. t . k
t # . -_, • / : i ,
1 . r . M ..)
/! / / t7a / - C
/a o / - -
/ .
r Ed 27
ATTACHMENT D
M E M O R A N D U M
•
TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
FROM: Reid Haughey, County Manag =+
SUBJECT: Rio Grande SPA Review'
DATE: . February 26, 1991 -
I am writing to express comments - on behalf of the County
concerning the Rio Grande SPA Conceptual Review and any impacts
such review may have on the Rio Grande recycling facility.
It is the County's intention to implement a recycling program
that will be based on curbside recycling. As a result, the Rio
Grande recycling facility should not be significantly expanded.
We cannot at this time anticipate that the recycling facility
will be diminished in any way though. Therefore, we are
reluctant to encourage any encroachment on the area. We
anticipate that we will have a permanent and consistent presence
in our current facility for the foreseeable future. Please
consider this in any proposals that come through this process.
We look forward to cooperating with other tenants of the area.
Please contact me if I can provide any additional information or
answer any questions. Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
pcsem /wp /rh2.336
MEMORANDUM
TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office •
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department Y"`-
DATE: February 12, 1991
• RE; Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA
Having reviewed the above application and made a site visit, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. The alignment of the trolley line as it passes between the
County Jail and the Youth Center does not allow the required
width for bicycle and pedestrian movement. The engineering
:. Department agrees with the trolley consultant's view that there
will be a small amount of conflict time between the trolley and
pedestrian /cyclist. However, we recommend that warning signs be
placed an adequate distance away from this area to allow the
pedestrian /cyclist to prepare in case there is such a conflict.
2. The applicant needs to coordinate the construction schedule
with the Electric Department. They will need several months lead
time to order a special transformer or any other special
equipment.
3. The State Highway Department has indicated a warrant study
will have to be done if an interrupt signal for traffic is
proposed for Main Street. The plan for the trolley crossing at
Main will also have to be approved by the Highway Department.
4. The applicant will have to discuss the tracks crossing the
snow dump road and what it will do to the grade of that road with
Jack Reid of the Streets Department. Detailed plans and a cross
section of the area need to be submitted so that the grade
changes to the road can be evaluated.
5. The applicant proposes to place poles in the center of Galena
Street which could create a problem for snow removal. If a 3
foot wide island could be constructed in the center of Galena to
accommodate these poles, snow removal would be much more
efficient.
6. There has been some concern about the steepness of the grade
near the Youth Center and County Jail. The applicant needs to
describe in more detail the capability of the trolley to
negotiate steep grades.
•
•
.7. Construction projects in the public right -of -way should be
timed to coincide. if at all possible. The Sanitation District
plans to construct a new sewer line in Galena Street this fall
and the Streets Department plans to do an overlay on Durant
Street this summer. The applicant will need to coordinate this
project with these projects if that is possible.
8. There is potential for the proposed access to the recycling
center and for the parking spaces that are proposed to be in
conflict with the movement of snow dump trucks, especially since
this road is fairly steep. This problem, along with the problem
of the tracks and grade of the road, brings up the question of
the compatibility of the Snowmelter with this project. If the
answer is to move the snow dump site, then the applicant needs to
share in the responsibility of finding a workable solution to the
snow disposal issue.
jg /trolley
cc: Chuck Roth
•
•
•
•
•
\ a
FEB 1 4 1991 t:
Wadea e
420E HOPKWS AVENUE
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
. 00(0925-5&M
TO: Carol O'Dowd, City Manager
Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
•
FROM: Peter Wirth, Fire Chief `,41i --
RE: Comments, Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA
DATE: February 13, 1991
The following are comments on the "Aspen Trolley" project with
specific regard to firefighting, fire exposure protection and
fire rescue on buildings adjacent to the proposed Trolley route.
History - in 1987 Aspen Fire Department supported the City of
Aspen's action in the undergrounding of all electrical and
utility lines within the City of Aspen. This support was based
on the electrical hazard reduction to firefighters and rescue
victims when working around power lines. There was also a hazard
reduction in the form of tree limbs contacting high power lines
during high winds or heavy snows that Aspen receives in early
fall or'late spring when the trees were in blossom. Since the
undergrounding of utilities, the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department
has had a significant reduction in the number of responses
directly related to overhead power lines.
There are a number of large buildings that are situated along the
proposed trolley route. In reviewing the drawings of the track
layout in the streets and the electrical lines and their
approximate location in the air, the Aspen Fire Department would
have a difficult time performing building rescue and exposure
protection for those buildings located along the proposed
corridor. All building rescue operations would require the use
of ground ladders. All aluminum ladders on fire trucks would
need to be replaced by wooden ground ladders. The fire service
over the years has phased out the use of wood ground ladders due
to their weight and lack of strength. I believe that there is
only one manufacturer left that builds a NFPA compliant wooden
ladder. The San Francisco fire department which has similar
problems builds their own wooden ladders.
•
The location of the overhead electrical lines in this project are
in a direct line of contact with any aerial unit that we would
use to perform building rescue or exposure protection in a
defensive fire attack mode. The fire department operates two
pieces of apparatus that would service the area, a 48 foot
articulating boom with bucket, and a 75 foot water tower. Both
of these aerial devices are approximately 12 feet in height. It
appears from the drawings submitted that the overhead power lines
are approximately 15 -16 feet off the ground. This distance does
not provide sufficient clearance for use of our aerial devices
and seriously compromises firefighter safety and rescue efforts.
There should be a safety margin of 15 feet between firefighters
and power lines. The power lines would 'also interfere with any
..ground water monitors that we.would use in building exposure
protection or for defensive fire attack. Setting up our ap-
paratus in the middle of the street between the power lines
provides insufficient reach for both of our aerial devices and
insufficient clearance between the apparatus and the power lines
At this point in time it would be difficult for the Aspen Fire
Department to support this project unless an alternative method
other than overhead electrical power lines were used to power the
trolleys. I strongly recommend an alternative method of power.
If you have any questions regarding our comments please contact
. me at 925 -5532 or 925 -2303.
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Leslie Lamont. Planning Office
FROM: George Robinson, Parks Director
RE: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA
DATE: February 15, 1991
The Parks Department has several comments /concerns in regards to the proposed
Aspen Trolley as follows
1. The site for the Car Barn is presently being used for the Recycle Center and
snowmelt area - Are these areas to be relocated? Where?
2. The section between the Jail and the Youth Center looks to be below subgrade
by approximately six feet. With very little exposure to sunlight, are there any
special plans for any type of snow removal in this area? What type and whose
responsible? Installation of an ice melt system within the sidewalk would be
strongly recommended due to the lack of apparent sunlight.
3. Presently, there is a pedestrian commuter route between the Jail and Youth
Center. Will this be eliminated if the trolley goes through this area? The drawing •
showing this section shows only a six foot margin between trolley and wall.
However, in the adopted pedestrian /bikeway plan the recommend corridor should
be at least eight feet wide. It is also recommended that a fence /railing be
installed between the tracks and the walkway for safety precautions.
4. At the north end of operations in option °I, I have some reservations about
making the Rio Grande Athletic Field any smaller. If the city loses the Plumtree
Ball Field to the four laning of Hwy 82, there may be a greater demand for
Rio Grande Park for athletic events, such as softball, rugby, soccer, etc.. Will
track and trolley become a problem with balls flying into trolley cars and tracks?
Aesthetically, the trolley is disruptive to the visual impact of the area.
5. If a pedestrian accidentally walks in front of a trolley, how quickly can a
trolley car stop in case of emergency?
6. Please eliminate any options for going up Mi11 Street. I foresee many liability
problems with a trolley passing in front of the Wagner Play Area and through the
Pedestrian Mall.
7. If trolley is to cross pedestrian /bicycle trails as indicated in drawings, the
trails were not designed to support the weight of a trolley car. Tracks and
trolleys would break down asphalt and probably create numerous potholes at
intersections.
8. Extra construction considerations need to be made for tracks laid In mall area
between Durant St and Cooper. Reconstruction of mall brick'to accommodate •
weight of trolley and construction of track laid.
9. If cable poles are to be installed in the middle of Galena street where tracks
split as Indicated by drawings, what considerations are being made for snow
removal (le. when Streets Dept does snow removal they make wind rows In the
middle of the street and then the snow blower comes by and picks up rows)?
10. What type of signage, signal markers are to be installed?
•
11. Any estimates on breakdowns of trolley systems?
12. Double ended cars would be best option to keep congestion to a minimum,
saving money and less open space wasted.
13. If trolley were to be constructed, it might be wise to start project in spring
rather than fall due to time needed to construct railway.
