HIGHLANDS INN RENEWAL PROJECT ASPEN, COLORADO
POST OFFICE BOX 4708 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 U.S.A. PHONE: (3031925-5050
Project Outline .............................................. 1
Pertinent Aspen Facts ........................................ 2
Comparables .................................................. 4
Project Estimates ............................................ 5
Future Development Potential ................................. 6
Plat Map ..................................................... 7
Area Map ................................................... 8
Summary and Offer for Sale ................................... 9
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
1. General & Detailed Submissions
2. Development Approvals
3. September 81 Appraisal & November 81 Appraisal Update
4. Architectural Schematic Designs & Renderings
5. Building & Development Budgets
6. Market Data & Sales Information
7. News Articles Regarding Highlands & New Project
HIGHLANDS BASE AREA
HIGHLANDS INN EXPANSION
Highlands Inn Expansion
Carol Schofer Farino
ands Inn Expansion
An Architectural Thesis Presented to Planning, University of Colorado fullfillment of the requirements for Archi tecture.
the College of Design and at Denver in partial the Degree of Master of
I he thesis of Carol St holer F-arino is approved.
University of Cqlorado at Denver
--TABLE OF CONTENTS----
Recent history and project background
Growth management plan................
Program requirements. .............
Cl i mate. ......................
Zoning and codes. ....................
Appendices Bi bli ography
24 26 37
Aspen Highlands is one of -four ski areas in Aspen, Colorado. More specifically it is in Pitkin County, 2 miles outside of the city limits of Aspen.
At the base of the ski area are two principal parcels of land, an Inn and a base area facility for day skiers, and an inn. Each has a separate owner.
The Inn is scheduled for demolition, as it is presently uneconomical to operate. The Inn might be saved by modifying and expanding it, thereby changing the focus of its use (making use of it in expanded and new ways). It should be modified and
redivided into three areas: number one, employee housing, as
required by the county in order for any further building to occur. Secondly, it should be the management and hotel center and support facilities for condominium-hotel units to be added contiguous to it; offices, check-in, bars, restaurants, laundry, etc... Third, it's existing pool, sauna, and jacuzzi should be incorporated into a health club facility for an entire growing, expanding, phased hotel complex.
The Inn's owner, Joe Cooper, who is interested in such a project, currently has approval for 180 units, of which 11 must be for employee housing locatable within the remodelled inn. The
remainder he would like to see be lock-out condo-hotel units for sale to individual owners in fee simple or time-share arrangements. The leasable units would be managed through the remodelled Inn. A management contract for such an operation could be separately held as a continuing entity by the developer or his sucessors. Whereas Mr. Cooper has the Inn and the unit permits to build, he needs more land. Whereas Mr. Cooper has the Inn and
the permits to build, to do a large enough expansion to bring the
area up to it's highest and best use requires more land.
The base area, owned by Whipple Jones, must be considered when any planning is done as the proximity of his land and the excellence of the building sites on it should phase into any further unit development.
Planning has been a concern of Mr. Jone's Aspen Highlands Ski Corporation. This thesis does not intend to do a base area
master plan, but rather demonstrate the feasibility of phased growth via condo-hotel units with the Inn serving as the administrative center. Included in any future base area master plan should be new recreational facilities such as a par three nine hole golf course ( in the same location as winter skier
circulation), stables, pasture land, tack buildings (by the river), indoor and outdoor tennis courts, and facilities for Ballet West to rehearse and perform during the summer season. These added facilities would extend the season from the present four months to a year, thereby making the entire project more prof i table.
The master plan must consider skier circulation, which is a major problem for this ski area. With three distinct skier areas at the base of this mountain, development must mesh in and around lifts which now are located in such positions that they present an access problem for skiers wishing to move from one area to another. Topological circulation planning should solve this problem. With the advent of phased condo-hotel units, a vehicle for the upgrade of the entire base area and imp1imentation of a total master plan becomes economically viable.
The base of the mountain is part of a beautiful valley running along Maroon Creek from the lake at the base of the Maroon Bells to the Roaring Fork, the creek running through Aspen from Independence Pass to Glenwood Springs. The principal concern regarding development at the base area is that any work done has minimum impact on this pristine valley. To minimize the impact of development, I propose maximum density on the site with
clusters of buildings, in order to minimize the land area to be built on. By concentrating construction in one area along the roadway, more of the valley will remain untouched open space.
The area has lately fallen victim to stagnation due to it's lack of new construction resulting in a less than economically healthy skier day count. The two base area owners have spent an enormous amount of time and money on plans and proposals to
upgrade the base area. The county has been receptive to their
idea of growth, expansion, and rebuilding, but time is
passing and nothing has yet been accomplished. The county is so interested in a reversal of the area's decay, so the time appears right for action.
Helicopter skiing on the mountain is close to being a reality beginning in the winter of 1983-1984. This unique skiing opportunity should begin a resurgence of activity at the Aspen Highlands ski area.
My thesis is to bring together the three forces which at present are at odds as to how to upgrade this ski area. The two owners must be assured of financial rewards for their work and risk and the county must be assured the work is consistant with the wishes of the community regarding the best possible use of the land.
The involved -factions must work together. The developers decide what they can and will do and the county be approached for
expansion approval. The county's Growth Management Plan for
limiting growth in the entire county to 37. per year is the major obstacle presently blocking cooperation. To preserve the growth management scheme for the benefit of all and to improve the Aspen Highlands base area in particular, a full master plan must be
formulated for the area with all of the economic criteria
pertenent to the development included. The county, upon approval of the plan, should then set the development time-table so as to control growth within acceptable public sector capabilities and within economic parameters acceptable to the developers.
Therefore the phasing of this development becomes critical. I propose to design a prototypical first phase of 32 condominium-hotel units and two employee housing units. Using a portion of the existing approvals, this initial phase is to be sited contiguous to the existing Highlands Inn with future units radiating and expanding outward from this preliminary phase.
RECENT HISTORYPROJECT BACKGROUND
RECENT HISTORY AND PROJECT BACKGROUND-
Both the base area and the Inn have design work prepared tor presentation to the county.
The base lodge has had master planning developed for the entire area. The plan was based on an undisclosed off-site parking area with bus circulation provided to the area. After seeing the result of this arrangement at Beaver Creek, near Vail, Colorado, and given the necessary expenditure to procure land for parking, the owner of the base area discarded the entire plan.
The Inn has had architectural work completed through the design development phase. The existing Inn is to be torn down and replaced with an ultra-modern structure. The appearance of this design makes it inappropriate for this location.
The base area plan included moving two of the base area lifts and the addition of a new lift. This solution is both costly and damaging to the entire base area potential. The master plan for the area should combine topological and architectural solutions to the skier circulation problem. Considering the savings over the previously proposed solution, the ski area owner will then immediately save money.
In addition, the concept of restoration of the old Inn with additions saves a structure which to many is too beautiful to distroy. More square footage would result from this new
approach, further justifying the new architectural design.
Both the owner of the ski area and the owner of the Inn, after having spent considerable money for preliminary designs, have no desire to spend more money for further designs. The result is the county will be presented with no plans at all. Therefore a stalemate exists. For any progress to be made a new approach must be taken. This new approach must realistical 1y be acceptable to all concerned, considering the design criteria of each of the three parties involved.
The principal point of controversey is the growth issue. The county's 37. growth management policy clashes with a developer's need to have 300 units at this base area in order to be economically viable. Monetary realities plus quality growth could mean a sucessful partnership of business and government for the benefit of the community both economically and environmentally by careful use of phased planning and segmented architectural design.
Preserving the existing inn continues a pleasing traditional ski area context and phased planning allows all parties to plan ahead. Phased construction has major advantages: 1) smaller
construction projects require smaller capital investments, therefore less exposure at any one time. 2) future phases would reflect time of construction, adding a contextural richness not available to a project built all at once. 3) the Inn continues in operation while some units are built, sold, and managed as prototypes.
Therefore I have chosen to design the first phase of the cond-hotel units, siteing them immediately next to the inn, thereby creating the western edge of the eventual base area community crescent.
ifir 'in'tt i ~ nm
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
---Growth Management Plan---
The following quoted material is from The As^en/Pitkin County @CQb!th Management Policy Plan.
The plan "sets forth a series of recommended policies" which have been adopted into law "to guide the growth and physical development of the Aspen/Pitkin County community over the next 15-year period. These policies seek to set a clear course for the harmonious integration of future residential development including employee housing, ski area expansion, settlement patterns that integrate with the development of a cost-effective Gnowmass-Aspen transit system, an airport facility that is supportive of larger transportation goals, and sewer and water utility extensions based on the proposed location and density of residential development. There is little explicitly discussed about the County environment. It is more the implicit assumption that underlies this entire endeavor. Growth management would be a meaningless exercise in the manipulation of sterile numbers if some higher goal were not in mind. This goal is the preservation of the physical and social environment of Aspen and Pitkin County. Much has been written about the environmentalist
as one who would shut the door on growth once he has secured his
cabin in the mountain. Much of this antagonism has been directed at the Aspen community. The policies outlined here set Aspen in a specific context which is not one of the exclusive second home resort. It is rather the identification of Aspen/Pitkin County as a unique natural and national resource. This community plays an important role in the American national scheme of things. If Aspen perserves its environment then something greater than a National Park is preserved. If the environment is not protected then it becomes one of the endless score of American communities without identity or purpose. In short, we have a responsibility to vacationing, working Americans who hold the vision of one or
two weeks a year in a quality Colorado mountain environment. The
quality of that vacation experience is diminished by thoughtless and tasteless development which has the effect of co-opting the setting for the fortunate few who are wealthy enough to purchase homes here."
"A fiscal impact analysis enables the County to quantitatively identify the ability of the community to support the services required for new housing from tax revenues produced from the added homes, without imposing an additional tax burden on those already living in the community. New housing expands the tax base, and generates additional tax dollars. However, new housing
will increase the tax districts' expenditures by requiring such services as police and -fire protection, public schooling, and road maintainance. Clearly, expenditures should not exceed revenues if onerous tax increases in the district are to be avoided. An analysis of tax revenuse and expenditures anticipatedas a result of the growth rates hypothesized by the Growth Management Plan will indicate whether those growth rates create beneficial fiscal impacts or whether the cost of supporting the new growth would exceed the additional tax revenues produced, and consequently whether some adjustments should be made in the potential growth rates."
"The trend in the development of local growth management techniques has been to constrain growth to those areas of the community which are most capable of providing services to the new residents. The pioneering communities of Rentaluma, California, and Ramapo, New York, both had their growth management programs up-held by virtue of their attempt to phase growth in accordance with the community's ability to provide services. As will be
developed further in this Plan, this "phased growth" approach is also closely tied to the protection of local fiscal resources, and again is a concept which has gained legal acceptance."
"Whenever competing goals have required resolution, the
community, through its elected officials, has consistently and repeatedly opted in favor of low growth and preservation of the natural environment and small-town amenities."
"... the 1973 Aspen Land Use Plan sets as one of its key goals "to hold the rate of growth to a level substantial1y below that experienced since the late sixties and ensure growth that does occur is in keeping ..." with the spirit that "Aspen has historically valued its environment and small-town unigueness above al1."
"It should be noted that at a 15% growth rate, a quantity doubles in less than five years; at a 207. annual growth rate, it doubles in less than four years."
The Growth Management Plan system "... recognizes established plans in its consideration of Master Planned and non-Master Planned areas. The City of Aspen, Snowmass/Brush Creek, Roaring Fork East, and Buttermi1k/Airport have been master planned and carry with them officially adopted Master Plans. These plans
specify both long-range development density and utility locations." The Highlands base area does not have master planning. "Non-Master Planned areas of the County have been examined and the system calls for an annual building permit quota of 3.47. of the existing housing supply base. Again this judgement
is based largely on the relative un-availability of critical community services needed for urban and suburban density development." This should encourage a push for the two developers at the Highlands area to have a Master Plan for the entire area approved by the County Commisi oners.
"It is estimated that the growth of 3.47. as projected in the Draft Growth Management Plan will produce positive fiscal effects for each of the thirteen tax districts studied. Each taxing district is expected to receive a surplus of tax revenues from the new housing over the expenditures required to service the housing." "The proposed housing growth would also generate substantial revenues from sewer, and water tap fees, connection charges, and yearly service charges." "The analysis indicated that there will be no negative fiscal impacts resulting from the 3.47. growth rate projections in any of the taxing districts studied." "Indeed it appears that new housing, given the current high sales prices for new housing, more than pays its own way."
The Highlands base area falls into the quota system as part of "The Aspen Metro Area". This area includes four sections: 1) the "Roaring Fork East" consisting of all private land immediately to the east of the City of Aspen, 2) "Castle/Maroon Creek Area" including the Highlands area 3) "Buttermi1k/Airport/Owl Creek Area" consisting of the land north and west of the city, 4) "Red and Smuggler Mountain Area". The total annual count of unit building permits for this entire area is 27.
At this point cooperation between the owner of the Inn, having 180 unit permits, and the owner of the base area land becomes essential.
The first phase of this condo-hotel consists of 32 sellable units plus 2 employee housing units. Each free-market unit is to be a two bedroom living unit totalling between 1100 and 1500 sq. ft. and so configured as to permit renting as
three separate portions (or any combination thereof), a studio unit complete with the unit's kitchen, and two typical hotel bedroom units with bathrooms.
32 units to be begun first phase:
1100 to 1500 sq. ft. each suite
single hotel room lock out units 250 to 500 sq. ft. each lock out arrangement for renting as hotel guest units or suites providing one and two bedroom combinations each unit would be suitable for living should the rental option not be taken by an individual owner 2 employee housing units to be joined as one 308 sq. ft. unit with common living space and separate bedrooms for each of the two occupants
50 parking spaces, underground, close to the units, separate from day skiers
plaza with lift and skier access to and from other base areas with maximum ski-in/out access loading area and trash facility to be located inside janitorial and laundry space vending machine space
each complete sellable unit to include: vistas from living spaces exterior deck for every unit
interconnecting rooms to allow varying hotel suite combinations
verticle connection in several units for interconnection variety
individual mechanical systems
parlor sitting and entertaining area
small kitchen with bar
multiple access to the suite
lockable storage space for owner's personal possessions
typical hotel bedroom units to include: full bathroom closet double bed sitting area exterior deck
typical hotel guest room accessories
completion of the project includes: kitchen equipment furniture and fixtures all finishes
1. appropriate signage to be designed
2. cost per square foot to be kept down by use of preassembled
modules - working drawings to be done by fabricator
3. story and roof lines should relate contextural1y to the inn and should appear compatable eventhough the new structure would be modern materials and technology
4. exterior materials to be compatable with existing inn
5. native plants not in need of irrigation to be used for 1andscapi ng
6. lift area to be so designed so as to no longer necessitate the
extension of the Exhibition lift into the existing parking area.
7. time-sharing option is approved for this site; such arrangements are not permitted within the city limits of Aspen.
8. wood and stained glass to be used, materials which are used extensively in Aspen interiors.
Based on a 1600 sq. foot per unit land requirement, and given a 16 unit per maid multiplier, for 32 quest units plus 2 employee housing units 1.2 acres of land are needed. Aspen Highlands Ski Corporation values it's land at $1,000,000 per acre. Given a budgeted building cost goal of $100 per square foot, and a projected sales figure of $200 per square foot, the following is a profit projection:
1,000 sq. ft. typical unit with 32 units on the site
$1.2 million for land
yields $37,500. land cost per unit
at $100 / sq.ft. 1,000 sq.ft.
yields $100,000 building cost per unit
total unit cost $137,500.
plus financing carrying costs, marketing, real estate commissions, ..
at $200 / sq.ft. 1,000 sq.ft, yields $200,000 unit sales price
Therefore a high- end projected profit of $60,000 per unit
for the entire project:
32 units averaging 1,000 sq.ft.