FEB -5 .: •
it'zirzu
A a A TRANSIT AGENCY
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 4, 1991 -
To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
From: Dan Blankenship, General Manager
•
Re: Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA
•
I have reviewed the Aspen Trolley Conceptual SPA and offer the
following comments on behalf of RFTA:
1. In general, the overall project appears to have many
• benefits for the community and its sponsors are to be
commended for identifying contributions to fund project
capital costs. Evidently, once constructed, the system
is to be given to the City of Aspen by the applicants.
However, the applicants have not addressed how the
operating costs will be funded. The assumption, I
believe, is that RFTA will operate and pay for the system
once constructed. Unfortunately, however willing RFTA
might be to operate the proposed system, funding the
operating costs of the proposed system may pose a
significant problem for RFTA.
This year, RFTA was unable to fund the cross -town
shuttle, the off- season Airport /ABC shuttle, and
Silverking services, because of funding constraints. The
$231,000 - $270,000 estimated annual operating expenses
connected with the proposed trolley system, given the
current revenue and expenditure forecast for existing
RFTA services, will be extremely difficult, if not
impossible, for RFTA to absorb. In order for RFTA to
operate the system at the levels envisioned, additional
revenues must be identified or some of the existing RFTA
services must be reduced or curtailed.
Ultimately, the RFTA Board of Directors, and not staff,
is responsible for making recommendations to the City
Council and the Board of County Commissioners regarding
annual budget priorities. Therefore, it may be possible
that the Board may view the trolley to be a higher
priority than other existing services.
, - .3
2. If double trackage is used on Galena, I would recommend
that, at a minimum, diagonal parking be eliminated on the
west side of the street. However, consideration should
be given to totally eliminating parking on Galena. Given
the width of Galena, it seems likely that the trolley
system will contribute to increased congestion. As
planned, Galena will continue to have parallel parking on
the east side of the street and diagonal parking on the
west side of the street. Additionally, the trolley
system will require sufficient room for two trolleys to
pass each other there
load and unloadpassengers onboth s des of the tracks in
the middle of the street. Add to these space
requirements the substantial number of large vehicles
which double -park in order to unload freight, along with
normal two -way automobile traffic on Galena, and it would
appear evident that some or all of the parking on Galena
must be eliminated in ordered to mitigate the congestion
that will result from adding a trolley system into a
corridor that is already significantly congested.
•
In conclusion, please let me know if you have questions or if
I can be of additional service.
♦ Y :•1;4::'; e l � :; e .� .[-"r '°' vkr . , ♦ t Y' t r r,AS e fia_ - �5
w tft' n l i N 1 . 9 ll r c�5�w.Z _. r f �� R.s
-� : h A G �y s> , , ! . -tr � � . 1"C it i s f *C1- - y ---:.- t a ;; :r ; - 1
£ :. • -,::',-1-z-::.1"---'
e at _-' -tii,� 4-;; ' • : _-- ° ...4 z f ' a -` r : -t ,� �a r * Fix`• ' ` r t ff! J x r - #.. + • ' g •
, t :,-•
L,r,n"� � .�p�, s �,a a X v c l - r -zyT- ^' -a r • -�"� , 'a
0 , } +�n'4'F +S+ .iu.. ':"F" v (g • P t r i , y am it 'r'w. f 9 J g 1 •s +,. ¢ a
r .. -�- -ar ,.• rp S a' 0 - ,@ , r -i ' f- •{y-y t E . P, e ♦ y M ,
■ x `•• • '' i F, 2 : ( — 4-, •"v � -Z 1 t � • 11�[ t 's• .,;; :i.,µ ..1 +1 -.i 44." � +R `i '' Y r kti.
r I� ccn^ .. ti� e- .Zso3 �r� . .
• r I Wl -y t A - a r r - � i { 9 +Yla , ' K - 1
cx `p •.3a *� ;;;;I' � ••• { `..Sn 44;:t - ' 3 - �` ' ''7G x '4,7K .r ' • r , d . .
-i '+tea n r r d . ♦ - -, x I'4ti > c� s . , r , } " ,fr., • L st 1.
' • ;.37m = 'v4 . „ _, - t 3 r $ y '. ' " ' i"t t ' z
1 a a ruarys 1 2 , 99 i , . A 5 r4 ,, ^ a` F 4 . s y..
f I 1 • N f Y. -1 {ts.' M a ;,..,-;14.::...,..,...t. .. k'Y
\1C �. �Jb'•r"� t, � +� i Sa i - l t �'. _ ✓ ' �3r / } ..R »
• . .f 2 ` tt� ''t 3 r . r •
♦ i ' ,. a • r ... •, -- l` s ... 4 ' :
• _Ir . j � J J• I H ? ?'• • ' i ,` � i. j -- .e j : yam . °' luyl J ? i ^ - ":;4 ''''' ' ,, - - ' .. t a 4..F
Yy Y
{r ""� lageo C s a�� r .t j r ,- i _,.s'+- 'ir+,40, 1 •' �_] x -.-- : -‘).1.1.1',-.a•- + Y w6 4 s ), , +o yv •
•-{
F Aspen, 81611 -. fMn a rt� ' -,- t r s , xy '.
3 ' ♦ ♦ �,I , •,t; t !� a- h E° ]°1... - , 3(s .4' r, l
-. e • # - •
o u s b e '• 1 . y P •• . T.O e o ha y t ry
•: _ -• -{f 'v.r. . IL s- • S tJy F't *i L ... J ; ' v j' i G r i'ir'
�a y
j r 1 ;Me' to f • o inc id e v , .„,, i '+ he 'all ln 1 emenka ion of: th to Lie e yst a ;
v , y . 3 .iYl- `x' meS -T'� R" a C h -F -i t r
� a '•: z s up on • r ,, ; . e ''. 4 up i ,, r T
^ice ,- : GaLth streef -lone s ne' • Lathe. o `de t i pet. ,iin . s eJU: w,A.... -'5.-:..-^ , �, +.• c. -a -en being wo'ved�upGronamour 1.1 new - ehabilitation�sehedule in�an
n .
�"' at ein g k z•eha -e' os#. ioaslize� RP-47-4-44...,4 d min Mize' impact -
�`' durin t t- mplementar3on of the fro ey =sys em l k •
.,,n ' a'^� _ '�+im 1 +..a.. , "�#s4tF' ! l 'j,G'" ys M.+ r. + r :tt el11 a# Y k `+ . .
- - , -
P The most'crucial0 the,I)istr L b involves p -.., l ..... � .
A C i •. . - J
alternative chosen a s . t his. JS S u e. mu st . b e - resol ved prior . = ur
preliminary eng i n eer ing Every e ffort_ should be made to loca A te :
• totley t Ln � s aFinanner r that the i � s tr c�t,,to � ,. .
. +.?rs maintaifl our!� system without..the4need f . ..A, Fy ; • ,
"�,e 'the'trolleyh .The :placement of tracks -, an.Jt R. i o Grandee Waw$ ( .4 :
extension of_:Spring street) may; conflict w ith the se lime and;'
loop into Mill street o . -'o r , A4 4. f Dean S treet. 4
J' 4 . T �i _S� • tree t.
x 9 t' - c { y " a `; . M'3;`
n r v ew o f a pp _ca st n 1 the bart5 esi gn >w s f nc�u .tan,-:-
l &'
Alt-
ACSD
,' approved ' oil = and µ .grease. - -, sep . ; and :cl earl .: wate = . a
connections'`cannot' tie` di 'to the san itary' seweiTsystem as d s " -
suggested on. p :7 3 o f . ; . the application., lift stations stations
required to` connec � `the'pro �ect to' - our system will -remain
the "
property of the Tro Company for maintenance and operation.
The applicant should include the costs o pavement replacement as
would be required in areas -where the District's collection system
is relocated�to a the Troll
c � - l .fir x )�
r' t :, .e e'- t- 'I' ----. ze�H i .x.mR- 4 nn to . in 4ms , '., .. 3' -�
-: +___ We a Jon4_Busch e ffor .- -. coo t h te; ro ey s
implementation wth'the'District:'a encoura .th'e'Trolley' group
to continue to wor closely with the District in the future.
Sincerely,
Bruce Mather 130
District Manager
•
ATTACHMENT E
•
•
•
Pitkin County
•
October . 22, 1990
Jon Busch
Aspen Street Railway Company
548 Race Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Jon:
I an writing on behalf of the Board to evidence their willingness
to allow the Aspen Street Railway Company to pursue land use
reviews and other matters concerning a proposed trolley alignment
across properties that-the County own within the Rio Grande
Site. Some parcels are owned by the City of Aspen and some by
Pitkin County and we are not making representations as to .which
parcels are which, but are extending our willingness to pursue
the :permitting of a trolley way across any properties we may own
on the site.