Â£ 30,800 employee housing @ Â£100/sq.ft.
1x200^000 free-market units building cost @ Â£100/sq.ft.
Â£4,430,300. project cost
+ financing carrying costs + advertising + real estate commissions
Â£6,400,000 projected sales @ Â£200 / sq.ft.
employee units to be provided for employees, not sold
Â£1,969,200 project maximum profit
- Â£602,000 real estate commission @ 7"/.
Four areas of concern are critical to the design of this first phase of condo-units, the units themselves, the plaza area, parking, and the construction time-table.
Due to the units being clustered so compactly, privacy must be considered in the siting of each. Thought must be given to separation of exterior living spaces such as balconies, porches, enclosed back yards, patios, and decks. Window inter-relations must afford maximum visual barriers from one unit to another with party walls being accoustically soundproof.
Each unit should have a large kitchen with a dining area, entry foyers usable as mud rooms, open plans to avoid too many little boxy rooms, laundry facilities convenient to the bedrooms, and the maximum storage possible.
The arrangement of units should vary roof lines and setbacks to avoid monotony and give a uniqueness to each unit.
The thirty-two units should form a compact cluster community, removed from the activity of the base area, yet easily accessable to the base's facilities. Pedestrian and skiing circulation into the center of the base area should be removed from automobile and buse areas. As an individual proceeds from their unit
into "town", their experience should be that of a small alpine vi11 age.
The plaza, with the Exhibition chair lift at the center, a skier activity center by day and by night would be village square. By creating this changing energy pattern, the plaza becomes a central focus for the giving the feeling of an active ski location, yet community in which to live.
would be a quiet and use cluster, a homey
Parking must be convenient to the units, protected from the snow, and separate from the day skier lot.
Given the short construction season and the distance and difficulty of material shipment, the mode of construction must be quick and efficient. For the economy of "not hauling in the scrap" and for speed of erection, panelized, pre-cut modular techniques should be used. Material can be cut and assembled into wall sections in a warm, dry factory in Grand Junction or Denver for shipment to Aspen for quick assembly. The stigma of this form of construction is based on past experience of poor
quality or trailer-like plug together units but I foresee well designed wall panels of quality material. The finished product should be superior as the pieces would be assembled in an enclosed shop, on flat, square tables, with nail guns (state of the art assembly-line technology, not the outmoded technique of hammer on the site).
The appearance of the entire base area should be a mix of old and new structures blending into a pleasing and cohesive whole, not to give the appearance of being one, new, planned area, but a town which has grown and evolved naturally and beautifully through time. The two existing inns, the Highland's Inn and the Maroon Creek Lodge, give the perimeter of this area context and set the flavor of an old ski town, not having the new, planned, modern feel of Vail or Beaver Creek, but more the natural home town feeling of Aspen or Crested Butte. Therefore each subsequent phase should be different, although relating to the existing structures.
To quote -from section 2.1 of the Highlands Inn General Submission, Conformance with Aspen Area General Plan,
"... Evolution of the Aspen Highlands Ski Area and related facilities is a visible demonstrati on that the concept of a compactly organized, outlying recreational center is valid and practical ... the plan envisions creation of a one-quarter mile radius (accomodations/recreation areas about the base of the lifts which will include most of the developable land) ... The attractive sighting of Highlands is it's strongest encouraging factor. The plan projection estimates a visitor accomodation capacity of 1,200 which anticipates construction of an additional 225 accomodation units to those already in existance."
The specific site chosen for the first phase of expansion is contiguous to the existing Highlands Inn, on the side of the highway running from Colorado 82 toward the Maroon Bells. The site is presently a flat gravel parking and access area.
At present the Inn is connected to all public services and facilities and is served by public mass transportation. All utilities services have indicated a capacity which can easily serve the projected growth of the area. It is the desire of the city to utilize the excess capacity it now has, as the tap fees and increased tax base created by improvements at the base of the Highlands area will assist the utilities in paying overhead and capital costs.
The site includes the base of the Exhibition chair lift, one of three base area lifts of the mountain. This lift is to be
incorporated into the design so as to be the focus of
circulation possibilities for ski-in/out access for the unit's
occupants. A plaza area would surround this lift base area for
use by day-skiers as well as residents. Parking for residents would be below this plaza, thereby separating skier/pedestrian circulation from automobile traffic.
Views from the site are spectacular, south and west up the Maroon Creek valley and north and east onto the ski slopes.
At present there is no vegetation on the site. The surrounding area has aspens, pines, low grasses, and sagebrush.
Solar orientation is excellent for solar heating and natural daylighting as there is an open and unobstructed sky dome.
The Highlands area is served by -free city shuttle buses to the center of town every ten to -fifteen minutes during the high season, less frequently during the remainder of the year. Regular pay service is provided daily "downvalley" to Glenwood Springs. Taxi service is also available. In the past the Highlands has experienced that only 20"/. of it's visitors bring private automobiles. As presented in a traffic study presented May 1981 to the city as part of a request to downgrade the required parking criteria for base area occupancy unit expansion, maximum private vehicular flow resulted March 14-17, from 4 to 6 FM, approaching 900 vehicles/hour. From the proposed expansion of 180 units the study extrapolated 25 to 30 vehicle trips would be added to the peak flow; resulting in no impact.
One item which should be of particular concern is the access ramp from the day-skier parking area up to the Highlands Inn. It is presently situated through the middle of the parking lot. Moving it would open up the base area visually and make parking and bus circulation more efficient.
The Highlands Inn has been on it's site for eighteen years without any indication of foundation problems from soil or geological conditions. Soils tests have been run on the area around the Inn which have resulted in the finding that the soils are primarily silty gravel, subject to some downhill creep, one test hole found soil subject to slight expansion when wetted and to minor compressibility. All the conditions can be mitigated by appropriate engineering and construction techniques. Inasmuchas my particular site has no slope these problems are further di mi ni shed.
Along the west edge of the site, between the site and Maroon Creek, is a shear drop, erroded and exposed, this embankment will have to be stabalized and shoredup.
On the uphill side of the Highlands Inn is an active spring from which water might be drawn to add a water element to the pedestrian circulation space at the base area. Possibly not appropriate to the particular site of the first phase of expansion, it should be noted for a future master plan of the entire area.
Three structures now sit on the site: Chalet Heidi, a water plant, and a maintainance garage. Only the garage will be saved, moved to another location on the ski mountain.
Calculation of the 100-year storm for the first, phase 1.2 acre site indicate a maximum flood storage of 1944 cubic feet. Based on a 100-year storm of 5.13 inches/hour for a ten minute duration, and a coefficient of imperviousness of .50 .
vicinity maps -ib
area map m-
Aspen is located in central Colorado, N 39 11' and W 106 50', high in the Rocky Mountains at an elevation of 7,628 feet above sea 1evel.
The cool, sunny, dry mountain climate has an annual precipi tation of 19.25" and an annual normal temperature of 40.5 degrees, with the lowest monthly average being 20.1 degrees in January, and the highest 61.8 degrees in July. The mean number of days when the minimum temperature is 32 degrees and below is 226, with 25 days being 0 degrees and below. Zero days of mean daily maximum above 90 degrees, 42 days mean daily minimum 32 degrees and below. The mean yearly daily maximum is 55.7 degrees with a minimum 25.6 degrees. A record high of 93 degrees was set on June 23, 1954
and a record low of -33 on Janruary 12, 1963 (period 1951-1973).
The danger of freeze ends in June and begins again in September. Annual heating degree days are 8948 with cooling degree days of 22 (period 1941 to 1970).
Aspen's annual average snowfall is 137.25" and the only two months in which snow is not recorded are July and August. The four highest monthly averages of snow are December (25.27"), Janruary <24.98"), February (22.04"), and March (23.20").
The Cl i matography of the United States no. 20 Climate of Asgen., QLQCÂ§.do, N0AA Envi ronmental Data Service National Climatic Center, Ashville, N.C. April 1975, hereinafter included, has more specific details.
A solar angle chart is also attached showing the location of the sun throughout the year (latitude 40 degrees North).
The included material labled WEATHER DATA gives data for Eagle, Colorado, nearby and similiar in climate to Aspen.
ZONING & CODES
---Zoning and Codes----
Life and Safety Codes
1. Pitkin County Land Use Code Title II, Pitkin County Code.
2. Uniform Building Code, (U.B.C.) current edition, as amended by Title VII, Article 2, Pitkin County Building Regulations.
3. Uniform Mechanical Code, 1979.
4. Electrical Code, N.E.C.A. 1981 Edition.
5. Handicap Code, Title IX, Article V, Colorado Revised Statues.
(1973). ANSI Handicap Code (adopted and preferred by the National Handicap Housing Institute).
Barrier-Free Buildings, Title 9, Article 5, Colorado Revised Statutes.
6. Elevator Code. ANSI A17.1, as adopted by the U.B.C.
ANSI 17.1-1978 edition (revised elevator code reflecting current elevator construction methods).
7. Air pollution. State of Colorado Air Quality Control Act, 1979.
8. Health and Sanitation, Section 12-44-204, Colorado Revised Statutes as Amended, 1978.
9. Energy Code U.B.C., Chapter 53 (Energy Conservation and Thermal Insulation) added by Title VII, Section 2-24, Pitkin County Code.
10. Fireplace standards. U.B.C. Section 3708 (Regulation of Number and Construction of Fireplaces) added by Title VII, Section 2-20, Pitkin County Code.
11. Plumbing Code. I.C.B.O. Plumbing Code.
12. Uniform Fire Code (Section 13.307, Fire Alarm System).
13. Site Excavation and Brading U.B.C., Appendix Chapter 70, Section 7008 (h) added by Title VII, 2-23 to conform to the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations.
Local code. Pitkin County Land Use Code. Title II, Pitkin County Code.
State code. Colorado State Building Code.
National code. Uniform Building Code, 1979 edition with amendments.
1. AR-1 zoned site.
2. F.A.R. ( number of acres 43,560 sq.ft. / acre ) / 1600 sq. ft. minimum lot size = # lodge units permitted grouping housing units into sets of 16 for the capacity of one maid to service in a day; for 2 set i.e. 32 units plus the 2 in one unit) required employee housing units yields a total of 33 units. with a 1600 sq. ft minimum lot size for 33 units 1.2 acres of land is needed.
3. Typical wood residential construction possibly precut and preassembled on a precast concrete piaza/parking deck.
4. Parking the county requires one space per unit downzoning has been approved as this requirement appears to be 6 times too high, based on traffic engineering studies of the area. Diminishing the required parking spaces is incentive to discourage private automobile use and encourage extended mass transi t
5. Principal importance Growth Management.
6. 28' height limit possible grade line discount for structure below the historic topological lines of the site.
7. Employee housing 154 sq. ft./employee can have common living area although all employee housing would most advantageously be placed in the remodelled Inn dorm style units grouped to share common living area, private bedroom space for each employee, has been approved by the County- not to be sold but to actually house employees as per the approved detail submission of 169 units with 11 employee units this design of a 32 set will proportionately provide for two employees i.e. one 308 sq. ft. unit.
8. Due to the rental arrangement, these condo-hotel units must be sold as a securities offering.
9. Zoning in this area prohibits condominiums therefore all units must be offered as condo-hotel units.
10. Condominium regulations are under the general requirements of the U.B.C. not any specific condominium law. The detailed submission contains as a portion of it's subdivision process the conditions and exceptions placed on this site, resolution #83-18.
ASPEN HIGHLANDS EXPANSION
1600 MAROON CREEK ROAD PITKIN COUNTY approximately 2mius SW of ASPEN, COLO. PART OF NW4 SW SEC.14, T.10S, R.85W, 6tnPM .
ASPFN HIGHLANDS SKI CORPORATION
P.O. BOX T. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303-925-5300
5355 S. HATCH OR.. EVERGREEN. COLO. 80439 303-674-0444
MAY 9, 1984 ....
STUDIO w/ LOFT
670 sq. ft.
377 sq. ft. each
west buildings 8*9 _ ELEVATIONS
mat tik 13)
lilt Um 8176, _8115
My thesis is to save the Aspen Highland's Inn -from demolition. Recognizing it is too small to operate at a reasonable economic level, and further recognizing the structure is in need of extensive modernization and repair; I propose the Inn's room count be expanded and the existing Inn be renovated. Rather than tear down the beautiful existing structure and rebuild a new structure in it's place as is presently planned, I propose the Inn be made viable by adding 120 units, units to be sold as condominium-hotel units, some of the profits from their sale to cover the cost of renovation of the existing Inn.
By increasing the room count by 120 rooms the Inn will be sufficiently sized to operate in the manner of a quality hotel. By selling the rooms to individual owners or to time-share groups, the capital improvements necessary for the renovation of the Inn could be accomplished at no expense to the Inn's operating budget. I forsee the renovated Inn being the support facility for the operation of a hotel for the benefit of both the owners of the units and the owner of the Inn. The Inn providing basic support functions for the entire complex; lobby, check-in, offices, restaurant, bar, ski shop, pool, jacuzzi, etc...
I further propose the appropriate solution is at a greater level than just the Inn. The entire area must be considered. The entire Aspen Highlands Ski Base Area must be planned for expansion. Planned to create an entire "town" at the base of the ski area. The town would grow and develop with time. The beginnings of a town are present now, the area being rich with a mixture of building types, styles, and times. Given the opportunity to grow this rich fabric will continue to add to the lovliness of the entire area. The process of tearing down spaces to be rebuilt is not only economically foolish but loses the established flavor of such a town. By preserving the nice buildings and adding new in amongst them gives the richness lacking in such new "towns" as Vail or Beaver Creek. With the passage of time, with different owners, different styles and materials, there developes the "town" of Aspen Highlands, a complete resort community. The Maroon Creek Lodge, the Base Lodge, and the Highlands Inn are great starts. There are other building sites for future development. The eventual look and value of the entire area will be richer, making the longrun investment extremely worthwhile.
This solution is of benefit to all three of the present interested parties: the Inn, the ski mountain, and the county.
For the Inn, it's preservation gives it an identity and value many visitors to the valley would seek out. Having more rooms,
it will operate more economical 1y. By selling the added rooms, the capital investment to the Inn for it's improvement would be lessened. For the ski mountain the increase in the base area rooms and services would increase skiier days which have been falling in recent years. New development would occur on their land generating money for even more improvement of the mountain itself. For the county, i.e. for the people of the county, the tired look of the base ski area would be improved. The mountain would have more money to improve it's recreational value. The commissioners by virtue of the master plan would know what is going to happen to the area, they could set the pace and type of growth, thereby being able to count on and control phased growth. Growth in the valley area would be clustered and concentrated at the base along the road to minimize the impact on the valley's natural beauty. F'or the property owners contiguous to the base area, their property values and the desirability of their businesses would be enhanced by the improvements.
My proposed master plan creates a crescent shaped "town" around the ski base area parking. I have expanded the parking to the thunderbowl area indicating underground parking accesses from both major parking areas into a proposed underground parking facility under the "urban core". Most existing structures have been saved: the Highlands Inn, Maroon Creek Lodge, Base Lodge, and the ski shop. Between the Base Lodge and the Maroon Creek Lodge a plaza is sited to be the center of the "urban core". Commercial to be added toward the parking lot from the plaza; this commercial building having two commercial "first~f1oor" levels, one at the level of the parking lot, one at the level of the plaza. At the edge of the ski mountain is sited a large hotel, restaurant, shopping, health club, etc... complex to be designed and built in the future. Closer to the Inn is sited a mixed-use structure for offices, rooms, apartments, condominiums, whatever time dictates the area needs. The Inn is left in place with my expansion added to it's south. The town wraps around the base of the mountain, a pedestrian village as the vehicular traffic is one level below and totally separate. A quiet pedestrian "main street" extends it's length from the quiet "suburbs" of my expansion to the "urban" plaza by the Base Lodge. By so master planning the entire area Growth Management can be avoided, the county will deal with proposals on their own merit outside the constraints of the limited number of permits available per year.