Please contact me if I can provide any additional information or
answer any questions.
Since el `�l
Reid Haughey
County Manager -
pcsem /wp /rh10.318•
•
Administration County Commissioners County Attorney Personnel and Finance Road and Bridge
530 E. Main. 3rd Floor Suite 13 Suite 1 Suite F - Fleet Management
Aspen, CO 81611 506 E. Main Street 530 E. Main Street 530 E. Main Street 20210 W. Highway 82
(303) 920 -5200 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611
FAX 920 - 5198 (303) 920 -5150 (303) 920 - 5190 (303) 920- 5220 (303) 920 -5390
t 6 3 printed on recycled paper
-
. „
CITY I eh ' Y 4 SPEN .
•
, C ••■ .i 't
1 lQ 11"5(i9r Y' \
1 \K. .�y pp xx. y
o- vm
•
303 -920 -5 " "' ` t-: 'T = trnmstration
303 - 920 - 5198 FAX
October 26, 1990
Mr. Jon Busch
Aspen Street Railway Co.
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Jon,
I would like to thank you for the presentation of the ASPEN
TROLLEY FEASIBILITY STUDY prepared by Street Railway Associates
of Dallas, Tx. and funded by your organization. I_always admire
and want to encourage citizen - initiatives such as your effort.
From information developed in that study, with the assistance of
our Planning office, with input from the Planning and Zoning
Commission and the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission,
ouncil has analyzed all possible cross -town shuttle options. We
eve concluded in a work session that your trolley proposal is
clearly the most desirable alternative.
Your project, utilizing historic American style trolleys, will
.enhance the historic character of Aspen's commercial core and
will be a mass transit mode which people will actually want to
ride. It will be a community asset for generations to come. In
offering sudh a system to the City of Aspen, we anticipate that
it will be operated on some basis by our Roaring Fork Transit
Authority. With a system being developed without tax dollars it
is a natural for it to be operated and maintained in conjunction
with our transit agency.
Council has instructed you to proceed with your SPA application
which proposes to use some City property for a vehicle storage
and maintenance facility and has instructed staff to work with
you. We look forward to analyzing and discussing your submittal
when it is referred to us by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
As an attractive, non - polluting and historic mode of transport,
the trolley symbolizes in my mind the best of Aspen. It will
an important component of our efforts to clean the air and de-
emphasize the auto. Thank you for your organization's efforts.
Sincerely, .y/
Oj
William Stirling
Mayor of Aspen
1
ATTACHMENT F
a
Mansard Style Roof
Co K/d//
uuln
Liviny�Qaar tors
ti
Bailin ilk s r^ UIE i�- �•S '-II-
� m i 5ii ,ii' 1 gal „MR II
.) I I I I I II
--se Sow
per, in 1
■■ ■■
■■ ■5
e ' Door Door Door
n ir ‘
■
s
E—SlrEr _ _ _ ,
\ L i € Stairs
Stairs Tack Tack1
Tiack3
Office- Lower Level
Storage - (./peer Ltve/
FIGURE 3
FRONT ELEVATION
CAR BARN
• 4 •
•
/ 1 f
N
•
• YOUTH ��.
CENTER JAIL •
— ?9ou
� 1
0 try
Ir. A 1
nnuum°nr - 7896
G�l�J1ld - • '
l 3 12
7 10" 1 5
•
SECTION A -A •
8 " - '' O"
•
1 ASPEN TROLLEY PROJECT
•
..• ., . .
r
1 ._ ..._
eS Z - ; ) te2-
f, 1 t
tta
1 y E t t 5�
C P3
• � 1, \ ��
-]
x
Zi ,„c
o
, ,; fi t, r
ti i
r µ , 1 +
Vii• O
. w :4 , [
M wu w vi
ti 'i N i 1 OMV cn pe
� [ 0
TO ,
```i
it. 11/4. �4.. O •
1/4)1/4 » y4 0)
lc
1
o
P3I ; ,,
ti yy
�
tl ', 1 ∎ R W - ~ _ 1 of
" ,��
P i
1 � • '
�
• - Oar
r
•
-</I +t .
MR ;.!
s � bfie_I � , .--°-
„; *
1 11",_,-.7.____---
^\
- '=` .-
t
(� J ACC
....... IN napeo- . I 4 1:i Allif .
!fir ,
I
t ■
SllR I - it `
ra
: ih 1
g v /Rj��
„h i • ,,,
__..
. -, I V /-- -
__*1_
�� -.T. .
. 4
MATCH UNE A • 4 near a.•ee
Na MN, Ae.NN• ..P
2 4 �N....n . ......,. OPTION 1 f Barton- Aschman
;'"'
ASPEN TROLLEY Associates, Inc.
- ae••n
ATTACHMENT G T- -___
� -7 ___
\ \ \ .11 r c
�` i *\ fi '� l_"_� fit; \ . r /
1 4: , 4,;•2,--j‘e.*,. •
•% t . ' ( 1 '
i t
f�
III 1: 3�.. -- \ •
• S� , ` q
. J ' _
` ,„ / , `✓-- r • `\ _ _
t <i rr 11)`YHr( l- • y G
1 ,? X47/ 1 ,.17:4\t,...,,,---*;
1 / + ®� r
ry mil .,-.-=e- " ^ r� 'Y
a/ �1 / _ ... a ' . jIijiij a .9 O fr
o a -
/ / y
r.
/
/ 1 --I
AR.lf PARK— m
. . ,
.
1 .
. .
1 . .
. . .
1 • • 1 .
. . .
, .
.
Hi .
1. i 0
. ,
.i..--.
.
1 1....
.
.
1 . I :
.
( •
l• c . .
ill• 1 .
4 ni 1 ligu ,4:
:t 1
,r&
Oi Hi
a it es I ijave k...
el ws 111
i sN
. i
.. • 1 -r . .
11
11
A I
. . ,_. i. i • ; 1 -
..i
41
1
,e1
. i N
• 1...,,
l 'ar2.7-.
/1711 i I I .
01 1
1
....
...
0 1
1
1
1 Ii .
i
it.1
Y
1 b ".. f j
.. �. -� . 1
f � f �f. u:
1 ;1 Jr - ti
1 i i
11 \ i i i .b,
1 :1.1.... 1
0
c.
"`a
Cli
1,, ai
s
.
,i i
1 4r
1 � � I\.
:, • I .\.
I Ii j
1 ,
I "
1
i
•
1
3
1 •
TABLE 1
ART PARK FIVE YEAR CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Year One (1990)
1. Clean up area and remove all extraneous debris.
2. Continue landscaping from east side of Mill Street to berm.
•3: Design bike path alignment along river bank
4. Initiate 'We Count" tree planting program.
5. Refurbish and expand flower gardens.
6. Expand outdoor sculpture.
7. Begin placement of outdoor solar fighting instruments.
8. Continue installation of irrigation system.
4 9. Build steps and wildflower garden between Rio Grande playing field and Art Park
10. Erect theatre tent.
•
. Year Two (1991)
4 1. Continue landscaping and development of outdoor sculpture areas. •
2. Re-configure bike path and re- contour river bank.
3. Re- configure and landscape River islands, and begin bridge construction to
connect one island with the Art Park
4. Expand irrigation and fighting systems.
5. Develop pedestrian corridor to youth center and downtown.
6. Erect theatre tent.
Year Three (1992)
1. Develop permanent theatre and affordable housing (note: Theatre construction is
expected to occur during year three, four or five, depending upon fund raising).
2. Continue landscaping/lighting/irrigation /sculpture placement
3. Landscape pedestrian corridor to youth center and downtown.
4. Build and landscape covered picnic shelter.
Year Four (1993)
1 1. Complete landscaping around new theatre building.
U Year Five (1994)
1. Complete landscaping of entire property.
5
ATTACHMENT H
E I JUL 1 6191
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICE
July 16, 1991
Ms. Leslie Lamont, Planner
Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: ADDITION TO ART PARK CONCEPTUAL SPA APPLICATION
Dear Leslie,
As I recently discussed with you on the telephone, the Aspen Community Art Park is
submitting an addition to their Conceptual SPA Application with respect to the proposed
theatre. The nature of the change, the reasons for it and an evaluation of the continued
compliance of the project with the SPA review criteria are included herein.
The Art Park is proposing an interim plan with respect to operation of the theatre tent.
While the Aspen Theatre Company continues to pursue its long term goal of establishing
a true theatre building on the site, it finds itself in the position of having to replace its
theatre tent by the 1992 season. There are two reasons for this need. First, the tent itself
deteriorated badly during the last winter season, due to the manner in which it was
stored. The tent is expected to last through the current season but must be replaced
prior to next year's season.