The program for this first phase of development has been changed from the writing of my pre-thesis. The final unit count resulted in 120 units to make the Inn a viable size. Each unit is smaller
than originally projected, smaller than 400 square -feet following the sucess pattern of the condo-hotel/renovation pre-sale of the Holiday Inn on Highway 82 into Aspen. All units were sold this past winter, renovation to be accomplished this summer.
My design for the 120 units is basically a parking garage at the level of the areas parking lots with a pedestrian plaza above flanked by two and three story structures of rooms. The plaza is in two sections the upper section at the level of the Inn, a lower section four feet below the level of the Inn equal in elevation the bottom of the Exhibition chairlift. The room structures are single loaded accessed by porches overlooking the plaza. Three groups of buildings are presents buildings which face the ski slopes, buildings which view up the Maroon Creek Valley to the Maroon Bells, and a building dedicated to employee housi ng.
All buildings are low and rural in appearance, designed to look like outbuildings or a ranch cluster so as not to compete or attempt to copy the Inn. By adding a totally new appearance the rich town fabric of differences is enhanced. I have set up the language of different times, materials, styles, and designers. This town will never appear to have been designed as one, at once, by one designer.
Due to the hotel nature of the structure all walkways are easily accessable to a maid's cart. All walks are covered due to the high snow volume of the site. One elevator connects all levels.
Views being the first priority of the unit's siting, all has been done to maximize the views enjoyment of each unit. Upon entering a unit, the walls have been pulled back from the viewline to give a full view upon entry, each unit has private outdoor porch space toward the view.
To create the soft edge of "town" and to create a quiet "suburd" feeling, trees, lots of trees, readily available on the ski mountain have been planted in and around the structures. At the entrance to the parking garage an island of trees has been set to screen the appearance of that entry fron the base parking areas. To the steep, erroding embankment along Maroon Creek Road has been added retaining walls heavily planted and rip-rapped. This not only stabilizes the bank but also provides a screen of the buildings from the road. Trees along this edge offer a much nicer sight to anyone travelling along Maroon Creek Road.
The general massing of my design follows a progressive path up the hillside, thus the units are at the parking level to the north and sweep up as does the mountain as the structures progress
south. The most northerly buildings on each plaza level are at the level of the plaza to -facilitate handicap access. As the
buildings sit further to the south, so do they elevate by one step each building, emphasizing the greater height progression up the mountain. The plaza is the circulation end of the "town", a gentle curve which would swing a pedestrian around, thru and back out toward the center of "town".
Housing must be provided for 27.72 employees on site. At a rate of 150 square feet per employee that dictates a building of 4,158 square feet. This is addressed by building number 1. Multiple kitchens and baths are provided with living space configured dormitory style. The lack of required square footage can be paid into the County at a rate of $.58/square foot, a one time change considerably less expensive than building more square footage. It also is believed that the number of employees projected by the county is high. The actual space designed would accomodate the 15 to 17 employees realistically expected. At the end of a full operating year it will be shown that in fact the lesser number of employees were required; the county has agreed at that time to drop the extras and not levy the fee for the space not built. I feel our 2,654 square feet, enough for 17.69 employees is more than adequate.
The number of parking spaces provided is not up to the .9 per unit required, 57 are provided. Given the sea of parking in front of the site, this seems to be sufficient for the county in view of traffic studies indicating only 207. of the Inn's guests bring a car, and Aspen Highlands Ski Area statistics show 557. of the people buying lift tickets ride the free bus from Aspen.
I forsee the buildings constructed with cold roofs, cedar shake shingled. The porch railings and post to be of the same wood, left unfinished to age along with the roof material. The exterior walls of the frame structures are to be 2x8 balloon framed for insulation and to provide a sufficient surface for a drivet or stucco finish. The parking structure is like a concrete basement for the housing units above.
Three structures currently exist on the site: Chalet Lisa an old horse barn to be torn down, a water plant no longer in use and sitting on Aspen Highlands Ski Corporation land without permission also to be torn down, and a metal maintainance garage to be disassembled and moved to another location.
My solution I feel is of benefit to all and works econmomical 1y. To replace the Inn as is currently proposed would cost
$25,000,000. Construction of my buildings would cost $4,700,000. excluding land which belongs to the ski area already. If land costs were to be included at. a rate of $1,000,000 per acre the site requires 1.67 acres although as much as 6 acres might be required by the county to be considered. Even at six acres i.e. $6,000,000 added to the cost equals $10,700,000. Based on this past winter's sales of the Holiday Inn rooms of comparable size their best views (of the ski slopes) sold for $331/square foot, their other units (viewing the highway into town) sold for $298/square foot. Given our 48,000 square feet of sellable space with much better views, and the potential for being in a "town", the Highlands Inn appraiser valued these units sellability at in excess of $350/square foot. This nets $16,774,000; A $6,074,800 return excluding land, $12,074,800 including land sale profit. Given this amount of money, and the Inn's projected renovation cost of $60. to $80. / square foot the Inn could nicely be redone and saved.
mw. pi1!. ^i'piy!w^i^ turn *'-
Highlands Inn Renewal Project sales brochure......... i
Growth Management enabling act........................... ii
Aspen Highlands excerpt from the Aspen Plan............. iii
Excerpt Aspen Land Use Code.............................. iv
Excerpts Aspen Growth Management Policy.................. v
Traffic engineer report................................. vi
Soi 1 report.......................................... vii
Flood storage report............................... viii
Plants For High Altitude Landscape Design................ ix
Climate data.............................................. x
Aspen Times articles..................................... xi
Highlands Inn appraisal and update...................... xii
Preliminary building and development cost breakdown for demolition and rebuilding of
the Highlands Inn................................ xiii
Architectal rendering proposed rebuilding of
the Highlands Inn................................. xiv
Skiier day statistics six year comparison
throughout Colorado................................ xv
Aspen Highlands ski area lift plans...................., xvi
List of pertinent memorandum, letters, and
county resolutions............................... xvii
Resolution #83-18 granting detailed submission
approval.........................................x vi i i
Resolution #83-25 accepting employee housing
dormatory layout.................................. xix
The Aspen Highlands Inn renewal project, its land, and all the acquired development rights are presently for sale or available for joint venture participation to build Aspen's largest and finest condominium or interval ownership hotel.
The 6.643 acre property is zoned AR-1 allowing 104,179 square feet of construction with a maximum of 180 units. About 14,000 square feet of the allowed building density will be allotted to support areas such as lobby, office, service, circulation, bar/restaurant; and the remaining 90,000 square feet of space will be available as marketable hotel condominium or time-share units and has a potential market value in excess of $30,000,000. Balconies, decks, mechanical spaces, below grade parking and accessory uses are exempt from the floor area limits and will add considerable additional square footage to the structure. Construction costs are estimated at $12,500,000.
The site itself is uniquely situated at the base of the Aspen Highlands ski resort, and surrounded by chairlifts which are the main skier access to all ski trails. Our location, while only two miles from the center of Aspen, is just outside the city's planning jurisdiction and therefore free from the restrictive growth and ordinance requirements imposed on all other development proposals in the City. In fact, the AR-1 Highlands Inn land is the only property in either Aspen or Pitkin County which is exempt from growth management plans controlling all new hotel, condominium, commercial, and residential projects.
Further impetus to the success of this project is also assured by recent master planning for the renewal and expansion of the entire Aspen Highlands ski resort. Planned work in the near future calls for new chair lifts, additional trail construction up on the ski mountain and the eventual complete reconstruction of all base area facilities. Our combination of ski slope location, complete area redevelopment, and proximity to Aspen, assures significant profit potential and unique marketing opportunities. Highlands could become the "prestige Aspen Ski Area", and as condo buyers and hotel guests will be competing for very limited property and accommodations in this base area, demand should be strong when either presales are offered or completed units are available.
The development process has encountered no opposition to either the concept or magnitude of the project, full approval from all governmental agencies involved is assured, and a building permit will be issued upon the review of final building plans by the County. With the momentum now established, it would be practical to initiate construction beginning in the spring of 1984. Should joint venture participants or new owners become involved in the project, then the development timetable would be dependent on the extent of new design or program input.
We look forward to your interest in this project, and will be pleased to discuss financing or participation at your earliest convenience. All offers for the purchase of this development will be considered, with the principal now involved retaining a limited partner position, or a complete acquisition might be negotiated for cash or on reasonable contract terms.
PERTINENT ASPEN FACTS
The Highlands Inn renewal is an exciting and potentially very profitable project. The following concepts are of primary importance in evaluating the merits of this project:
1. Aspen and Pitkin County have very stringent growth management plans now controlling all future development. While the commercial business district has almost totally been rebuilt during the past five years, there have been very few new quality large accommodations or condominium facilities constructed here. Lodge-Hotel expansion is now limited to a total of 55 additional units per year in the city & county and new condominium projects are even more restricted. Therefore there is no chance of future excessive expansion which might adversely compete with our now approved condo/hotel project. And because of limited supply, all real estate prices here are high and will be going higher.
2. The rebuilding and controlled expansion of the Highlands base area recreational complex is fully supported by the entire community including all locally elected and appointed officials and the county staff. All necessary authorizations gained during the past two years have received unanimous approvals from the Pitkin County Commissioners and Planning and Zoning Board.
3. The Highlands ski mountain has substantial expansion capabilities within its permit area and has already gained the permission to build new lifts and upgrade pomas to chair lifts.
4. During the winter of 1981-1982, the Highlands Skiing Corporation retained Gage-Davis Company of Boulder, planners of Beaver Creek, to master plan the entire Highlands mountain and base area, and they have completed the preliminary work. All the old base-facilities are to be removed, the Exhibition chair lift immediately west of the Highlands Inn property is to be extended, and another new main lift is to be built close to the east. The large parking lot in front of the lodge is to become the lift center with commercial, and ski area support facilities surrounding it, and further to the northeast is another prime development area for a future hotel or condominium-hotel complex.
5. All of these expansion proposals are of great benefit to the Highlands Inn property as it is the central and most desirable land here now and also in the new master plan. Our land appraisal and project net profit potential budgets may seem high in light of the recent unfavorable national economic situation which has even affected recession-proof Aspen, but with the new master plan for base area development and lift expansion, all our estimates should become realities during the next several years as development proceeds and as the economy continues to improve. The Highlands could soon become a small and exclusive satellite development in the middle of all the Roaring Fork Valley attractions and may even gain a reputation as Aspen's most prestigious ski area and accommodations complex.
6. The Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation has been awarded a 7.5 million judgment by Federal Court against the other local ski company in an anti-trust action, and now by court order, one lift, ticket is transferable between all Aspen ski areas. This is much more convenient for skiers and will increase utilization of the Highlands ski area. When a final settlement is negotiated in this litigation and payment is received, it is expected that major capital improvements program will be undertaken which will substantially upgrade this ski area.
7. The Pitkin County airport has recently been expanded and lengthened to allow 100 passenger direct jet service into Aspen from the West Coast, Midwest, and Southern regions. No other mountain resort has comparable frequency of flights landing conveniently only four miles from town.
8. Aspen-Snowmass has become a three season destination resort. Skiers create a steady demand for accommodations and services throughout the winter season and cultural events with outdoor recreation bring a large number of tourists to this area when the ski lifts are not operating. The wide variety of local activities and the atmosphere created by downtown shops, clubs, and restaurants, have made Aspen famous around the world and we now have over one-half million affluent visitors come vacation here each year, with most staying for a week or more.
9. The Highlands Inn site is the most desirable, centrally located, valuable tract of land remaining in Pitkin County upon which to build. The current appraised value of the land and the presently acquired development rights is $8,370,000. With the hotel accessory use density exemptions and increased unit count we are just now receiving, it is expected that an appraisal update would reevaluate this property at about nine million dollars.
10. The principals involved in the development work are well experienced in hotel management, all ski area operations, development/construction work, and local politics. The primary architect's most previous work was the design of a major Hyatt Hotel and several general contractors are available who have had many years' experience building large mountain projects.
11. Although the real estate market in Aspen has been slow for two years and some properties have actually lost value, as the national economy further improves there should be a very good demand for new mountain condo hotel units. Our project's timing seems excellent as presales can be offered this coming winter which should coincide with a vigorous economic recovery and an increasing local real estate market.
12. If all the presently approved project is constructed without phasing, then there would be only 80 to 90 condominiums for sale (those condo units can be designed to lock out into a maximum of 169 hotel rooms). Should a decision be made to stage this development, even fewer units would then be available to the very large number of potential buyers which come to Aspen each year. Therefore an unprecedented marketing success is reasonably assured, especially as this will be the only new condo hotel or interval ownership facility available in this valley for quite some time to come.
During the three year period of 1979, 80, & 81, Aspen/Snowmass condominiums comparable to what can soon be offered in the new Highlands Inn complex sold in excess of $350 per square foot. Unfortunately, the national recession was so severe and lengthy that some owners were recently forced into distress sales and consequently there have lately been a few properties sold at reduced values. However with a continuing strong economic recovery, real estate prices in the Roaring Fork Valley should quickly regain their former levels, and then within the next several years many quality condominiums will probably approach $400 per square foot in sales prices.
Please be aware that a $333/square foot value was used in the profit potential budget (page 5), while many of the following comparables have sold in excess of $350 per square foot.
The Woodstone, with very small hotel rooms and no kitchens, has reportedly sold sixteen units at over $400/sq.ft. during the past winter in a presale program prior to the remodeling their old lodge building.
Woodrun Place, a 56 unit condominium hotel facility presently completing construction across from Snowmass Village, presold 31 units during last winter's ski season. Their remaining best units are offered from $300 to $346/square foot.
Recent sales in the Aspen are Aspen Alps, #805 Aspen Square, #318 Asepn Square, #216 Gant, #H-302 Gant, #F-303
Recent sales in the Snowmass Timberline #216 Top of the Village #309 Top of the Village #405 Enclave #208
$369/square foot $357/square foot $356/square foot $355/square foot $352/square foot
$421/square foot $374/square foot $370/square foot $348/square foot
These units were constructed from seven to thirteen years ago. They are not part of a modern, full service resort condo-hotel complex, some are not directly situated on the ski slope, and also they lack the combination of amenities which the Aspen Highlands recreational complex provides. While the majority of buyers might chose properties in Aspen or Snowmass, many will prefer the more peaceful setting found in the scenic Maroon Creek Wilderness Area at Highlands while still being part of Aspen, just five minutes from the center of town.
By taking into consideration all factors, the Highlands Inn has one of the best locations available and therefore the new units will successfully compete with all other similar condominiums in the valley. The project, if developed as a condo/hotel, should gross approximately thirty million dollars in sales. Even higher gross sale returns might be assured if reasonable long term financing could be provided to potential buyers or if interest rates are at moderate levels and there be an optimistic economic out look when the new units are marketed.
This would also be an excellent location for a quality interval ownership type facility and that kind of a project could expect a much higher sales potential as each week's ownership would probably sell for between $5,000 and $35,000. Even with the higher marketing costs necessary to timeshare, interval ownership would have the highest profit potential for development of this property and could net considerably more to the developer than the six million dollars as indicated in the following budget.
HIGHLANDS INN RENEWAL PROFIT POTENTIAL
90,000 sq.ft, condo units x $333 per sq.ft. = *5,475 sq.ft, bar/restaurant areas (if sold) = Administration, Financing, Assessment, Marketing Professional Fees, Closing Costs, Miscellaneous Fixtures, equipment, & construction costs
Net Profit to land cost & development company 12,575,000
Purchase price of land & development rights - 6,575,000
Net return to development company
* Twice this area of bar/restaurant/commercial area might be made available to the project via further County reviews.
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
The base of the Highlands Ski area contains approximately 29.5 acres AR-1 land on which, with current zoning, 800 units could eventually be constructed. A reasonable future development plan to add the first annex to the now approved 180 unit Highlands Inn (169 Tourist + 11 Employee) would be to make application for a multi-year County growth quota totaling about 60 to 80 additional units. Gaining this size quota would be assured because there are no other GMP competitors eligible with properly zoned land except the owner of the ski area, from whom the development land must be acquired. Thus within three years a 250 unit new facility could be built at the Aspen Highlands Inn site. Recent discussions with the County Commissioners indicate that they might be receptive to having up to 300 rooms initially built at the Highlands, if this is deemed necessary to assure quick construction and essential to the economic viability of a new quality hotel.
It is believed that within a few years a Code amendment could be introduced which might substantially increase the current county lodge quota from 20 units to twice and possibly three times that amount. Therefore, there exists the potential that the a new Highlands Inn Hotel could be rapidly expanded in future stages, the size of each to be primarily controlled by free market demand. It is realistic to expect that within 5 to 7 years there could be at least 500 new hotel rooms completed at the Highlands. The base area has already been master planned to properly handle the full development potential of the 800 rooms now allowed under local zoning, and these will be eventually constructed in accordance with local growth control policies.
It is to the Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation's benefit to encourage maximum hotel development quickly as possible as any new units at the Highlands will have a substantial positive effect on the overall ski area operation. Consequently, they should be receptive to selling additional land at a reasonable price for future lodging development. With respect to acquiring additional land, it should be realized the County lodge growth quota has now placed the Highlands Inn Development Company in the attractive position of being the only serious potential buyer for the base area land. It is simply not economically viable for another buyer to come in and acquire property for the very small project which they would be limited to by present growth management plans.
It is of future importance that the ski area may be receptive to a contractual arrangement whereby most of the funds used by the hotel development company to acquire more land could be reserved for specific mountain or base area improvements. Such a sale agreement would be of great benefit to this entire skiing resort complex, and would encourage substantial upgrading of all area facilities to quickly proceed.
Also, in the near future, the Highlands Ski Corporation hopefully will be receiving a monetary award from an anti-trust litigation judgment and it is expected that they may expend a good portion of that money to further upgrade the ski area. Thus revenue from the sale of development land and/or a litigation award should soon support considerable renovation and expansion throughout the entire Highlands recreational complex.
ASPEN HIGHLANDS BASE AREA MASTER PLAN
SUMMARY AND OFFER FOR SALE
ATC Associates, owner of the Highlands Inn renewal project is seeking to sell or to enter into a joint venture relationship for the future development of its 6.643 acres of land at the base of the Aspen Highlands ski area. The presently approved development rights are for 90,000 square feet of marketable hotel condominium or time-share units and over 5,000 sq.ft, commercial space. The land and development rights were appraised in 1982 at $8,370,000 and a current evaluation should approach nine million dollars. Based on recent sales and the latest project budgets, net return to the developer is estimated to be in excess of $6,000,000. By acquiring additional AR-1 property and development rights at the Highlands, the potential profit could be substantially increased.
The Aspen/Pitkin growth controls have limited the number of units constructed for the past several years, and therefore this resort does not have as large a surplus of properties now offered for sale as does Vail and all other mountain resorts. Local growth controls have made it very difficult to gain development rights, therefore similar condominium offerings will not be available to buyers during the marketing period, thus assuring the Highlands development to be a prompt financial success.
I have been involved with this property for six years, with the past two years dedicated to procuring necessary local governmental approvals. I am now desirous of selling my land and development rights for 6.5 million dollars on contract or five million cash.
Or for two million dollars I would be interested in forming a new development partnership, with my percent of participation to be negotiated. Please realize that the above offers represent approximately a 40% discount on an MAI appraisal that will certainly be a valid evaluation of this property as the economy recovers. However, as this project has finally gained approvals,
I must now be very realistic with my land return expectations in order to avoid another year's delay in development.
I am hopeful that an appropriate transaction providing for the continuing development of the new Highlands Hotel can be completed this fall so that construction may begin in the Spring of 1984. Therefore, I am actively soliciting and will consider all offers.
Joe Cooper Principal Owner A.T.C. Associates
Colorado H.B. 1034, Article S, Section 106-8-104, Powers of Local Government.
Without limiting or superceding any power or authority presently exercised or previously granted, each local government within its respective jurisdiction has the authority to plan for and regulate the use of land by:
e Regulating the location of activities and developments which may result in significant changes in population density.
f Providing for phased development of services and facilities.
g Regulating the use of land on the basis of the impact therof on the community or surrounding areas.
h Otherwise planning for and regulating the use of land so as to
provide planned and orderly use of land and protection of the environment in a manner consistent with Constitutional rights.
with tho remainder of the recreation complex in the Aspen area. The system could he located to substantially reduce vehicular circulation between ^'illagcs.
Community features of the area include the golf course proposed in conjunction with the flattest beginners ski slope, thus providing year round recreational use of the land. Other recreation amenities such as tennis courts, swimming pools and play areas will be provided bv the developers as a means of establishing a summer tourist potential. Development of permanent residences should follow a cluster plan where possible to create useable open-space.
Character of the Snowmass-at-Aspen development as presented by the developer is one of compact, intensive use areas with underground parking in certain instances, pedestrian internal circulation and tramways and transit for inter-village movement. The villages will vary in configuration with the most promising one initially planned as a series of multi story hotels positioned over an underground parking structure and commercial uses on the base elevation. Separating the villages will be less intensive residential uses and recreation open-^pace.
/ Aspen Highlands Evolution of the Aspen Highlands ski area and related facilities is a visible demonstration that the concept of a compactly organized, outlying recreation center is valid and practical. Based on a ski area 3S0 acres in extent with 7 lifts, and a peak visitor day of 1,425 skiers in 1964-65 the complex provides necessary skiers services, accommodations for 275 persons and has fostered development of an adjacent residential subdivision. Summer interest is provided by location of stables in conjunction with the Heatherbed Lodge and the nearby T Lazy 7 guest ranch. Most of the ski and accommodations facilities arc tightly grouped about the base of the slope within walking distance of the lifts. The setting is naturally attractive being located above the banks of Maroon Creek as the valley widens into an elevated plain. Highlands receives considerable day use by persons staying in Aspen Townsite, but recent construction in the area as well as a planned expansion in lodgings will contribute to a balanced recreation v i 1-lage. The Highlands area is located within 235 acres <^>f county A R zoned land. The : n envisions crea-wspion of a one-quarter mile radii Accommodations Recreation area about the -f the lifts which
will include most of the devch ,lile land presently
zoned A/R and includes some additional area to north and west. Uses envisioned for the Highlni area include additional accommodations and comm cial facilities directed toward serving the needs visitors.
Development progress will probably include ad tional construction of condominium-type lodge i comniodations and the possibility of a resort ho has been mentioned. The attractive siting if Hii lands is its strongest encouraging factor. The pi projection estimates the visitor accommodation < pacity at 1,200 which anticipates construction of additional 225 accommodations units to those alrea in existence.
Circulation to Aspen Highlands is via Marc Creek Road which is depicted as a dual lane art ial to the Highlands area. Beyond this point, the p; sent level of dual lane improvement to its termin at Maroon Lake will be adequate as no intensive ban uses are envisioned in this area. Highlands w probably continue to be auto-oriented, but at su time that further studies are made on the feasibil: of transit, the possibility of extending service this area should be considered.
Community features recommended for the Asp Highlands Area include provision for an open-spai easement to accommodate a riding trail aloi Maroon Creek. This trail should connect with tl trail and open-space created through subdivisii design in Meadouoodand provide safe access to ti wilderness trails accessible via Maroon Cret drainage.
The character of the Aspen Highlands ski area already established as one of a relatively remo recreation complex with a scenic setting, compa organization and providing accommodations and r lated commercial facilities. Maroon Creek Road e emplifies the ideal to be projected for newer s areas where the approaches to the village are n cluttered with strip development of a cummercit nature. Topping the last rise on the road, the travi ler finds himself directly in the center of recreutic activity without having been subjected to a gradua ly intensifying commercial awareness which woui have dulled the terminal impact.
Buttermilk Initiated as a beginners ski area c gentle slopes south of Highway H2 midway betwee the airport and Maroon Creek, Buttermilk has bee expanded until there are presently 3 lifts servin 4l)U acres of trails including expert terrain. The rc creation facilities serving the ski area consist o
exceed one (1) year, provided that such mobile home need not have water, electrical or sanitary facilities otherwise required herein; provided, further, that a building permit is obtained from the Building Inspector authorizing such use of the mobile home and specifying the period of use.
(d) Exceptions for extraction sites:
On any approved sand and gravel, or other mineral, extraction site there shall be allowed mobile homes for office and storage purposes, provided that a building permit is obtained from the Building Inspector authorizing such use of the mobile homes. The period of use under a permit shall be one (1) year, renewable by the Building Inspector's office, provided that extraction operations are in progress.
(e) Exception for agricultural purposes:
One (1) mobile home may be used for housing in conjunction with bona fide grazing or other agricultural purposes and during the months of May through October only.
r-504 9 Effective Date
This regulation shall become effective on the 24th of September. 1979. 5-505-5-509 Reserved.
5-510 Limitations on Residential Development within Pitkin County
(a) From and after the effective date hereof, there shall be issued, in each year, building permits within Pitkin County for no more than the following:
(1) within the Aspen Metropolitan Area (excluding the City of Aspen): twenty-seven (27) residential units;
(2) within the Snowmass/Brush Creek Area (excluding the Town of Snowmass Village): ten (10) residential dwelling units;
(3) within the Down Valley Area (excluding the Crystal River Valley and Frying Pan areas): thirty (30) residential dwelling units.
as those Growth Management Areas are defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Policy Plan (third draft), prepared by the Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office; provided that the maxi-mums herein extablished may be deviated from under those conditions specified in Section 5-510.3 as hereinafter specified.
The following development activity shall be exempted from compliance with the limitations and requirements of Section 5-510.1(a) and 5-510.1(b).
(a) The remodeling, restoration or reconstruction of any existing building, provided there is created no additional dwelling units (except if constructed pursuant to Section 5-510.2(bj).
(b) The construction of one (1) single-family or duplex structure on a lot subdivided prior to the effective date ol this regulation.
(c) The construction of a single-family home on a lot formed by a lot split as defined in Section 4-6.
(d) All housing units (under resale or rental controls) constructed within the Permanent Moderate Housing (PMH) Zone Category (established pursuant to Resolution No. 76-112 of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County); and all rental housing units constructed on the same site as a commercial use, and restricted to occupancy by persons (and their families) employed by the commercial use, and further restricted by maximum rentals falling within the low or moderate rental guidelines established pursuant to Section 5-510.5(a)(2)(D).
(e) All construction pursuant to valid building permits issued prior to the effective date of this regulation.
(f) All development not limited by the provisions of Section 5-510.1 (a).
(g) Any unit approved by the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to Section 3-8.13.
(h) The replacement of a mobile home (whether nonconforming or not) by a single-family residence; provided, however, that this exception shall be limited to mobile homes legally established and used exclusively for permanent residential purposes and shall not exempt compliance with the requirements of Section 7-1.12.
(i) The replacement of a single-family residence by another singlefamily residence; provided, however, that this exemption shall be limited to residences legally established and used exclusively for permanent residential purposes and shall not exempt compliance with the requirements of Section 7-1.12.
5-510.3 Excess Allotments
(a) In awarding allotments in any given year, the Board of County Commissioners may authorize construction in excess of the maximum number of dwelling units specified in Section 5-510.1(a) by as much as twenty percent (20%) of the quota established; provided, however, that any such excess shall be offset by a corresponding reduction in allotments given in successive years such that every fifth (5th) year the total construction within the previous five (5) years shall not be in excess of the cumulative total prescribed by Section 5-510.1(a).
Excerpts Aspen Growth Management Policy
History and development at the Aspen/Pitkin County Management Plan
Pentaluma, California growth management case
Historical Development of the Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Plan
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 1966 Aspen Area General Plan
Function: Locates appropriate areas for different types of land use, outlines transportation paths and modes, designates the location of public facilities and services.
Relationship to Growth Goals: Residential densities shall generally be more intense close to the two major centers, Aspen and Snowmass, and decrease in intensity as distances from the centers increase. (pg. 2)
1972 Goals Task Force
Goal: To establish optimum population growth rate.
Program: a Analyze past growth rates to determine optimum rate of population increase; b Determine median construction year to establish normal construction growth.
1973 Pitkin County Commissioners Action Plan
Master Plan Revision: Allowable growth should be regulated on a yearly quota-so that Master Plan densities projected for 1981 at any given location will not occur before that date, particularly where other public support facilities assumed by the Plan are absent. ... As it currently appears that the present rate of growth will far exceed the Master Plan densities for 1981, certain changes in building and zoning codes and subdivision regulations will be necessary. .
1973 Land Use Plan
Goal: To hold the rate of growth substantially below that experienced in the late sixties and insure that the growth that does occur is in keeping with these same policies and the Land Use Plan.
1973 Resolution Amending the Pitkin County Zoning Resolution and Building Code to Establish a Development Control System
Public Hearing, Board of County Commissioners, July 26,1973.
1975 Plan AmendmentsRoaring Fork East and Buttermilk Areas
. In addition, lot size standards should be related to transportation patterns, the availability of public utilities, and future population objectives. (as quoted in the Aspen Times, July 24, 1975, pg. 16B)
December 1975 Growth Management Plan, Pitkin County
Referred by the Board of County Commissioners to the Planning and Zoning Board February 4, 1976; referrals sent to Special Taxing Districts, U.S. Forest Service, City of Basalt, City of Aspen, State of Colorado, Skiing Corporations and Board of Realtors. Planning and Zoning requested additional study on fiscal impact, relationship to transportation, and ski and business expansion policies.
December 1976 Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Policy Plan, Second Draft
Incorporates the additional analyses and policy suggested at first draft. Amendments concerning commercial space added December 30,1976.
Meetings: Preliminary Meetings before the Board of County Commissioners, City Council and both the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions, December 1976-January 1977.
Growth Management Seminar, February 3-5,1977.
Public Meetings of both Planning and Zoning Boards throughout February.
Informal Public Hearings before joint meetings of City and County Planning and Zoning Boards March 15, 22, and 29, and April 5, 1977 (notice mailed to Special Districts, area caucuses and interested organizations and individuals).
Sierra Club/Wilderness Workshop presentations
Chamber of Commerce presentationJanuary 18,1977
Presentation before Board of RealtorsMarch 23,1977
Presentation by Joe Porter, Design Workshop, before Board of RealtorsApril 28,1977
Public Hearing, Aspen and Pitkin Planning and Zoning BoardsMay 5,1977
May 13, 1977, Aspen/Pitkin Growth Management Policy Plan, Third Draft
The four-lane proposal would take 20 years to achieve the basic safety improvements that are required now.
The four-lane would detract from the resort experience afforded by the Aspen community and as such would not be in the long-range best interests of the community. This is substantially verified by both summer and winter visitor surveys.