Second, the Theatre Company has been working with a professional fund raiser, who
indicated to the Board that it might be prudent to wait a few years before embarking
upon a major fund raising campaign. This conclusion was reached due to the existence
of several other (competing) fund raising campaigns in the Aspen community and the
need for the Theatre Company to be established in Aspen for a longer time before it
embarks upon such an ambitious program.
While its exact specifications are still being explored, the proposed tent which the Theatre
Company anticipates installing will be approximately 60' by 80', which is somewhat larger
than the existing 40' by 60' tent. It will be made of materials similar to the existing tent
and have a similar general profile. The tent will be set on a wooden deck, which allows
wiring to be run underneath and will be designed so as to eliminate the drainage
problems which occurred earlier this season from some of the surrounding City activities.
810 Midland Park Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 -2475 303 - 925 -7634
Ms. Leslie Lamont
July 16, 1991
Page Two
The Theatre Company would also like to construct a small structure as part of its new
tent, which would contain bathrooms and a small, enclosed storage area. Given the
location of the nearest sewer service lines in Mill Street and Spring Street, we have
determined it will not be cost effective to tap into the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District lines for these facilities. We have spoken with Bob Nelson of the Environmental
Health Department, who suggests we use "Clivus Multrum" composting toilets, with an on-
site, re- fillable water tank. He informs us an exemption from City regulations must be
obtained from City Council for this type of private system to be installed. We ask Council
to grant us this exemption, if supported by Environmental Health and the Planning Office.
The storage area would be approximately 250 sq. ft., and provide the Theatre Company
with a secure place to keep equipment and materials on -site, rather than continuing the
current cost and inconvenience of off -site storage. The structure for the bathrooms and
storage would remain on a year -round basis, but should not interfere with surrounding
City activities. A site plan of the proposed tent, storage shed and bathrooms is being
submitted by Harry Teague under separate cover.
Although the impacts of the proposed theatre building were demonstrated to be quite
manageable on the site, the impacts of the tent will be even less. For example, while the
new tent is larger than the current tent, the increase in size is not primarily intended to
increase the size of the audience. Instead, the currently limited stage area will be
enlarged and a larger backstage area created, in place of the current arrangement of
having performers wait outside of the tent. ft should be noted that a typical theatre
contains an equal amount of backstage area to audience area, a feature the current tent
cannot provide. Seating in the new tent is expected to remain at its current level of
approximately 80 persons (although an increase to 100 persons would be feasible, if
demand warrants), as compared to up to 200 persons in the proposed building. The
performance season would remain the same as today and not be extended year- round,
due to the limitations of the weather. We, therefore, believe the interim use of a new tent
will be in compliance with all standards for Conceptual SPA review.
We refer you to our original Conceptual SPA application with regard to the project's
community benefits and the manner of its compliance with the SPA review standards.
We request that the interim plan remain in effect for a period of five years, a time frame
which relates well to the City's regulatory procedures. Section 7-804 C. of the Aspen
Land Use Regulations requires a final development plan to be submitted within two years
of the date of approval of the conceptual plan. The Aspen Community Art Park intends
to comply with this limitation. Assuming the final plan is then approved, Section 6 -207 E.
of the Aspen Land Use Regulations grants a three year vesting period to any approved
specific development plan. Therefore, the interim plan can remain in effect through the
period of vesting of Final SPA approval, since a building permit for the permanent theatre
Ms. Leslie Lamont
July 16, 1991
Page Three
will need to be obtained within three years of the date of vesting.
Please let me know if you require any additional information during your processing of
the Conceptual SPA and this minor change to our original proposal.
Very truly yours,
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
M4
Alan M. Richman, AICP
.. - -- __ - - - -
C ...._-----:".
o
•
i .
;• \
il ,
•
lii .,j
I'�II� 1 ! •
ki . ,,
ki is ,
.. r -, 1 ,
7 ..
, „ ,.. .. , :
. . •
i ' '
j l•
•
I I i 1
1
' \
j / \ _ •
/ /
i
I /W
yri / \\
,� \ i
r
, l\
401AgN 1 r: .Q._
l (2,1t 6‘ ):
roGp� '
sla
A141
•
z �
m Y,
t.
,
1 4y
IT
0 ? 1
•
• T
r
APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL SPA
a
+ 1- Introduction
This application for Conceptual Specially Planned Area (SPA)
approval is submitted for that portion of the Rio Grande Property
which, for the past fourteen or so winters, has been utilized for
and known as
The Snow Dump
r
II. History of Snow Dump
At least since Aspen became a ski town, there have been snow dump
sites located within city limits. As the town became more
sophisticated in the ski business, the snow dump became
increasingly awesome until its daring ascent by veteran climber
Raul Andreasen in 1988, memorialized by the newspaper report
attached hereto in Appendix A, on page 7 of this application.
The exact location of this necessary facility of a ski town has
varied during the years. Wagner Park has been used. Snow was
dumped over the bank behind the elementary school onto the site
where Clarke's Market now stands. Snow has been dumped over the
bank behind the Hotel Jerome onto the site where Aspen Savings
and Loan was recently located. Snow has been dumped at the golf
course, at Herron Park, and at the Koch Lumber Property. From
about 1969 to 1977, snow was dumped at what is now the Sanitation
District employee housing site by the Mill Street Bridge. From
about 1977 to the present, snow has been .dumped at the current
snow dump site on the Rio Grande Property.
Various of City of Aspen staff have grappled, together with City
Council and the general public, for the past seven years for a
satisfactory solution to the problem of the location of the snow
dump. Some of the finest minds in land use at the city planning
office and three administrations and four city councils have been
unable to resolve the dilemma. The Pitkin County Parks
Association pitted their collective mind power against the
problem and came up dry. The Art Park Council threw their
collective, creative genius against the problem and came up empty
handed.
1
The problem of where and how to dispose of the snow removed from
city streets remains unhappily unsolved to this very day. It
would in fact appear that there is no satisfactory solution to
this problem. The concept which received the editorial cartoon-
. of-the-year award was the "Multiple Snow Dump" concept. Please
see page 8.
In about 1987, the city council directed staff, counter to staff
recommendations to continue solar melting, to purchase a snow
melter. It would appear, at least to this addled application
preparant, that 20/20 hindsight shows council to have made the
+■ wise decision of the decade.
Staff performed a reasonably extensive cost and feasibility
w „ report which determined that for a haul distance of greater than
_ three miles, the cost to the public was less to melt it than to
haul it. The Canada Transportation Board is reported to have
made a similar study, which we would have to presume was of a
higher quality than our home brewed effort, and determined that
melting snow was economical when haul distances exceeded two
miles.
Therefore, the million dollar question is: "Where is there a site
within two miles of the center of town where the public would
rather see a snow dump ?" -- This application submits to you that
the answer is, "Nowhere."
However, we do not attempt to stifle further creative thought on
the matter. We are only too eager to listen to creative comment.
There are various sites within two miles of the center of town
which could be used for a snow dump. Examples are the Marolt
Property and the Benedict Gravel Pit. Such proposals have not
previously been met with favorable reception.
Additional considerations are that the natural gas which is used
by the snow melter is a domestic product. The diesel fuel used
by trucks to haul snow to wherever is a derivative of an import.
The current location provides a situation where dump trucks full
of snow drive past the fewest slumbering residents and visitors.
Anyone desiring the full historical barrage about snow disposal
is requested to refer to the document titled "Snow Dump /Snow
Melter" on file at the office of the city engineer.
r
w
2
III. Proposed Conceptual Development Program
The applicant proposes to perform snow disposal in any fashion
whatsoever as directed by City Council.
The applicant further proposes that the best solution appears to
s- be to continue the insightful course set in 1988 with the
purchase and installation of a snowmelter. Frankly, this appears
to be a cost conscious and environmentally sensitive solution.
(The snow welter manufacturer reports that their gross sales were
up some fifty percent during the past year. Various major
airports, shopping malls and parking garages and some
municipalities in the northeastern United States and in eastern
Canada have found that the technology makes sound economic and
environmental sense.)
The installation of additional snow melter units adjacent to the
existing unit would further enhance the snow disposal operation
by
acutely reducing the land area
needed for temporary storage before the snow is front -end loaded
into the melter pit. It appears that with a total of about six
snow melters, the streets department would be able to dump all
truck loads of snow directly into a pit as rapidly as the snow is
removed from the streets - without having to dump the snow
temporarily on ground for melting during a night shift or during
the days following a snow storm.
A full complement of snow melters therefore would disencumber
most of the parcel in question for development in most any manner
desired. (It should be noted that additional snow welters would
not increase the costs of the natural gas used to melt the snow.
The gas costs are solely a function of the amount of snow that is
melted in a season.)
4-
After the first season of melting snow, it was found that the
quality of the water which was discharged to the Roaring Fork
River was unacceptable. In the fall of 1989, the City therefore
constructed temporary, experimental water treatment facilities to
treat the water prior to discharging into the Roaring Fork River.
Due to unknown reasons, though apparently probably to seepage
into the ground, there has been extremely little actual discharge
yet into the river during the past two winters. The discharge
during the previous winter was in fact so infrequent that the
staff was never able to obtain a sample for water quality
testing. On the two occasions when discharge was observed, it
3
was clear to the naked eye.
r
In conclusion, staff must report that the experimental nature of
the water treatment facilities remains experimental. We do not
.r yet have enough data to provide a final report.
r
IV. Response to Conceptual SPA Review Standards
The following are the responses to the Conceptual SPA review
standards which are found in Chapter 24- 7- 804(B) of the Aspen
w" Municipal Code.
Standard 1: "Whether the proposed development is compatible with
or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of
the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk,
architecture, landscaping and open space."
' Response: Aspen is a ski town. Ski towns have snow. The snow
needs to be removed from the streets, if not for general public
use then for emergency response vehicles. It has been reported
that the city experimented during a year in the Fifties with
leaving the snow on the streets, and that the results were not
laudable.
The proposal to continue and to increase the snow melter
operation would free up more of the Rio Grande Property for other
beneficial public development.
Standard 2: "Whether sufficient public facilities and roads
exist to service the proposed development."
Response: The site has been used for some fourteen years. Roads
and utilities are sufficient to service the proposed development.
Standard 3: "Whether the parcel proposed for development is
generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground
instability and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls,
avalanche dangers and flood hazards."
Response: Fourteen years of use attest to the suitability of the
proposed use.
Standard 4: "Whether the proposed development creatively employs
land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes,
avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space,
trails similar amenities for the users of the project and the
public at large."
Response: Given that there may not be any location within
reasonable distance of the center of Aspen where a snow dump with
r heights as great as eighty feet would not destroy someone's
4
viewplane, it may be that melting the snow as fast as it comes
'" off the streets is•the best answer.
Standard 5: "Whether the proposed development is in compliance
a with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan."
' Response: There have been no discussions about ceasing Aspen's
ski business or its snowfall requirements. Therefore snow
disposal must by default be part and parcel of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
'*' Standard 6: "Whether the proposed development will require the
expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public
°' facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood."
a
Response: As documented elsewhere and _compiled in "Snow
Dump /Snow Melter," it appears that the best use of public funds
justifies employment of snow melting technology.
Standard 7: "Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of
twenty (20) percent meet the slope reduction and density
requirements of Section 7- 903(B)( @)(b)."
Response: No development is proposed on slopes in excess of 20 %.
Standard 8: "Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for
the proposed development."
Response: Not applicable.
V. Summary
The staff of the City of Aspen remains committed to providing
world class services for the City Council, the residents, and the
visitors. We feel that we have duly studied the snow disposal
^• issue. Although we have adopted Council's 1988 directive to
employ snow melting technology, we remain flexible to carry out
"" Council's current will for the best interest of the public, the
a community and the resort.
L91.14
5
ale
w
r
Appendix g_
r c
6
Woo
r
•
.." • February 25, 1988 The Aspen Times Page 7-C
;First ascent on Snowmess Peak!
•
by Raul Andreasen soU4ryendeavor that for a men
so (Editor's warns following to a crystallites his lot id life. Gohhg • • •
tare story as told by.'dents /do,badtefphyskelarpsycho- • -
anther ea Ids final route TUN logical to a man mad dig ,, 1 ' y �? 1 • �
e• dimbabaldmg be attempted by deep into s4Rofwhkh her- .r K 'r '--,A e ased. or the e iota- oa are made. - ° ' om -- I'''''-:'' p
alt eased. Gratitude ud goes e «a to the In this carnet dug d'ptn4 my � � // , y � ;: , ' � -
sty of Aspen for constructing a park and pulled out a flask for a /// ,•, -
. mouamiw amend, to the snow snortofjlmBeam.Jcst ] im and • /1 q ,..f / ` i + r a .
-
« dump below Rio Grande park.) ma'lbat's how l like It (Well, a J �;/ i r %�„ pr •' • guy'sgottahave some company.) / /. ' ,- k r 1� i D t ta a •
It was a glorious day for the At Camp Two,roughly20 feet• ' / - Y �'' *. '•"- " � •: w ' i.- r
'm dtlmat in water moan4lneer above the sidewalk andd almost r / 4 ! r i `:. - �� . •
Ing. The sun shone brilliantly beyond the sound of city dump � - - • r M. .... _ - -.
, fromadar,blwsky.ItproWled trucks, there was evidence of a / : t "
the Jagged sera and glinted previous attempt attheswmmit p -� - e -
from the multifaceted. lee - The trash indicated a prieoi• / i •*
a covered dope, live team of hippie dimbera A . L: , J
• v •
This would be the last big matchbook broken sandal, gum h . • . q • „ : >. a.�
dimb, my swan song, end the wrappers, cigarette butts, meld
tai :,. J► t • tea. • • ' r '
°" mans were tams shoe ... no wonder the
Some rock Jocks prefer to team had Giled.Theywereabvi- • . — -
.se relinquish their careers by more ously ill prepared probably
peaceful means than a risky totted down by weather. ' td
fus
1 t ascent They become th
me 0411- Beyond Camp Two e limb 1 G.'
tots et *niters. They give slide became difficult, at least 5.13. : r
shows and ledures. They spin. Another bracing puff on the
, fabulous yarns about their flask was required before kick- - • -
aaventm'ettlefborcroasof • Mg asps frith camper's, lash- y -.;, - 1I .
the wale. ' . .; , • Mg at the ice with both axes, K k n
— Net me. .. .. pml!aanating screws like t peasant i
My last bow Would entaflthe khadapaddy. t ..
meet dllfleult climb in North Slowly, la�eserabtj, I msysd
- Marks, a climb to shame aaoss Wish eneet the , •
lints Thumb. Meliniey, St mat difficult pitches I've ever
,� pima attempted.Theursacyin every `
These Iosigaf Cant mounds move sent adrenalln pulsing w e
ImMbycomtwri' tots through my veins. �
meet outetendiog summit M the Mach drew taut, Meapka- •
annals of Amman mountsl- tan stood out on my Wow, my . '`• . �' -`
mewing Snowmen -' Mama with superbbwwather -. Mart ra i
gon bbed like disco. Qr the Y: '�'
constitution and an' the Paragon? -
lous j
we ebv vivid la aginatlon • It seemed like hours that I . . ,...
this wrtabs Oiliness'/I all ea languished all languished Wish* - .
adventures. And I thanked the traverse. Time took on new •
T., epidta by �Kmrr SW . yropottioms.11adtracker:we 5 a t ' -' - �V' •
the eaahlKg n near my thing but rock and les, guts and •
,,,? Rio Groats parking lot base gory, ..
camp. , 'then, just when exhaustion '`' _ I
The ayy p�re�uaacdhn was long and washout to take its letaltd1.I
but within minutes of looked up The summit was i.:.
i d de ear l stead beneath therm- : there within easy reach, just _ l : . c....4._
a • � -
pp an- of in and rock called ' pa a discarded Coke an ands
•
S sewnhan, • tame that strikes half-Soren newspaper,
-
i the chord of fear in even the E Yes. Pride? Certain- - \ P;
.w most experienced kbaanaggdaog.� Iy. I was renewed breathing the •
The t,
. ak -
ir' ss fg- - -. milted air. But even more pro- tL . •
ear y was �dmg like ,and was the knowledge that I ' 3 ,,
01 peering over the rim of the had done my bat. had climbed r -
Grand Canyon on a moonlit my best And I did it my way.
... night er watching the Aorora Standing a4ptbataRYpak IsthlsSnowmess Poakorthe CityofAspensnow Snowmess Peaking' hlgherawhatemotrnrs to
Borealis from the Antic tmdra. the world laid out'beiow, I dump at Wagner Park? It depends on your per the geologic phenomenon. And as Peak noorru
Here was grace and majesty, surveyed the Post Office, Clark's spactWs• But hero k seems climber Raul above awnvdth kertenacinp so growsnhe
r form and power. Market, Mill Strati! u n ty Androaaen ataddktg tomelairly tugged terhallenge ul agng Su vent ramparts. Frank
But beyond a the of supem e Museum; the County .knt hush of slgM ant the dry dump tnreke pi rain. ling _ c Martin photos. ae
th came e . A she e of oa r e Courthouse. such -
cha A ease of advature With such an inspiring over-
w . I prodded me onward, onward, view, who could falter at the
is onward. Then I realized It was strife of life's petty grievances?
my Ice axe jabbing me in the And I suddenly understood '
i
back the profound truth of Mallory, MI, �?t •
" i 1 untangled my gear and whowasaskodwhyhedimbed a I v
1 &7''
sorted pitons, icescrewa,choeks. mountain and answered:
blocks, friends and other gear 'Because there?