Four-lane costs are currently projected at $45 million to $67 million. This is an extravagant expenditure in light of energy shortages and the long-term uncertainty of the role of the automobile. If the cost difference between a two-lane and four-lane were applied to transit, the valley would evolve with a truly balanced transportation system.
These policies are more fully enumerated in:
Technical Memo 2. Transit Alternatives Study, Transit Incentives/Auto Disincentives: Program Element Combinations and Preliminary Impact Estimation, Alan M. Voorhees and Assoc., Inc., and Design Workshop, Inc.
County Airport (Sardy Field), R. Dixon Speas Assoc.
E Sewer and Water Extensions
The growth anticipated by this Plan is consistent with expansion plans for both sewer and water utilities for the Aspen and Snowmass area. The design capacity of the 201 sewer plant expansions at both Aspen and Snow-mass are consistent with the growth projected by this Plan.
The Plan for Aspen Metro envisions a population increase at 7% to 8% while, if adopted, this Growth Management Plan calls for less than 3% for the same area.
Expansion of the Aspen Water System to a population capacity of 26,000 will serve the needs of service area for a 15-year period. In the case of both sewer and water, immediate improvements are now necessary regardless of growth outlook and expansion plans should be supported. The population projections for Snowmass Sanitation are low and their limitations are no doubt obvious to the officials of that district in light of the recent Master Plan approval.
There are no conflicts between sewer and water extension policies and areas outlined for development in this Plan and consequently all sewer and water utility 201 plans should be given endorsement.
F Employee Housing
A Housing Assistance Plan has been proposed for Pitkin County and identifies a deficit of employee housing units. It is simply the policy of this Plan to ensure that adequate low and moderate income housing be provided as part of the residential growth quotas in the Aspen and Snowmass areas. The goal is hereby established to deliver 54 units of employee housing annually at Snowmass (34 permanent, 20 transient as per the Snowmass General [Master] Plan) and half of the units in the Aspen Metro area annually as low and moderate income housing. The implementation of this Plan will seek to ensure that incentives are created in the area outside the Aspen/Snowmass Area for the provision of low and moderate income housing.
G Future Directions for Implementation
Detailed consideration will have to be given to ordinance and code amendments to enforce these policies. Obvious questions will arise as to the feasibility of implementation of much of this Plan, especially the policy on residential development. The probable impacts on City and County land use regulations will be as follows:
Both codes would have to be amended to restrict consideration of major subdivisions which envision new construction to once a year, probably June or July.
In July of the year both City and County will have the benefit of knowing how much construction activity has taken place in each of the separate growth management areas for that current year to date.
If the building allotment for each area has been exceeded by construction on previously approved and subdivided lots then no new subdivisions will be considered for that area in that calendar year.
In the event of competing subdivision applications for a given available building allotment, then a ranking system, similar to the one outlined in the original Growth Management Draft, would have to be employed.
All other areas appear adequate as adopted planning philosophies.
In order to evaluate the impacts of this Plan, public hearings should be conducted at six-month intervals subsequent to the date of adoption. An ongoing Citizens Advisory Board should be constituted to provide ongoing analysis of the Plan with respect to its success in meeting stated Plan goals and objectives. This Commission should also assume the responsibility for annual allotment recommendations.
A Residential and
The following is a proposal to limit the growth of new residential development of Aspen/Pitkin County to an annual rate of 3.47% (simple). Three point forty seven percent does not represent a number which was rigorously, quantitatively derived. It represents a balance of judgments about a growth rate which could be sustained by local services. It also represents the realistic buildout of existing zoning as phased over a fifteen-year period.
This strategy proposes the separate review of four differing growth management areas in the County, to include:
1 The Aspen Metro Area
2 The City of Aspen
3 Snowmass/Brush Creek
With 9,188 total dwelling units now in existence within the County, a 3.47% annual rate yields a total of 319 units per year. The Petaluma, California building permit quota system has provided a national example for communities endeavoring to establish growth timing controls. Recently upheld by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, this system establishes an annual ceiling of 500 units for the City of Petaluma. This Plan is innovative and important in its precedent-setting. With some 1,179 officially subdivided lots in the City and County it is clear that the growth potential represented by these lots must be accounted for and scheduled in a rational way. Accordingly the growth control management system as proposed contains a provision for reviewing and giving first priority to development on approved lots. In general, the system recognizes that the County has made certain legal commitments to growth in the form of these lots ard further establishes a built-in bias for building out existing subdivisions before considering substantial new ones.
The system also recognizes established plans in its consideration of Master Planned and non-Master Planned areas. The City of Aspen, Snowmass/Brush Creek, Roaring Fork East, and Buttermilk/Airport have been planned and carry with them officially adopted Master Plans. These plans specify both long-range development density and utility locations. The Plans for Buttermilk and Roaring Fork East were officially adopted by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission in the spring of 1975 and specify total populations for their respective areas for the year 1985. Total annual building quotas for these areas can be derived by scheduling the total 1985 buildout over the next ten years. (The actual buildouts are developed further in this Section.) Planning for Snowmass is completed and involved a cooperative program between Snowmass Corporation, the Snowmass Caucus, and Pitkin County with the assistance of the City/County Planning Office. Consensus was reached on a plan to include some 2,424 dwelling units to be constructed over a 15-year period. Commitments have been made regarding transportation, storm drainage, employee housing, etc.
Non-Master Planned areas of the County have been examined and the system calls for an annual building permit quota of 3.4% of the existing housing supply base. Again this judgment is based largely on the relative unavailability of critical community services needed for urban and suburban density development.
The purpose of this section is to describe four separate growth management areas for Pitkin County and assign annual building allotments for each. Tremendous social and cultural diversity exists in Pitkin County. Great differences exist with respect to the ability of various portions of the County to provide the needed services to deal with urban and suburban styled development. For purposes of allotment allocation the County has been divided into Master Planned and non-Master Planned areas. In the 1975 revisions to the 1966 Aspen Area Master Plan,
Traffic Safety Planning & Management Systems
BOX 234 VJOODY CflCEK.CO 81G5G (303)925-1759
May U, 1981
Mr. Stephen C. Peer Resort Inns Incorporated 165C Maroon Creek Road P.0. Box 4708 Aepen, CO 81612
Bear Mr. Peer:
Skrettki Associates is pleased to present to you our analysis f traffic .impacts of the proposed Highlands Inn expansion.
V?e have found that there will be no noticeable increase in traffic in the -Maroon Creek Corridor due to this proposed expansion. This is largely because Highlands Inn has historically catered to Package Tours that arrive in Aspen by means ether than the automobile and generally ski the Highlands. As 8UCh Highlands Inn guests, when they do travel in the Maroon Creek Corridor, use existing bus services that are already in the traffic stream. Furthermore, what ever travel Highlands Inn guests do engage in, is normally outside of the peak traffic hours
We appreciate the opportunity to take part in this project.
Therefore, minor adverse soils conditions do exist, all of which are controllable and can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction techniques.
The applicant will meet with the soils consultant as soon as a final design of the building is developed and obtain such further studies engineering and recommendations as are necessary to mitigate and control the minor adverse conditions encountered.
It is noted that the existing cut Slope behind the Highlands Inn has without any reinforcement remained stable for 18 years. The new construction which will have reinforced retaining wall against this slope will improve the current situation.
n n r\ r.
1000 West Fillmore St.
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593
Home Office May 20, 1331
Stephen C. Peer
c/o Resort Inns Incorporated
P O Box 4703
Aspen, CO 81612
SUBSURFACE SOILS INVESTIGATION
HIGHLANDS INN ADDITION ASPEN, COLORADO
Transmitted herewith is the report concerning a subsurface soils investigation for proposed additions to the Highlands Inn at Aspen, Colorado.
LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY, INC.
Written by: Gary n. Krzisnik,^PV'E ^
Grand Junction Office-' Vv^pA
Reviewed by: cSeorg
Morris ^ P,
LD Job No. 33073-GS cc: LD Glenwood Springs
LD Grand Junction
602 East 8th Street Pueblo, Colo StOOl (303) 546-1150
P.O. Box 1427 86 Rosemont Placa
Glenwood Sonngs. Colo 81601 Montrose Colo 81401
(303) 945-6020 (303) 249-7838
P.O. Box 1882 P.O. Box 1643
Grand Junction. Colo 81501 Rock Springs. Wyo 82901 (303) 242 8968 (307) 382-2549
HIGHLANDS INN GENERAL SUBMISSION
Soil, Surficial Geologic Characteristics and Radiation
(Also Section 5-100)
. This policy is designed to prevent damage to
structure or improvements resulting from soil or geologic conditions such as subsidance, expansive soils, weak soils, permeability, drainage or ground water problems or radiation hazards.
It is noted at the outset that the existing Highlands Inn has been in place for 18 years without any indication of foundation problems from soil or geologic conditions.
Lincoln-DeVore Laboratories has conducted an analysis of the site and bored test holes to determine the soil types to be encountered. A copy of their report is attached hereto. The report has identified the soils as being primarily silty gravel soils and indicates that they may be subject to some small downhill creep and some minor slope movement. In addition, one soil type was encountered at one test hole which is both subject to slight expansion is wetted and subject to minor .compressibility. All of the conditions encountered, however, are mitigated by appropriate engineering and construction techniques.
The report recommends that exterior low bearing walls be cross connected in order to prevent differential movements resulting from the minor creep and recommended that all foundation elements be balanced to cause an even loading on the site and minimize any tendency of creep. Further, pressure loading was indicated sufficient to contain the expansive soil but not so great as to compress it. The report further recommended vertical reinforcement in all exterior foundation walls against cuts and in certain situations recommended foundation drains. It further recommended the control of water on the site in order to direct drainage and runoff away from the foundational members and the building site in order to minimize any problem that might arise from water encountering the various soils involved.
.HK ENGINEERING COMPANY 2815 WAYZATA BLVD. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405 (612) 374-4
PANDELI M CIO President
CHARLES E. HAHSEN Vice President LARRY. G McMURIBY Vice President DAVID N. McENARY Secrelery/Trejsurer
ORUCE R KELLEY Associate
LESUE G. RENSCHLER Associate
KENHOY K. JANZEN Associate
ALLOWABLE RELEASE RATE/REQUIRED FLOOD STORAGE DETERMINATION
ASPEN, COLORADO lomra. Nt. 8222
Determination of Allowable Release Rate - Undeveloped Site:
1. Area of site (A) 3.32 Acres
2. Average ground slope 0.17 foot/foot
3. Overland flow distance 500 feet
4. Time of concentration (see Attach.) 15 minutes
5. Rainfall intensity for
100-yr. storm (I) 4.32 inches/hr
6. Runoff coefficient (C) 0.50
7. Allowable release rate (Q=CIA) 7.2 cfs
II Determination of Required Flood Storage Developed Site:
8. Assumed runoff coefficient
(developed area) * 0.90
Duration Time. 100-yr. Storm Inflow Rate Storage Rate Flood Storage
(Hrs.) (Min.) (In./Hr) (cfs) (cfs) (cf)
0.08 5 6.66 19.9 12.7 3810
* 0.17 10 5.13 15.3 8.1' 4860 Max
0.33 20 3.73 11.1 3.9 4320
0.50 30 3.00 9.0 1.8 3240
0.67 40 2.57 7.7 0.5 1200
0.83 50 2.22 6.6 - -
1.00 60 2.00 6.0 - -
PLANTS FOR HIGH ALTITUDE
Prepared by Tom Knoblock, Knoblock Development, Inc. from past experiences, observations and information provided by:
Dr. James R. Feucht, C.S.U. Extension Professor,
Dr. Jack Butler, C.S.U. Professor Horticulture
Turfgrass Science Larry Watson, Little Valley Wholesale Nursery,
( April 1981)
(Revised January 1982)
Sizes Generally Available
TP Tube Pak
Cont Container 1-5 gal.
Cal Caliper size l-2"cal.
L. Cal Large Caliper size 3" 6" cal.
S.S. Spade dug shrubs
S. - Seed
Shade generally prefer partial shade DECIDUCUS TREES
Shade Acer circinatum Vine Maple Cont., Cal.
Acer ginnala Amur Maple- T.P., Cont., Cal.
Acer glabrum Rocky Mountain Maple T.P., Cont. Clumps, Cal.
Acer negundo Box Elder T.P., Cont., Cal.
Acer platanoides Norway Maple Cont., Cal., L. Cal.
Acer rubrum Red Maple Cont., Cal., L. Cal.
Acer saccharinum Silver Maple Cont., Cal., L. Cal.
Alnus Rhombifolia White Alder Cont., Cal.
Alnus sinuata Sitka Alder Cont., Cal.
Alnus tenuifolia Thin Leaf Alder T.P., Cont. Cal.
Betula fontinalis Rocky Mountain Birch, 'T.P., Cont.
Betula pendula European White Birch Cal. Clumps
Betula pendula gracilis Cutleaf Weeping Birch, Cont,. Cal., L. Cal. Betula utilis jacquemonti Himalayan Birch Cont., Cal.
Betula verrucosa 'Youngi' Youngs Weeping Birch Cont., Cal. Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian Olive T.P., Cont., Cal.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolata Green Ash, Cont., Cal., L. Cal. Gleditsia triacanthos inermis sp Honey Locust Cal., L. Cal.
Malus domestica Domestic Apple Cent., Cal.
Malus sp Flowering Crabapple Cont., Cal., L. Cal.
Populus alba Silver Popular Cont., Cal.
Populus alba "Bolleana" Bolleana Popular ^ont., Cal.
Populus angustifolia Narrow Leaf Cottonwood T.P., Cont., Cal, L. Ca Populus Balsamifera Balsam Popular, Cont.
Populus canadensis 'Eugene'- Carolina Popular
Prunus virginiana 'Shubert' Shubert Choke Cherry Cont., Cal. Quercus gambelii Gamble Oak T.P., Cont.
Robinia pseudoacacia Black Locust Cont. Cal.
Salix Willow Cont., Cal.
Sorbus aucuparia European Mountain Ash Cont., Cal.
Sorbus scopulina Mountain Ash- Cont.
Abies concolor Concolor Fir 3 -10'
Abies lasiocarpa Subalpine Fir T.P., 3~12'
Juniperus scopulorum Rocky Mountain Juniper Cont.
Picea engelmanni Englemann Spruce T.P., 3-18'
Picea pugens Colorado Spruce T.P., 3-30'
Pinus aristata Bristlecone Pine T.P., 3-12'
Pinus contorta latifolia Lodgepole Pine T.P., 3-18'
Pinus edulis Pinyon Pine T.P., 3-12*
Pinus flexilis Limber Pine T.P., 3-10'
Pinus monticola Western White Pine T.P., 3~10'
Pinus nigra Austrian Pine T.P., 3-15'
Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa Pine T.P., 3-15'
Pinus sylvestris Scotch Pine T.P., 3-15
Pseudotsuga menezii glauca Douglas Fir T.P.2-15'
Acer ginnala Amur Maple T.P., Cont, S.S.
Acer glabrum Rocky Mountain Maple T.P., Cont.
Amelanchier alnifolia Serviceberry T.P., Cont. S.S.
Artemisia cana Silver Sagebrush T.P., Cont.
Artemesia tridentata Big Sage Cont.
Berberis thunbergi Japanese Barbery Cont.
Caragana arborescens Siberian Peashrub T.P., Cont., S.S. Cercocarpus mcntanus Mountain Mahogany T.P., Cont. Chrysothamnus nauseosus Rubber Rabbit Bush T.P., Cont.
Comus stolonifera coloradensis Redtwig Dogwood T.P., Cont, S.S. Cotoneaster acutifolia Peking Cotoneaster Cont. S.S.
Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian Olive T.P., Cont., S.S.
Euonymus alatus Burning Bush Cont.
Lonicera tatarica Tartarian Honeysuckle Cont.
Lonicera korolkowi 'Zabel'- Zabels Honeysuckle Cont., S.S. Potentilla fruticosa Shrubby Cinquefoil T.P., Cont.
Prunus melanocarpa- Choke Cherry T.P., Cont., S.S.
Quercus gambelli Gamble Oak T.P., Cont.
Rhus glabra cismontana Dwarf Smooth Sumac T.P., Cont.
Rhus trilobata Oakbrush Sumac T.P., Cont.
Ribes alpinum Alpine Currant T.P., Cont.
Ribes inerme Gooseberry Cont.
Rosa foetida bicolor Austrian Copper Rose Cont.
Rosa harrisonii Harrison Yellow Rose ^ont.
Rosa woodsii Woods Rose T.P., Cont.
Rubus sp. Raspberry wont.
Shade Rubus parviflorus Thimbleberry Cont.
Salix Willow Cent.
Sambucus canadensis aurea Golden Elder Cont.
Sambucus pubens Native Elder T.P., Cont.
Shepherdia argentea Silverleaf Buffaloberry T.P., Cont. S.S. Shade Sorbaria sorbifolia Ural False Spirea Cont.
Spiraea bumalda 'Frobeli' Spirea Frobel Cont.
Spiraea thunbergi Bridalwreath Spirea Cont.
Symphoricarpos albus Snowberry T.P., Cont.
Shade Symphoricarpos x hancock Hancock Coralberry Cont.
Syringa villosa Late Lilac Cont.
Syringa lanciniata persica Persian Lilac Cont.
Syringa vulgaris Common lilac Cont., S.S.
Vaccinium sp. Huckleberries Cont.
Viburnum lanatana Wayfaring Bush Cont.
Viburnum opulus European Highbush Cranberry Cent.
Aronia melanocarpa Black Chokeberry Cont.
Ceanothus sanguineus Wild Lilac Cont.
Cotoneaster adpressa 'Praecox' Creeping Cotoneaster Cont. Caragana arborescens 'Pendula' Weeping Peashrub Cont.
Lonicera morrowi Morrow Honeysuckle Cont.
Morus alba 'Pendula' Weeping Mulberry Cont.
Rosa Hybrids, many Cont.
Juniperus chinensis 'Sea Green' Cont.
Pfitzeriana 'Glauca' Cont.
Juniperus communis horizontalis Rocky Mountain Spreading
Juniper T.P., Cont.
Juniperus horizontalis plumosa ccmpacta Andorra Juniper Cont. Juniperus satina tamariscifolia Tammy Juniper 'Blue Chip'-Cont. Juniperus scopulorum Upright Rocky Mountain Juniper Cont.
Shade Mahonia aquifolium Oregon Grape T.P., Cont.
Shade Pachistima myrsinites Mountain Loer T.P.
Pinus mugo mugus Mugo Pine Cont., Cal.
GROUND COVER AND VINES ( Cont. 1 gal. only)
Aegopodium variegata Snow-On-The-Mountain T.P., Cont Ajuga reptans var. Curlybugle T.P.
Antennaria Pussytoes T.P., Cont.
Asperula odorata Sweet Woodruff T.P.
Arctostaphylos uva ursi Kinnikinnick T.P.
Artemisia schmidtiana Silvermound T.P., Cont. Cerastium tomentosa Snow-In-Summer T.P., Cont. Clematis Jackmanni Jackman Clematis S., Cont. Clematis ligusticifolia Native White Clematis T.P. Duchesnea indica Mock Strawberry T.P.
Suonymus fortunei 'Coloratus' Purple Leaf Wintercreepe Festuca ovata glauca Blue Fescue Cont.
Fragaria ovalis Wild Strawberry T.P., Cont.
Humulus lupulus Hop Vine- T.P., Cont.
Lonicera japonica Hall's Honeysuckle Vine S., Cont. Mahonia repens Creeping Oregon Grape T.P., Cont. Pachistima canbyi Dwarf Mountain Lover- T.P., Cont. Parthenocissus quinauefolia Virginia Creeper T.P., C Phlox subulata Ground Phlox T.P., Cont.
Polygonum auberti Silverlace Vine, T.P., Cont. Polygonum reyneutria Fleece Flower, T.P., Cont. Potentilla verna nana Creeping Potentilla T.P.
Sedum Stonecrop T.P., Cont.
'Teucrium canadense American Germander T.P.
Thymus citriodorus Lemon Thyme T.P., Cont.
Vitis riparia 'Wild Grape T.P., Cont.
PERENNIAL FLOWERS (Cont. 1 gal. only)
Achillea Yarrow T.P., Cont.
Altaea Rosea Hollyhock T.P.
Alyssum saxatile -Basket-of-Gold S.. T.P., Cont.
Anaphalis sp. Pearly Everlasting T.P.
Anemone vulgaris Pasque Flower Cont.
Shade Aquilegia coerulea Columbine S., T.P., Cont.
Shade Asperula odorata Sweet Woodruff T.P., Cont.
Campanula glomerate Clustered Bellflower T.P.
Campanula medium Canterbury Bells T.P.
Campanula rotundifolia Harebell T.P.
Castilleja miniata Indian Paintbrush S., T.P.
Centaurea montana Mountain Bluet Cont.
Chysanthemum coccineum pyrethrum Painted Daisy Cont. Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Oxeye Daisy T.P.
Chrysanthemum maximum Shasta Daisy Cont.
Alaskan Daisy Cont.
Clematis jackmanii Clematis Vine S., Cont.
Dianthus sp. Carnation Grenadin S., Cont.
Dianthus barbatus Sweet William T.P., Cont.
Shade Dicentra spectabilis Bleeding Heart Cont.
Shade Digitalis purpurea ambigua Foxglove Cont.
Epilobium angustifclium Fireweed T.P.
Eriogonum umbellatum Sulphur Flower- T.P.
Erysimum asperum Western Wallflower T.P.
Eschscholzia californica California Poppy S., T.P. Gaillardia aristata Blanketflower T.P.
Geranium viscosissimum Wild Geranium S., T.P.
Hemerccalis sp Day Lily Cont.
Heuchera sanguinea Coral Bells T.P., Cont.
Iris germanica Bearded Iris Cont.
Iris siberica Siberian Iris Cont.
' Kniphofia uvaria-Tritoma, Red Hot Poker T.P., Cent. Lathyrus latifolius Perennial Sweet Pea Cont.
Liatris pychnostachya Gayfeather S., T.P., Cont.
Lilium tigrinum Tiger Lily Cont.
Linanthus grandiflorus Mountain Phlox S.
Linum lewisii Lewis Flax S., T.P.
Linaria vulgarus Butter and Eggs T.P.
Lonicera japonica Hall's Honeysuckle Vine Cont.
Shade Lupir.us sp Lupine S., T.P., Cont.
Lychnis chalcedonia Maltese Cross Cont.
Monarda menthifelia Horsemint T.P.
Myositis alpestris Forget-Me-Not Cont.
Oenothera sp Evening Primrose T.P.
Paeonia officnalis Peony Cont.
Papaver nudicuale Iceland Poppy T.P., Cent.
Papaver orientale Oriental Poppy Cent.
Pedicuiaris groenlandica Little Red Elephant T.P. Penstemon palmeri Palmer Penstemon S., T.F.
Penstemon sp T.P., Cont.
Penstemon strictus 'Bandera' Rocky Mountain Penstemon S. Phlox paniculate Perennial Phlox Cent.
Phlox subulate Ground Phlox T.P., Cont.
Polygonum reyneutria Fleece Flower Cont.
Pyrethrum x Robinsons Hybrids Painted Daisy S., Cont. Ranunculus repens Buttercup T.P.
Rudbeckia hirta Blackeyed Susan T.P.
13.,^'Ko^Via mnrt+5na f! n 1 n T a r? n Rqvl PSS GoneflOWer -
PERENNIAL FLOWERS (continued)
Sempervivum tectorum Hen and Chick Cont. Soli dago decumbens Dwarf Goldenrod T.P. Shade Spirea var.~Astilbe Cont.
Tanacetum vulgare European Pansy Cont. Thalictrum-Meadowrue T.P.
Thermopsis montana Golden Banner T.P. Veronica Cont.
Viola kitaibeliana Johnny Jumpup T.P. Shade Calluna vulgaris Heather T.P., Cont.
Delphinium Larkspur T.P., Cont.
Shade Hosta Plantain Lily Cont.
Leontopodium- Edelweiss Cont.
Shade Convallaria Lily of the Valley Cont.
Adiantum capillus Maiden-hair Fern Cont. ull sun Pteridium aquilinum Bracken Fern Cont. Pteretis Nodulosa Ostrich Fern Cont. Osmunda cinnamonea Cinnamon Fern Cont. Sword Fern Cont.
Agropyron christatum Fairway Wheatgrass Agropyron dasystachyum Thickspike Wheatgrass Agropyron desertorum Crested Wheatgrass Agropyron intermedium Intermediate Wheatgrass Agropyron elongatum Tall 'wheatgrass Agropyron riparium Streambank wheatgrass Agropyron smithii Western Wheatgrass Agropyron trachycaulum Slender Wheatgrass Astragalus sp. - Milk Vetch
Bromus inermis Smooth Bromegrass, Manchar Bromus marginatus Bromar Mountain Brome Coronilla Varia Vetch L. Cal.
Dactylis glomerata Orchardgrass Deschampsia caespitosa Tuffed Hairgrass Festuca arundinacea Tall Fescue Festuca rubra Red Creeping Fescue Festuca rubra commutata Chewings Fescue Festuca ovata glauca Blue Fescue Lolium perenne Perennial Rye Grass Medicago sativa Alfalfa Melilotus alba White Sweet Clover Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet Clover Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian Ricegrass Phleum alpinum Alpine Timothy Phleum pratensis Timothy Poa alpina Alpine Bluegrass Poa ampla Big Bluegrass Poa pratensis Kentucky Bluegrass Puccinellia distans Weeping Alkaligrass Triticum aestivum Winterwheat Trifoloum hybridum Alsike Clover Trifolium repens White Clover Trisetum spicatum Spike Trisetum Vicia pulchella Sweetclover Vetch
CLIMATOGRAPHY OF THE UNITED STATES NO. 20
Climate of Aspen,
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND /ENVIRONMENTAL / N A TI O N A L C LI M A T I C C E N T E R
IwOG ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION / DATA SERVICE / ASHEVILLE. N.C. APRIL 1975
LATITUDE N39 II LONGITUDE W106 50
MEANS ANO EXTREMES FOR PERIOD 1951-1973
ASPEN, CO ELEVATION 7928
TEMPERATURE(F) PRECIPITATION TOTALS (INCHES)
MEANS EXTREMES MEAN OF DUMBER DAYS SNOW, SLEET MEAN NUMBER OF DAYS
MONTH MAX. MIN. f- s_ H MAXIMUM MONTHLY u Â£ su X
DAILY MAXIMUA DAILY MINIMUM MONTHLY RECORD HIGHEST X < u > > < a RECORD LOWEST YEAR > < a 90 AND ABOVE to %UJ f*> CO i| si o Â£ iS MEAN CREATES MONTH L) YEAR CREATES DAILY YEAR > < a z < S YEAR CREATES DEPTH YEAR > 2 5 o C 0 3 0 2 5 8
JAN 34.1 7.5 20.8 58 56 5 -33 63 12 0 13 31 8 1.62 4.40 57 1.20 69 27 23.9 71.J 57 46.0 57 28 6 0 0
FEB 37.2 9.7 23.5 60* 62 12 -30 51 1 0 7 28 6 1.A3 3.04 62 .70 62 17 21.1 39.0 62 o 57 01 6 0 0
MAR 42.4 15.3 28.9 70f 59 22 -14 65 3 0 5 31 3 1.83 5.34 65 2.87 60 14 22.2 76.5 65 56.0 65 25 6 1 0
APR 52.5 24.4 38.5 73 69 22 -1 73 8 0 0 27 0 1.76 3.45 68 1.22 57 07 13.6 36.0 70 41.0 65 02 5 1 0
MAY 63.5 32.7 4B.1 80+ 69 28 14* 62 1 0 0 15 0 1.50 3.32 57 1.36 57 09 3.0 1A 0 61 8.0 57 09 4 1 0
JUN 73.4 38.9 56.1 93 54 23 23 73 19 0 0 3 0 1.21 3.77 69 1.26 69 24 3 3.5 73 2.0 73 03 4 0 0
JULY 79.6 44.8 62.2 9
AUG 77.4 43.6 60.5 92 69 9 28 68 24 0 0 0 0 2.00 4.38 64 1.29 64 OS 0 6 1 0
SEPT 69.9 36.2 53.1 87 60 3 15* 71 18 0 0 7 0 1.65 5.80 61 1.24 61 24 2.6 27.0 61 7.0 71 17 5 1 0
OCT 59.7 28.1 43.9 76* 63 1 6* 72 31 0 0 24 0 1.60 4.53 69 1.13 63 31 i.i 35.6 69 9.0 69 16 4 1 0
NOV 44.0 17.0 30.5 66* 71 11 -19 55 16 0 4 29 2 2.93 64 .87 55 u 19.3 37.5 64 21.0 55 15 5 0 0
DEC 34.6 8.6 21.6 59 59 17 -19 61 12 0 13 31 6 l.J 4.75 51 2.06 66 06 24.2 58.3 51 42.0 51 31 6 1 0
YEAR JLU _iLU J ILiiL lisl :2U JAN 43|12 0 -ill 226 25 19.44 5.80 6P MJ 2.87 AR 60j iii 76.5 AR iU MAR 56.0|65 ill _l 0
ALSO ON EARLIER DATES
PROBABILITY OP LATER OATE IN SPRING (MQ/OA) THAN INDICATED
TEMP .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 60 .70 .80 .90
32 6/26 6/21 6/18 6/15 6/13 6/10 6/ 7 6/ 4 5/30
28 6/14 6/ 8 6/ 4 6/ 1 5/28 5/25 5/21 5/17 5/11
24 6/ 4 5/28 5/23 5/19 5/15 5/11 5/ 7 5/ 2 4/25
20 5/20 5/13 5/ Â§ 5/ 4 5/ i 4/27 4/23 4/18 4/11
16 5/ 8 5/ 2 4/27 4/23 4/19 4/15 4/11 4/ 7 3/31
0/ 0 PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE OF THRESHOLD TEMP IS LESS THAN INDICATED PROBABILITY
PROBABIL ITY OF EARLIER OATE IN FALL (MO/CA) THAN INDICATED
TEMP 10 .20 30 40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90
32 8/ 4 8/14 8/21 8/27 9/ l 9/ 7 9/12 9/19 9/29
28 9/ 7 9/12 9/16 9/19 9/22 9/25 9/29 10/ 2 10/ 3
24 9/20 9/25 9/29 10/ 2 10/ 5 10/ 8 10/11 10/15 10/20
20 9/29 10/ 5 10/10 10/14 10/18 10/22 10/26 10/30 11/ 6
16 10/ 3 10/10 10/15 10/20 10/24 10/28 11/ 1 11/ 6 11/13
0/ 0 PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE of threshold TEMP IS less than inoicateo probability
PROBABILITY OF LONGER THAN INDICATED FREEZE FREE PERIOD (DAYS)
TEMP .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90
32 114 102 94 86 80 73 66 57 46
28 145 135 128 122 116 111 105 98 88
24 172 162 154 148 142 137 130 123 113
20 195 186 180 175 170 164 159 153 144
16 212 203 197 192 187 182 176 170 162
PRECIPITATION WITH PROBABILITY EQUAL OR LESS THAN
LVL JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC
0.05 0.48 0.49 0.62 0.34 0.33 0.18 0.46 0.89 0.22 0.19 0.79 C.45
0.10 0.63 0.62 0.79 0.70 0.67 0.28 0.39 1.07 0.35 0.46 0.92 0.62
0.20 0.86 0.81 1.04 0.95 0.87 0.43 0.78 1.31 0.58 0.74 1.10 0.89
0.30 1.06 0.93 1.25 1.17 1.04 0.62 0.95 1.51 0.81 0.97 1.25 1.13
0.60 1.25 1.14 1.45 1.37 1.20 0.79 1.11 1.70 1.05 1.19 1.38 1.36
0.50 1.45 1.30 1.66 1.58 1.37 0.98 1.27 1.89 1.32 i.n 1.51 1.61
0.60 1.68 1.49 1.90 1.82 1.35 1.20 1.46 2.09 1.63 1.66 1.66 1.90
0.70 1.93 1.68 2.15 2.08 1.75 1.47 1.66 2.33 2.00 1.93 1.82 2.22
0.80 2.25 1.96 2.47 2.62 2.01 1.82 1.92 2.62 2.51 2.32 2.02 2.54
0.90 2.81 2.38 3.04 3.01 2.45 2.43 2.37 3.06 3.37 2.95 2.32 3.36
0.95 3.24 2.71 3.46 3.46 2.78 2.97 2.71 3.46 4.14 3.4ft 2.59 3.95
MEDIAN PRECI PITATION AMOUNTS (0.50 PROBABILITY LEVEL) IN THIS TABLE OIFFER FROM THE MEANS
SHOWN IN THE ABOVE TABLE 8ECAUSE OF THE METHOD USED IN MAKING THE COMPUTATIONS. THESE VALUES WERE DETERMINED FROM THE INCOMPLETE GAMMA DISTRIBUTION 'WHOSE CURVE HAS BEEN FOUND TO GIVE BEST FITS TO PRECIPITATION CLIMATOLOGICAL SERIES.