`r that made absolutely no sense to Because it's there... the
me. If only I knew how to use words echoed in my ears.
this blasted hardware. • Because Snowmess Peak sure as , •
•- Undaunted, 1 shouldered my heck won't be there this •
• pack, cinched down my helmet summer! •
e• ' and began the solo climb of a Then another dump truck
lifetime. pulled in and I scampered down
There is something about a among the glacial debris. 7
..
.
•
101
•
•
•
SA •
trs.aus,
•
igiesetuipts .
54Dw PIMP
+is
•
9.4
‘1 4IPP F
f '
• •
• ' HMO Cif
• • r • OING CS
•
. . •
t •
. .
• • . •• . .
OF • .
. .
•
mon
Alll
.ar
8 •
•
1"'"'.
!'
"
,-."
C1~
"":::.."~
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Mayor and Council
carol O'Dowd, city Manager
Bill Efting, Assistant City Manager~~
Robert Gish, Public Works Director 1~
October 17, 1990
"
"
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
SNOW REMOVAL, MELTING AND ALTERNATE STORAGE OVERFLOW
SITE-
SUMMARY: Prior meetings with city council have discussed all
aspects of snow removal, storage and disposal/melting. The
winter of 1989-1990 was a relatively low snow year allowing one
melter and the available storage space on the Rio Grande to
handle the winter load. staff would like to review last year's
operations, discuss possible alternate storage sites, and secure
a' location for emergency overflow storage for the 1990-1991
winter if necessary.
eoO'NCIL GOALS: To maintain and manage the capital assets of the
city, preserve the traditional character of the town and promote
good will and cooperation with the people and agencies of the
Roaring Fork valley.
BACKGROUND: In previous meetings with City council, staff and
the citizens of Aspen, we have discussed the merits of natural
snow melting versus the experimental gas melter. Increased
pressures on the valuable space and location on the Rio Grande
parcel by special interest groups have reduced the physical space
for winter snow storage. The federal and state requirements to
clean the discharge water from the melter operation has also
taken storage .space for a retention pond and a filter system.
With the completion of the Rio Grande parking Plaza, additional
landscaping, completion of the library, future completion of the
Teen center, and transportation requirements, it appears that a
new location for the snow storage and/or melting is inevitable.
The natural snow storage melt operation has been on the Rio
Grande property over 10 years and in the last two years,a melter
was added to assist in melting the unsightly mound of snow mixed
debris and sand. The size of the pile and resulting natural
melting was directly proportional to the annual snowfall. The
melter gr~atly reduces the pile on a continuing basis. Last year
the pile of snow was gone in March.
1""".
"
~
, i."l.
Mayor and Council
October 17, 1990
Page Two
CITY OF ASPEN FACILITY REQUIREMENTS: The city of Aspen's
requirements are for a storage site within one mile of the
central core of Aspen. This would be a natural melt site with
spring cleanup. This is the most cost effective and economical
haul distance. site locations of greater distance than two miles
result. in hauling costs th,at would be greater than additional
melters at Rio Grande. site locations which have been discussed
in the past are Marolt Ranch, Golf Course (construct a water
pond/hazard), Benedict parcel east of Aspen and property near the
. Moore 'Pool. None of these locations have been found to be
practical, approved or neighbor friendly.
-:
The second requirement that would parallel the storage site would
be the addition pf a snowmelter to supplement the natural
melting. The snowmelter l()cation will require adequate ponding,
filtering, or retainage of the water for n.atural evaporation.
Cleanup .of solid debris is continuous throughout the snowmelter
operation with a storage pile generated or hauled off as
generated.
1989-1990 OPERATIONS S~Y: Please reference Chuck Roth's
earlier packet memorandum to the Mayor and Council as an
information item in the :May 1.4, 1990 Council Packet. This
information included operational data, Water Quality Discharge
Report and the economic analysis of hauling snow various
distances versus melting at the Rio Grande. In. summary the
melter was underu~ilized due to a low snow year and city staff is
pleased with the overall operation. Unscheduled downtime was
less than 6% (7 days out of 110 days).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends using the snow mel ter and
storage area at the Rio Grande parcel for the winter of '90-'91.
In addition, we. recommend using a small portion of the Marolt
pr()perty behind the employee house as an experimental overflow
area for emergency situations. staff will continue to work with
citizens to develop alternatives for removing the snow melter and
storage from the Rio Grande property.
RFG/CR/BE/sp/m97.90
r',
t \,
,~
..
nr'T17.
Uv. .
.
"'-..,
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Dallas Everhart, Finance Department
Chuck Roth, City Engineer (j~
October 16, 1990
TO:
DATE:
RE:
SNOW MELTER GAS BILIS
since there has not been consensus as to'what the actual natural
gas costs have been for melting snow, I asked the gas company. for
a swmnary. Please find it attached.
Winter '88-'89
Winter '89-'90
$30,959.59
$16,656.54
I just want to be sure that we are all working with the same
information.
cc: Carol O'Dowd, city Manager
Bill Efting, Assistant city Manager
Cindy Wilson, . Finance. Director
Bob Gish, Public Works Director
Jack Reid, Streets superintendent
Carolyn Herwick, streets Administrative Assistant
Leslie Lalllont, City Planner
CR/sp/m95.90
r-,.
..
,
~~)
l~~
r
\ \ -,J.<=1- 53 +0 \ d - l q - 88
\:;l-lq-6B. +-0 D\-,;).t-89
o l-;:H -89 -\-0 Od - t8-89
D;;L -(6 -51-fu 0 S-tB--Be;
D'3-15-8'1 -to oQ~dd.J89
Ol\-~dd-8i -\0. os- ):)-'8l
\() -Jo -8'1 -\- () \ \ -;;1,,\ -e=\
n-d- \-69 -to p-lQ-89
\'d --lq-8q -\-0 O(-l~-qo
ot-lq-CfO --to Od -lb-~o
)d--lb~CfO +0 o~-d.1-90
)'3~d.\-qo J.,-o oLf-tQ-9.o
)l{--l'i -9.0 -\-u 5- \8- 90
StVD W ~ r).:t('
R~~\)~
NATURAL GAS
DMSION OF
K N ENERGY, INC.
~ 3t4 cct
dO ldd-~
G, q lSect
d ~q?:O
s~t
-e
.c
t4 tf<{q
.l 4:~;;)..
I ~l <(;~
4:o"?5
V
-e-
113 Atlantic Av~nue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2323
t ~\lt,~~SS
1tIO) Uci.::'!
S6~.~
I :>It>SO ' 4 f
d ?;fl tt < 4-~
8-ucJ
~ 30 /~5~. 5j
8.00
;;,[olf-?;./ to
lolcUi ..;LY-
(PoSS (q(p
\ ~<)6. '6S-
1,'l~
~.oO
-$ lfo; (,5(,,54-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Amy Margerum
FROM:
Leslie Lamont
RE:
Snowmelter/Rio Grande SPA
DATE:
October 3, 1990
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tom and I have begun the SPA planning process for the remainder
of the Rio Grande property. Our approach is to pull together all
the inconsonant parties into the conceptual review process.
Those groups include: trolley, art park/usage, recycling, and
Engineering (snowmelter). .
I have held a pre-application process with the trolley interests
and the art park/usage advocates. I need to meet with the
Engineering Department and Jim Duke for the snowmelter and
recycling uses. Francis has also indicated an interest in order
to enhance the river.
Based upon the information submitted by all these groups, we
intend to conduct a conceptual SPA review for those interests.
Each group will then submit an application for Final SPA review
when their specific program is ready fOr review.
I expect the application information by October 19 and hope to be
able to schedule conceptual review before P&Z the beginning of
December.
This process will certainly dovetail with
relocate the snowmelt facility to a
controversial site.
our continued effort to
more appropriate/less
;-...
r-'\
'\
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and Council
Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
THRU:
FROM:
Leslie Lamont, Planner
{tY
DATE:
September 25, 1989
Conceptual SPA Amendment for Snow Melt Facility/stream
Margin Review-Public Hearing
RE:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY:
conditions
Rio Grande
The Planning Department recommends
of the SPA Amendment for the Snow Melt
Parcel.
approval with
Facility on the
BACKGROUND: The Engineering Department seeks to amend the
Conceptual SPA Plan approval for the Rio Grand Parcel. The
Department proposes to install two additional sedimentation ponds
necessary to operate the snow melt facility. An amendment to a
SPA Plan requires a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning
commission and review by the Council. The P&Z recommended
approval of the SPA amendment, with conditions, at the public
hearing.
Stream Margin Review is also required because one of the ponds is
proposed to be within 100 feet of the high water line of the
Roaring Fork River. At their September 12 meeting, the Planning
and Zoning commission reviewed the application and recommended
approval of the Stream Margin Review.
The Engineering Department's application and map are attached for
your review.
APPLICANT: City of Aspen
LOCATION: Rio Grande SPA
ZONING: Public SPA
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
Engineering: In a memo dated September 8, 1989 Elyse Elliott had
the following comments:
1. Trail - the amended application states
trail will be relocated. I would suggest
Trails Supervisor, be shown the new plans
approve the width and location.
that the pedestrian
that Pat DUffield,
for this trail to
I~
?-"
'\
2. Parking Garage - a drain pipe is presently being installed
from the Parking Garage to the Roaring Fork River. At this time
we do not anticipate that there will be any problem with the
coordination of the pipeline and snowmelt projects. If the pond
is constructed which is proposed for the area that the pipeline
crosses, the depth of this pond will not be a problem.
3. Parking at Snowmelt Lot - the application states that a
demarcation line was agreed upon between the Art Park and the
City Engineering Department. There will be some parking
available during the snowmelter modifications. Once the winter
season has started, however, this parking will no longer be
available.
4. Ponds - the application states that one of the two new
sedimentation ponds will be used in the winter only. I fit is
determined that the ponds should be filled in again after the
winter than the appearance of this area will be as it is at this
time. The other ponds will fill with sediment and will be
dredged every spring and fall.
5. Plat - a plat for the Rio Grande parcel should be prepared by
all parties with developments in that area. That would include
the Parking Garage, Library, Snowmelter and possible Teen Center.
The Snowmelter should agree to contribute a 1/4 share in the
costs of obtaining this plat.
Environmental Health: After a review of the application, Bob
Nelson had the following comments:
Air- There should be no negligible impacts on air ~ality as the
resul t of burning natural gas in the snow mel ter. The steam
associated with normal operation of the device is not of concern
as an air quality issue.
Water Quality- it is not clear to this department whether the
current disCharge will violate imposed standards. The commingling
of storm water runoff from the Spring Street drainage and snow
melter discharge may continue to create a discharge problem.
This runoff is now going to be diverted into the river before it
reaches the snowmelter therefore reducing the volume of water to
the treatment ponds. By diverting the urban runoff this will
improve the final discharge quality out of the treatment ponds.
A number of engineering techniques and improvements to the
settling ponds are available improving water quality.
When the City receives the discharge permit this Department must
review the permit and plans to determine compliance with those
standards.
Noise:
Based on information obtained from last years monitoring
2
.r"\
"
~
. "
os the facility, it appears that the snowmelter will generate
between 70 to 75 decibels at 50 feet away. That is about as loud
as a vacuum cleaner, 10 feet away. If the heavy construction
equipment and the snowmelting are only operated during the normal
work day, this should not result in any complaints.
The City could explore mitigation techniques such as an earth
berm and other sound dampening materials. All sound control
measure should be reviewed during the design process before the
ponds are built.
Solid Waste: the City should be more aware of the amount of
solid waste associated with a snow dump and the enlarging and
routine cleaning of the sediment ponds. Design of the
installation this fall, should prevent solid waste from entering
the river or from blowing around the site.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Descrintion of the Pronosal According to the Engineering
Department's application, the Council has directed the City to
continue the experiment of snow melting while looking for a
permanent snow dump site. The Water Quality Division of the
State Health Department is requiring a discharge permit and is
concerned that the total suspended solids that are discharged may
be too high. The permit has not yet been issued. The
Engineering Department expects the permit within a couple of
weeks.
In anticipation of the discharge standards to be set by the Water
Quality Division, the Engineering Department proposes to install
two additional sedimentation ponds thus requiring an amendment to
the Conceptual SPA Plan and Stream Margin Review.
To prepare for this season of snow removal the Department also
proposes minor changes to the snow melt facility.
In total the Engineering Department proposes to:
1) install two additional sedimentation ponds, the largest one
will be temporary and used only during the winter;
2) realign the trail for pUblic safety reasons;
3) enlarge the pit and apron of the snow melt facility so the
tandem-axle trucks can dump the snow directly into the facility;
4) possibly store snow between the temporary pond and existing
Art Park and Theater Company improvements and delineate the
existing improvements with lathe and flagging or a snow fence to
preclude the dumping of snow onto the Art Park area; and
3
1"""'\.
"
.,-...,
5) experiment with a sand filter or small water treatment
facility which would be located near one of the ponds.
All these proposals are shown on the attached map.
citizen Comments In two separate meetings with supporters of the
Art Park, Kent Reed and Al Bloomquist expressed a strong concern
that the temporary pond may eventually become permanent and
possibly compromise future plans for the Art Park. Attached is a
letter from Kent Reed regarding the proposal. Staff also met
with other members of the Art Park group Monday, September 11,
1989 to discuss the issue further.
Many members of the Art Park and the Parks Association were
present at the P&Z meeting and again expressed their concern for
the future of the park improvements. other members of the
community spoke to the noisome nature of the snow melt facility
and the use of fossil fuels to do something that could be better
done by solar energy.
staff emphasized the temporary nature of the large pond and
suggested a review period in order to develop a plan that may
accommodate many of the proposed ideas for this site.
SPA Review section 7-804 B of the Land Use Code outlines the
criteria for development in a SPA:
1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or
enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture,
landscaping and open space.
RESPONSE: The commitment was made in the past to locate the snow
melt facility on this parcel. The additional ponds are necessary
to meet the standards of the Water Quality Division.
There is the possibility that the ponds can be used as an
enhancement to the Art Park and that both the snow melt and Art
Park uses can coexist. The Planning Staff proposes a mandatory
review, by May 1, 1990, of the snow melt facility. This review
deadline will enable the City to evaluate this seasons snow melt
operation to determine the ultimate needs of the facility and
respond to the concerns expressed by the Art Park supporters.
The review will provide the opportunity for City staff and Art
Park supporters to develop a land use plan that meets the future
needs of all interests.
2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to
service the proposed development.
RESPONSE: It is anticipated that the existing snow melt facility
4
!""'\
"...-"
cannot meet the discharge criteria as may be set by the Water
Quality Division. until a discharge permit is issued it is
unclear what the actual pond capacity will be required for
efficient operation of the facility. The Engineering Department
predicts that a 1/2 acre to 1 acre of pond area may be necessary
to comply with the discharge standards. To operate the snow
melter during this season, construction of the ponds must begin
by October 1 and be completed before a significant accumulation
of snow.
3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally
suitable for development, considering the slope, ground
instability and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls,
avalanche dangers and flood hazards.
RESPONSE: The proposal complies with this. Stream Margin Review
is part of this application for the largest pond.
4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land
planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid
adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and
similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at
large.
RESPONSE: It is imperative that the two additional ponds be in
place in time for this winter season. Because of the temporary
nature of the large pond and the "experimental" nature of the
snow melt facility, staff proposes approval of this amendment to
the SPA Plan with a mandatory review by May 1, 1990. As noted
above, a review period will enable staff and other interested
members of the community to develop a complete plan for the area
- a plan that may support the coexistence of Art Park uses and
the sedimentation ponds for the snow melt facility. In addition,
a review periOd is necessary for the city staff to develop and
evaluate a long term operational plan for the snow melt facility.
5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: As was originally stated in the staff memo of
September 20, 1988, the 1973 Land Use Plan identifies the uses of
this area as Public Uses, open space and multi-family. The snow
melt facility is a public use which provides a necessary service
of snow removal.
6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure
of excessive pUblic funds to provide public facilities for the
parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood.
RESPONSE: This is not applicable as this is a pUblic project.
7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty
5
r"\
~
~
-,
percent (20%) meet the slope reduction and density requirements
of Sec. 7-903 (B) (2) (b) .
RESPONSE: This is not applicable as there is not development on
slopes in excess of 20%.
8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed
development.
RESPONSE: This is an essential public facility, GMQS allotments
are not required for this type of proposal.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval for the SPA amendment
to install two additional temporary sedimentation ponds, relocate
the pedestrian trail, and enlarge the apron and pit of the
snowmelt facility with the following conditions:
1. A mandatory review of the snow melt facility, the snow
removal process, and the proposed Art Park facilities shall occur
before May 1, 1990. The propose of the review is to reevaluate
the snow melt experiment and to develop a plan that enables the
coexistence of Art Park and snow removal needs.