YR STATION t JAN 09 0370 FEB WAR APR MAY MAX JUN TEMP JUl AUG SEP OCT NOV OIC ANNUAL
91 32.7 38.3 40.9 90.9 63.4 68.3 80.2 74,9M 71.3 99.8M 42.2 31.3 94.2M
92 33.9M 33.6 37.ON 94,CM 62.0 75.6M 77.5 74,7M 71.8M 64.7 40.6 33.9m 94.9M
93 39.1 36.0 43.3 48.8H 58,** 76.2 79.9 76.7 74.4 61.1 47.6 35.1 56.4M
94 42.9 44.7 40.6 59.0 66.1 76.0 81.4 7e.3 69,2 60.5 49.6 35.6 58.6
99 32.1 31.9 41.1 91.6 62.1 70.0 80.9 78.3 73.8 61.2 49.1 37.9 55.5
96 38.7 33.0 44.2 92.3 66.5 76.8 78.2M 79.3 75.1 62.4 37.9 33.9 96.2M
97 30.7 42.2 41.8 47.2 56.8 69.3 76.0 76.0 69.1 57.1 37.6 37.2 53.4
98 33.9 40.1 39.1 47.5 66,5M 79.1 78.0 81.2 71.6 61.4 46.6 43.6 57.OM
99 40.2 36.7 48,9 99.7 64,3 76.9 79,9 76.7 67.7 56.5 47.9 42.4 57.8
60 39.OH 32.4 45.9 98.4 64.7 76.9 81.6M 80.5 73.1 59.2 47.4 38.1 57.7M
61 38.1 40.3 45.2 90.9 69.2 76.5 79.7 78.5 62,2 59.0 42.7 32.0 95.9
62 32.6 42.1 42.2 98.6 63.4 - 73.2 77.8 78.3 70.6 61.9 47.4 37.6 57,1
63 29.3 40.3 41.5 93.6 65.7 72.8 82.9 75.0 74.2 66.1 47.3 34.4 56,9
64 28.8 30.1 36.1 49.7 64.0 71.9 82.6 74.7 69.2 63.2 42.0 32.4 53.7
69 33.7 36.1 35.3 92.6 61.9 70.3 77.4 74,0 62.1 64.2 46.2 36.8 54,2
66 31.2 32.4 47.4 99.6 66.9 73.8 81.6 * 78.7 72.7 58.5 48.4 31.3 56.5
67 33.0 37.9 48.7 94.8 59.9 69.1 79.6 78,1 71.2 61.8 47.0 30.5 59.9
68 34.1 37.9 44.1 47.1 61.2 75.5 78.8 72.2 67.7 61.3 ;a 3 31.7 54,2
69 37.8 36.4 38.9 37.7 68.2M 68.2 80.4 81.8 69,9 48.9M 42.1 39.5 55.5M
70 31.9 41.9 39.7 46.3 69.3 72.9M 79.9 80.2 66.7 51.9 42.4 34.4 54.4M
71 33.1 34.8 42.2 94.2 60.8 75.6 80.7 80.4M 68.0 98.2 42.3 28.5 54.9M
72 32.9 39.3 49.1 34.2 64,7 79.1 80.8 77,8M 68.0 59. SM 36.4 29.0 55.2M
73 30.2 37.6 42.2M 46.2 62.3 71.5 76,5 77.3 68.2 62.3 46.9 22.3 54.5M
SUM 784.7 894.8 979.4 1206.5' 1460.8 1687.1 1831.1 1779.8 1607.8 1373.0 1012.4 795.4 1280.6
YR STATION! JAN 09 0370 FEB MA APR MAY MIN JUN TEMP JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ANNUAL
91 6.1 9.5 16.7 24.9 33.1 34.7 43.5 42.2M 33.5 27.OM 12.6 7.6 24,3M
52 6.4M 3.7M 8.7M 26.OH 34.1 39.7M 43.7 43.3M 36.5M 26.5 11.9 4.4M 23.7M
53 14.5 5.9 17.2 22.5M 29.7 40.6 49,9 43,5 39.6 28.0 19.5 7.0 25.8M
54 11.6 16.7 17.0 28.7 33.8 37.4 46.9 42.8 38,1M 29.2 19.2 3.4 27.1M
59 2.7 -.9 11.0 19.6 30.3 34.6 42.6 43.4 34.9 24.8 14.7 13.5 22.6
56 14.7 2.9 12.0 25.3 34.7 40.6 41.9M 38.7 36.8 29.1 10.0 4.8 24.3M
97 6.5 19.9 18.1 24.6 31.9 37.4 44.4 43.9 34.1 30.9 14.9 8.5 25.9
58 3.1 19.8 14.4 23.1 32.7M 40.3 42.7 44.5 37.7 27.5 16.0 11.0 25.7M
59 6.1 11.9 15.0 23.3 31.5 42.0 42.7 43.6 34,6 24.7 14.8 9.9 29.0
60 5.6M 3.7 17.3 24.8 31.3 38.1 44.9M 43.9 39,1 28.6 17.3 8.6 25.2M
61 9.0 12.1 19.2 24.5 33.3 40.5 44.1 46,0 33.3 26.2 14.1 9.2 25.3
62 1.9 14.8 10.6 26.8 30.5 37.7 42.3 40.5 35.2 29.6 22.8 13.5 25.5
63 3.5 19.9 17.0 27.0 39.7 37.3 44.6 45.5 40.4 32.8 18.2 7.6 27.1
64 2.2 1.2 8.0 22.8 32.6 38.6 47,6 42.6 37.0 30.1 18.9 10.5 24.3
69 14.0 10.0 13.1 26.6 33.4 40.0 47.0 44.4 36.7 29.7 22.2 12.0 27.4
66 3.4 5.1 16.2 24.3 33.8 38.9 46,4 41.3 35.8 27.0 21.7 7.3 25.1
67 10.3 10.2 23.1 29.9 31.8 38.5 46.2 42.7 36.7 28.3 19.6 8.1 26.8
68 7,9 14.3 19.2 21.1 31.7 38.7 49.5 42.5 34.3 29.3 45.9 8.6 25.4
69 13.3 9.8 11.9 27.4 36.3M 37.6 47.2 *7.1 38.7 25. OM 13.9 12.0 26.7M
70 9.6 14.4 19.2 19.5 32.2 39.8M 45.4 45.5 39.3 23.9 21.3 11.4 26,1M
71 11.1 10.3 14.6 25.6 31.8 40.2 46.0 44.9M 33.2 27.5 16.9 8.1 25.9M
72 7.8 13.6 22.9 26.8 32.2 41.7 49,3 45.1M 38.9 32.3m 14.1 6.0 27.2M
73 5.8 6.8 16.9M 20.6 33.3 38.8 44.9 44,9 37.1 29.0 21.1 10.0 25.8M
SUM 172.3 223.6 351.3 961.7 751.3 893.7 1030.9 1002,8 833.5 647.0 391.6 198.6 588.2
YR STATION! JAN 05 0370 FEB MAR APR MAY AVERAGE JUN TIMPERATURE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ANNUAL
91 19.4 23.9 28.8 37.7 48.3 91.9 61.9 58 6M 52.4 41.4M 27.4 19.5 39.2M
92 20.2M 18.7M 22.9M 40.OM 48.1 57.7M 60.6 59,OM 54.2M 45.6 26.3 19.2M 39,4M
53 26.8 21.0 30.3 35.7M 44,1 58.4 62.9 60.1 55.0 44.6 33.6 21.1 41.IM
54 27.1 30.7 28.8 43.9 50.0 56.7 64.2 60.6 53,7M 44.9 34.4 19.5 42.9M
55 17.4 15.9 26.1 39,6 46.2 92.3 61.6 60.9 54.4 43.0 29.9 25.7 39.1
56 26.7 18.0 28.1 38.8 50.6 98.7 60. IM 97.0 56.0 49.8 24.0 19.4 40.3M
97 18.6 29.1 30.0 35.9 44.2 93.4 60.2 60.0 51.6 44.0 26.3 22.9 39.7
98 18.3 28.0 26.8 39.3 49.6M 57.7 60.4 62.9 54,7 44.5 31.3 27.3 41.4M
59 23.2 24.3 32.0 39.5 47.9 59.5 61,1 60,2 51.2 40.6 31.4 26.0 41.4
60 20.3M 18.1 31.6 41.6 48.0 57.3 63.1M 62.2 56.1 43.9 32.4 23.4 41.5H
61 21.6 26.2 32.2 37.7 49,3 58.5 61.9 62.3 47.8 42.6 28.4 18.6 40.6
62 17.1 28.5 26.4 42.7 47.0 99.5 60.1 59.4 52.9 45.8 35.1 25.6 41.3
63 16.4 28.1 29.3 40.3 90.7 55.1 63 8 60.3 57.3 49.5 32.8 21.0 42.1
64 15.9 19.7 22.1 36.3 48.3 55.3 69.1 58.7 53.1 46.7 30.5 21.5 39.1
69 23.9 23.1 24.2 39.6 47.7 55.2 62.2 59.2 49.4 47.0 34.2 24.4 40.6
66 17.3 18.8 31.8 40.0 50.4 96.4 64,0 60.0 54.3 42.8 39.1 19.3 40.9
67 21.7 23.9 35.9 40.4 45.9 53.8 62.9 60,4 54.0 49.1 33.3 19.3 41.4
68 20.8 25.9 29.7 34.1 46.5 57.1 62.2 57.4 51.0 45.3 27.4 20.2 39.8
69 25.6 23.1 29.4 42.6 S2.3M 52.9 63.8 64.5 54.3 37.OM 28.0 23.8 41.IM
70 20.8 28.0 27.9 32.9 48.8 56.4M 62,7 62.9 51.0 37.9 31.9 22.9 40.3M
71 22.1 22.6 28.4 39.9 46.3 57.9 63.4 62.7M 50.6 42.9 29.6 18.3 40.4M
72 20.2 26.5 36,0 40.5 48,5 58.4 63,1 61.9M 53.5 44.IM 25.3 17.5 61.3M
73 18.0 22.2 29.6M 33.4 48.1 55.2 60.7 61.2 52.7 45.7 34.0 21.2 *0.2M
SUM 479.0 539.9 663.9 884.4 1106.8 1290.9 1431.6 1392.0 1221.2 1010.7 702.6 497.6 935.3
MONTHLY NORMALS OF TEMPERATURE* PRECIPITATION AND HEATING ANO COOLING 1 DECREE 1 BAYS (19*1-701
JAN feb mar APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP QCT NGV DEC ANN
TEMPERATURE 20.1 23.0 28.1 38.6 47.9 55,4 61.8 60.1 33.3 43.9 30.8 22.3 40.3
PRECIPITATION 1.74 1.55 1.93 1.84 1.37 1.31 1.42 1.89 1.50 1.37 1.53 1.55 19.23
HEATING DEGREE DAY 1392 1176 1144 792 330 291 113 161 343 694 1026 1324 8948
COOLING DEGREE DAY 0 0 0 0 9 0 13 9 0 0 0 0 22
YR JAN FEB MAP APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ANNUAL
51 2.61 1.87 1.34 2.33 1.65 1.14 1.11 2.16 1.28 2.00 1.22 4,75 23.46
52 2.34 1.47 2.18 .70 1.33 .62 1.73 2.78 .90 ,00 1.62 .83 16.30
53 1.11 .98 2.09 1.53 1.80 .72 1.74 1.47 .14 1.13 1.40 1.25 15.36
5* 1.08 .31 1.18 1.15 1.32 .29 1.17 1.80 2.45 2.0t 1.40 .35 15.04
55 .63 1.74 1.24 .38 1.27 .91 1.63 2.07 .25 1,07 2.60 .59 14, eU
56 1.90 1.66 .70 1.35 .73 .55 1.48 .93 .21 .71 1.59 1.55 13.36
57 4.40 .48 1.64 2.40 3.32 1.85 1.55 1.90 .46 1.05 1.52 .94 21.33
58 1.07 1.76 1.24 1.55 .44 1.05 .14 .87 1.04 .80 1.25 .95 12.22
59 1.68 1.44 2.05 2.41 2.56 1.72 1.95 2.34 3.20 1.77 .63 .43 22.70
60 1.43 2.82 4.17 .62 1.49 .57 1.52 1.58 1.19 1.47 1.72 1.46 20.04
61 25 1.70 1.92 2.52 2.29 .08 1.11 1.57 5.80 3.44 1.90 1.38 24.46
62 2.23 3.04 1.08 2.93 2.00 .33 .63 1.03 .86 1.14 .33 .72 16.82
63 1.60 1.27 1.94 .71 66 2.29 .83 3.25 .98 1.93 .89 1.01 17.38
64 1.36 1.34 2.53 1.65 1.33 2.25 1.41 4.38 1.05 .47 2.93 3.82 24.52
65 1.77 1.05 5.34 1.16 1.14 1.55 1.90 1.76 3.64 .21 2.91 1.71 24,14
66 .730 .75 .52 2.11 1.02 1.05 2.30 1.75 .74 2.13 1.48 3.99 18,550
67 .95 2.00 1.27 1.21 1.52 1.55 2.07' 1.58 1.41 1.31 1.52 2.16 18.55
68 .97 1.98 1.02 3.45 1.52 .30 1.81 3.34 1.06 1.24 1.82 1.35 19.86
69 3.85 .79 1.16 .76 1.40 3.77 1.49 1.53 1.78 4,53 1.03 2,05 24,14
70 1.35 .82 1.93 3.42 .44 1.47 1.60 2.53 3.34 2.40 1.63 1.54 22*67
71 1.26 2.13 2.35 1.30 1.15 .23 .e7 2.03 1.83 2.19 1.66 3.25 20.24
72 1.37 .72 1.54 2.20 1.02 1.26 .31 1.65 2.82 2.82 1.23 2.86 19,80
73 1.22 .870 1.64 2.70 3.00 2.30 2.04 1.11 1.35 .87 1.58 2.88 21.740
SUH 37.36 32.99 42.07 40.54 34.44 27.85 32.41 45.91 38.00 36.77 36.32 42.62 447.28
STATION! 05 0370
SEASON JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN SEASON
50-51 3.9 23,0 20.* 15.0 1.9 .0
51-52 .0 .0 .0 10.5 17.2 58.3 27.8 18,9 23.3 6.7 0 .0 167,7
52-53 .0 .0 .0 0 18.9 11.8 22.9 10.5 22.5 10.9 3.0 .0 100.4
53-54 .0 .0 0 2.0 18.1 22.0 13.5 2.0 6.C .0 1.5 .0 65.1
54-55 .0 .0 .0 .0 14.0 6.5 14.0 36,0 22.0 10.0 0 .0 102.5
55-56 .0 .0 .0 7.0E 31.0 8.9 30.0 30.5 8.5 6.0 .0 .0 121.9E
56-57 .0 .0 .0 4.0 26.3 26.0 71.5 5.0 13.5 25.0 3.0 .0 181.5
57-58 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.5 20.0 21.0 31.0 19,0 11.0 .0 .0 123.5
58-59 .0 .0 .0 T 16.0 19.0 33.5 20.0 13.OS 3.5c 0 .0 105.OE
59-60 .0 .0 10.0 23.0 13.0 10.2 21.2 35.5 24.0 1.0 4.0 .0 141.9
60-61 0 .0 .0 8.0 13.0 21.0 5.0 26.0 23.0 21.0 14.0 .0 131.0
61-62 .0 .0 27.0 16.0 26.5 29.5 25.0 39.0 16.0 19.5 2.5 T 201.0
62-63 .0 .0 .0 T 11.0 10.5 22.5 16.0 27.0 4.0 .0 .0 91.0
63-64 .0 .0 .0 5.0 12.5 14.5 21.5 22.5 38.0 10.5 5.0 1.0 130.5
64-65 .0 .0 .0 5.0 37.5 47.0 32.0 19.5 76,5 10.0 2.0 .0 229.5
65-66 .0 .0 7.0 T 22.5 15.7 11.3 15.3 7,3 23.0 5.5 .0 107.8
66-67 .0 .0 .0 11.5 16.5 30.1 14.8 31.2 9.0 11.0 2.3 .0 126.4
67-68 .0 .0 .0 6.0 19.5 34.2 19.1 26.1 14.3 31.1 6.3 .0 156. e
68-69 .0 .0 T 5.6 24.9 18. C 43.0 10.4 14.0 6.5 .0 2.3 124.7
69-70 .0 .0 .0 35.6 9.3 23.7 18.2 11.8 26.1 36.0 2.5 ,0 165,7
70-71 .0 .0 8.1 20.1 16.3 22.7 10.2 28.6 30.9 17.0 3.4 .0 137.3
71-72 .0 .0 6.8 10.4 23.7 38.1 12.2 14.0 20.3 10.0 1 .0 .0 136.5
72-73 .0 .0 .0 8.7 14.5 36.3 19.4 12.0 26*7 24.6 4.2 3.5 149.9
73-74 .0 .0 .0 8.5 20.2 32.0
SUM .0 .0 58.9 186.9 444.6 556.0 549,5 485.0 510.5 313.2 69.1 6.8 3019.6
E AMOUNT IS WHOLLY OR PARTLY ESTlMATfO.