2. The large pond near the river is temporary in nature and will
either be cleaned out and filled in or be incorporated into a
landscape plan for the area.
~ . The city PubJic Works Department shall be responsible for
~ndscaping and berming around the sedimentation ponds, and
periodic cleaning of those ponds.
4. At the end of the season the City shall clean out the
sedimentation ponds and replace any landscaping, sod or berm that
was removed to accommodate the sedimentation ponds.
5. When the City receives the discharge permit the Environmental
Health Department shall review the standards and plans to
determine compliance with those standards.
6. Excavation of the large pond shall be as minimal as possible.
7. The Planning and Zoning Commission has directed staff to
continue their efforts to find a permanent solution to the
snowmelting and snowdump facility believing that there is a
higher and better use of this parcel.
Ijljsnowmeltcc r. tel-felt -dtrr i.e. ~l>f" Wfr7 n fi2.,tv
IN I tI. ?rJOkJ ~q1 1tV'.t... v~(,Cfl.-Ul fb 1'1 )'fRi!R){5 IS 1b tf2..r 1/
~-r II fJrtYffM'C,f/y' II Wt l#rt ";''r fr5 ~r, fZJ'iPf} ~ ~f#fJr..t.-
Si..,e.... If-- /1"M<r /)IS'lI(rct? {;/ct~ 'Too PVJI{,CLf O'>,/}" e?~e~
f) .J., CO 2.-7111~ t!a,&<. M> (,e /JtI.ese~ ?ttE"c,
fr-- Sa V- rOtr ~ .:.:J J -/~ -,,<,/J Jf1
I <Thm/ 44 rJ~/t4f}J1; /.ft> I)).R.I) (;./ 'l'IK- 1hU:7W'--,
~'lIl;];[)hl>> ?~wtI4 C ~r-V:.. Ivll Hff'!Q trfPR.8/YduJ? ft. r7Z ~ePfc T
I' t.tg 6ft> (:zM'L{,.- f{if ~ rr f}~{,.- kXfte{~-r, khfeh.F-'tt
~/v > w,p'ffJ(.. ~{(/{; I~C-~ .j{i T,(f"u... PP#!. ~ F~. F;L..e/1--
CIT
PEN
September 7, 1989
Planning and Zoning Commission
city of Aspen
130 S. Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: Addendum to Snow Melter SPA Amendment Application
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The City Engineering Department would like to add the following
to our original SPA Amendment application:
1. We propose to relocate the pedestrian trail located in the
snow dump lot area to ensure the safety of pedestrians in the
Snow Melting Facility area for as long as the facility is in
operation.
2. We also propose to enlarge the Snow Mel ter pit in both
directions and modify the surrounding fence which will enable
more efficient operation of this facility.
3. We would also like to experiment with the implementation of a
sand filter or small water treatment facility which tVould be
located adjacent to the Snow Melter.
4. We are pursuing an agreement with Fritz Benedict to
temporarily store snow out at his gravel pit property but if this
does not work out, we still need a snow accumulation area located
between the proposed temporary pond and tent area.
5. A demarcation line was agreed upon between people from the Art
Park and the city Engineering Department.
Enclosed is a site plan showing the above additions.
Thank you very much.
jgjSnowSPAl
Sincerely
~~
Jim Gibbard
Engineering Department
cc: Chuck Roth
Bob Gish
Bob Anderson
Bill Efting
Bill Ness
~"""
~
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: RIO GRANDE SPA AMENDMENT FOR THE SNOW MELTER FACILITY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, september 1~, 1989 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m.
before the Aspen Planning and Zoning commission, in the 2nd Floor
Meeting Room, 130 South Galena street, Aspen, CO to consider an
amendment to the Final Development Plan for the city-owned Rio
Grande property which is zoned Public with an specially Planned
Area (SPA) overlay. The application for amendment is being
submitted by the City Engineering Department and includes two
additional sedimentation ponds and possibly increasing the size
of the existing ponds near the Art Park.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 920-5090.
sIC. Welton Anderson. Chairman
Aspen Planning and Zoning
commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Published in The Aspen Times on August 24, 1989.
City of Aspen Account.
.~
-,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920-5090
,
August 18, 1989
Jim Gibbard
Engineering Department
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena st.
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Rio Grande SPA Amendment for Snow Melter Facility and
stream Margin Review
Dear Jim,
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have
determined that your application is complete.
We have scheduled your application for review by the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing on Tuesday,
September 12, 1989 at a meeting to begin at 9:00. We have also
scheduled the ci ty Council meeting. It will be on Monday,
September 25, 1989.
If you have any questions, please call Tom Baker, the planner
assigned to this case.
Sincerely,
Debbie Skehan
Administrative Assistant
;-..,
~
CIT
PEN
August 17, 1989
Planning and Zoning commission
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The city of Aspen, at the direction of council, has decided to
continue the experiment of snow melting during the winter of
1989-90 while at the same time attempting to find a location for
a snow dump where snow can melt naturally. The Water Quality
Division of the state Health Department is requiring that we
apply for a discharge permit and has indicated that the total
suspended solids that are p~sently discharged into the river may
be greater than what is alloWed. In an attempt to mitigate this
problem, the city of Aspen intends to construct the following at
the SnoW Melter Facility in the Snow Dump Lot:
1. Two additional sedimentation ponds, one of which will be
temporary for winter time use only.
2. Possibly increase the size of the existing ponds near the Art
Park.
This letter is a request for a SPA development review for the
proposed development pursuant to section 24 article 7-804 of the
Municipal Code and stream margin review pursuant to section 24
article 7-505 of the Municipal Code. The following will address
the applicable requirements of these sections:
1. Attached is a plan of the proposed development.
2. So that the Snow Melter Facility can be in operation this
winter, construction is proposed to be initiated October 1, 1989
and to be completed before any significant accumulation of snow.
3. No public facilities will be needed to accommodate this
development.
.>-,
~
4. The original intent of the city Council in designating the
parcel as SPA was that the Snow Melting Facility be an experiment
and that the Snow Dump Lot be reserved for the Art Park. The
existing ponds are part of the Snow Dump Facility and the
additional ponds will not be in conflict with the area where the
Art Park is now located. If the existing pond near the Art Park
is increased in size, we will replace any sod or berm that we
disturb.
5. A plat which meets the requirements for the approval of a
subdivision is not available at this time but will be after the
plat for the Rio Grande SPA has been completed.
6. The proposed development will not increase the base flood
elevation because we will be excavating material from this area
and any fill material to be used for the temporary settling pond
will either be taken from the excavated material or if brought
in, will be removed before spring run-off each year.
7. The existing trail will not be modified and will remain
dedicated for public use.
8. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan will be
implemented to the greatest extent practicable.
9. No vegetation will be removed or slope grade changes made that
will produce erosion and sedimentation of the stream bank. The
proposed ponds are located in an area where the grade is
relatively even and where the vegetation is very sparse.
10. To the greatest extent practicable, the proposed development
will reduce pollution and interference with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary.
11. There will be no alteration or relocation of the water
course.
12. copies will be provided of any necessary federal and state
permits relating to work within the 100 year floodplain.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
~~
Jim Gibbard
Engineering Department
jg/snowSPA
cc: Chuck Roth
Bob Gish
SEP-a
August 9, 1989
Dear Members of the Planning & Zoning Board:
The members of the Art Park Committee and The Aspen Theatre
Company have some concerns about the proposed settling pond that
is to be constructed on the Rio Grande "Snow Melt" property.
Since the "Snow Melt" area was designated as "Arts Usage" last
fall by the City Council, we feel that any proposed use of that
area should be looked at carefully for its long-term impact on
the entire parcel.
We understand that it is possible that the pond will not be
temporary; that there is no plan as to the pond's size, depth,
configuration or exact location on the "Snow Melt" . Nor is it
understood how the run-off from the pond will make its way back
to the other settling ponds.
In view of these unknowns, we urge all parties envolved to
formulate now a comprehensive and integrated approach to this
intrusion upon the "Arts Usage" area and that very specific
criteria be met before approval is granted.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely Yours,
/- t R ed
Art Park Committe Member
Director, The Aspen Theatre Company
~\~
~---....--.,--,",--..
.. )~--/ ~.-
~~-,.
>-
0:
<{
0:.
0"
..
.~~~:~~'.~
~: ., w-
~~. - (J)"
:g'::- 0
~~f~ ~
0:
Q.
.;.0
.0 :'j..,
~ '-'tII.
"\.L. 5uJ
. C>l ...~~'"
cJ. ." I u.J
::> .dl-<,
'9'. -<t;...<
. . .
, , ,
. . .:: -~.?:-o.:
.'
-'