T TRACE/ AN amount TOO SHALL TO measure.
M ONE OR MORE DAYS OF RECOPO MISSINGJ IF AVERAGE VALUE IS ENTERED* LESS THAN 10 0AYS RECCRO IS HISSINS.
o water equivalent OF SNOWFALL WWQLLV OR PARTLY ESTIMATED.
Sale Price: IS cents per copy. Checks and money orders should be made payable to Department of Coonerce, NOAA. Remittances and correspondence regarding this publication should be sent to: National Climaeic Center, Federal Building, Asheville, N. C. 28801.
SUN PATH OIAORAMS .CONTINUED)
The earth's axis is inclined 2327' to its orbit around the sun and rotates 15 degrees hourly, hus. from all points on the earth, the sun appears to move across the skyvault on various para *1 circular paths with maximum declinations oI 2327 The declination of the sun's path ranges in a cycle InMwimmi the extremis of the summer solstice amt winter solstice. Thus, the sun follows the same path on two corresponding dates each year. Due to irregularities between he calendar year and the astronomical data, here a unified calibration is adapted. The differ nces as they do not exceed 41\ are negligible for architectural purposes.
)ECLINATIQN of the, sun
Date Declination Corresp. Date Decimation Unified Calibr
jne 21 > ?3"?7' ,23<>27
lay 21 20"(n) July 21 t20"31' 2020'
pr. 21 m48- Aug. 21 * 12U12' M200'
Mar. 21 oitr Sop 21 0*t 7' * 028'
Feb. 21 -1037 Oct. 21 1038' -1038'
in. 21 Nov. 21 -1953- -1955-
ec. 21 23027 -2327
The elliptical curves in the diagrams represent the horizontal protections of the sun s path. T are given on the 21st day of each month. Roman numerals designate the months. A cross grit curves graduate the hours indicated in arahtc numerals. Eight sun path diagrams are shown at intervals from 24 N to 52 N latitude.
Find the sun's position in Columbus, Ohio on February 21st 2 P M.:
STEP 1. Locate Columbus on the map. The latitude is 40 N.
STEP 2. In the 40 sun path diagram select the February path (marked with II), and locate 2 hour line. Where the two lines cross is the position of the sun.
STEP 3. Read the altitude on the concentric circles (32) and the bearing angle along the o circle (3530'W).
Victor Olgyay, AIA. Associate Professor, School of Architecture. Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
In this appendix are tabulated monthly average solar radiation, temperature, heating degree-days, and solar position data useful in solar design analysis. Note that much more detailed information on solar radiation is available in Appendix E. The quantities tabulated are the following:
HS = normal daily value of total hemispheric radiation incident on a
horizontal surface (Btu/ft day).
VS normal daily value of total solar radiation incident on a vertical,
south-facing surface (Btu/ft day).
TA = (T . + T 1/2 where T and T are monthly (or annual)
min max min max
normals of daily minimum and maximum ambient temperatures (F).
Dxx = monthly (or annual) normals of heating degree-days below the base temperature xx (F days).
KT = average monthly (or annual) clearness ratio, i.e., the ratio of total hemispheric radiation incident on a horizontal surface to the extraterrestrial radiation incident on a horizontal surface.
LD = LAT-DEC, latitude minus mid-month solar declination (degrees).
For the US cities tabulated here, values of HS, TA, and D65 were taken from
Ref. 1. "Normals" are mean values for the period 1941 to 1970. Degree-days
below base temperatures other than 65 F wer calculated by the method 2 3
described by Thom based on the values of TA and D65 from Ref. 1.
For the Canadian cities, values of HS and TA were taken from Refs. 4 and 5.
Degree days below various base temperatures were calculated by the method 2 3
described by Thom based on the values of TA from Ref. 5 and the degree days below 18 C from Refs. 6-11.
For all cities, monthly values of VS were computed using the correlation (see Table E-l, Appendix E)
= 0.6866 0.6623Y + 1.3269Y2 + Kt (- 0.4458 + 0.3090Y + 4.7776Y2)
where Y = (LAT-DEO/100, LAT is the latitude (degrees), DEC is the mid-month
solar declination (degrees), and Ky is the average monthly clearness ratio.
The average monthly clearness ratio, Ky, is the ratio of the normal
monthly value of total hemispheric radiation incident on a horizontal surface,
Q^, to the monthly extraterrestrial radiation incident on a horizontal
surface, Q. : he
KT = Oh/Qhe (0-2)
The monthly horizontal surface radiation is determined from the normal daily value:
Qh = N HS , (D-3)
where N is the number of days in the month. The monthly extraterrestrial horizontal surface radiation is determined from the daily value at mid-month:
Qhe = NIY , (D-4)
where I is the extraterrestrial solar flux at normal incidence at mid-month
(Btu/h ft ), and Y is the ratio of the daily total normal incidence radiation to horizontal surface radiation (the integral of the sine of the solar altitude from sunrise to sunset):
Y = (24/it) [cosL cosD sin Hs + H$ sinL sinD] , (D-5)
OENVER. COLORADO ELEV 5331 LAT 3S 1.7 HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT ELEV 180 LAT 41 .9
HS VS TA D50 D55 D60 D65 D70 KT LD HS VS TA 050 D55 D60 D65 070 KT LD
JAN 840 1465 30 623 778 933 1088 1243 .64 61 JAN 477 694 25 781 936 1091 1246 1401 .40 63
FEB 1127 1577 33 482 622 762 902 1042 .64 53 FEB 715 891 27 650 790 930 1070 1210 .43 56
MAR 1530 1503 37 406 559 713 868 1023 .64 42 MAR 978 900 36 447 601 756 911 1066 .42 44
APR 1879 1227 48 130 240 379 525 675 .62 30 APR 1315 888 48 109 226 370 519 669 .44 32
MAY 2135 1061 57 18 63 143 253 406 .62 21 MAY 1568 859 58 5 30 101 226 364 .45 23
JUN 2351 1037 66 1 5 23 80 158 .65 16 JUN 1686 853 68 0 1 6 24 107 .46 19
JUl 2273 1053 73 0 0 0 0 50 .54 18 JUL 1649 861 73 0 0 0 0 36 .47 21
aug 2044 1188 72 0 0 0 0 69 .64 26 AUG 1422 880 70 0 0 2 12 67 .45 28
SEP 1727 1491 63 3 14 51 120 232 .66 38 SEP 1154 967 63 1 6 34 106 224 .46 40
OCT 1300 1657 52 63 143 261 408 559 .67 50 OCT 853 991 53 37 114 237 384 540 .46 52
NOV 883 1441 39 324 469 618 768 918 .62 59 NOV 497 679 41 265 412 561 711 861 .38 61
DEC 732 1323 33 540 695 849 1004 1159 .61 63 DEC 385 562 28 676 831 986 1141 1296 .36 65
YR 1570 1334 50 2592 3588 4733 6016 7535 .64 YR 1060 835 49 2971 3948 5075 6350 7841 .44
EAGLE, COLORADO ELEV 6512 LAT 39.6 WILMINGTON, DELAWARE ELEV 79 LAT 39.7
MS VS TA D50 D55 06 0 065 D70 KT LD HS VS TA D50 D55 D60 D65 D70 KT LD
JAN 754 1234 18 992 1147 1302 1457 1612 .57 61 JAN 571 819 32 558 713 868 1023 1178 .43 61
FEB 1078 1470 23 748 888 1028 1168 1308 .61 53 FEB 827 1006 34 460 599 739 879 1019 .47 53
MAR 1502 1461 31 586 741 896 1051 1206 .63 42 MAR 1149 1032 42 268 417 571 725 880 .48 42
APR 1933 1261 42 245 393 543 693 843 .64 30 APR 1480 952 52 47 123 240 381 531 .49 30
MAY 2255 1103 51 38 129 271 425 580 .65 21 MAY 1710 887 62 2 11 47 128 246 .49 21
JUN 2509 1075 59 1 13 72 190 333 .69 16 JUN 1883 895 71 0 0 0 0 59 .52 16
JUL 2384 1085 66 0 0 5 43 139 .67 18 JUL 1823 898 76 0 0 0 0 18 .51 18
AUG 2084 1207 64 0 1 14 79 200 .65 26 AUG 1615 947 74 0 0 0 0 29 .51 26
SEP 1767 1530 56 6 46 142 285 432 .68 38 SEP 1318 1064 68 0 2 9 32 113 .51 38
OCT 1307 1663 45 - 168 317 471 626 781 .67 50 OCT 984 1113 57 11 50 129 254 399 .50 50
NOV 869 1400 31 573 723 873 1023 1173 .61 59 NOV 645 901 46 156 285 430 579 729 .45 59
DEC 691 1203 20 921 1076 1231 1386 1541 .58 63 DEC 489 720 35 475 629 784 939 1094 .41 63
YR 1597 1306 42 4278 5474 6849 8426 10147 .65 YR 1210 935 54 1978 2829 3818 4940 6295 .49
GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO ELEV 4839 LAT 39.1 WASHINGTON, DC ELEV 289 LAT 38.9
HS VS TA D50 D55 D60 065 D70 KT LD HS VS TA D50 D55 D60 D65 D70 KT LD
JAN 791 1296 27 726 880 1035 1190 1345 .59 60 JAN 572 793 32 555 710 865 1020 1175 .42 60
FEB 1119 1520 34 460 599 739 879 1019 .62 53 FEB 815 956 34 454 594 734 874 1014 .45 53
MAR 1553 1498 41 283 430 583 738 893 .64 42 MAR 1125 979 42 262 411 564 719 874 .46 41
APR 1986 1276 52 63 142 260 404 550 .65 29 APR 1459 919 53 38 109 219 357 507 .48 29
MAY 2380 1132 62 4 16 58 133 255 .69 20 MAY 1718 877 63 2 10 45 131 240 .50 20
JUN 2598 1081 71 0 1 5 20 69 .71 16 JUN 1901 890 71 0 1 3 5 63 .52 16
JUL 2465 1094 79 0 0 0 0 10 .70 18 JUL 1817 883 75 0 0 0 0 20 .51 18
AUG 2182 1240 75 0 0 0 0 26 .68 26 AUG 1617 929 74 0 0 0 0 34 .51 25
SEP 1834 1573 67 1 3 15 60 133 .70 37 SEP 1340 1058 67 0 2 12 43 131 .51 37
OCT 1345 1698 55 30 91 186 324 470 .68 49 OCT 1004 1111 56 17 68 156 291 438 .50 49
NOV 918 1486 40 312 457 606 756 906 .63 58 NOV 651 883 45 179 313 460 609 759 .45 58
DEC 731 1280 30 636 791 946 1101 1256 .60 62 DEC 481 678 34 497 651 806 961 1116 .39 62
YR 1661 1346 53 2514 3412 4434 5605 6931 .67 YR 1210 912 54 2004 2869 3864 5010 6372 .49
PUEBLO, COLORADO ELEV 4721 LAT 38.3 APALACHICOLA, FLORIDA ELEV 20 LAT 29.7
HS VS TA D50 055 D60 D65 07 0 KT LD HS VS TA D50 D55 06 0 06 5 070 KT LD
JAN R94 1504 30 617 772 927 1082 1237 .64 60 JAN 853 967 54 53 125 225 368 508 .46 51
FEB 1172 1572 35 429 569 708 848 988 .64 52 FEB 1126 1061 56 30 84 161 290 401 .50 43
MAR 1564 1467 40 315 466 620 775 930 .64 41 MAR 1*74 1016 61 10 34 94 175 302 .53 32
APR 1956 1223 52 56 136 257 405 549 .64 29 APR 1879 928 68 1 5 18 30 128 .58 20
MAY 2162 1034 61 3 17 67 148 283 .62 19 MAY 2091 870 75 0 0 0 0 41 .60 11
JUN 2434 1025 71 0 1 4 28 70 .67 15 JUN 1998 844 80 0 0 0 0 12 .56 6
JUL 2312 1030 76 0 0 0 0 15 .65 17 JUL 1814 801 81 0 0 0 0 8 .52 8
AUG 2102 1167 75 0 0 0 0 27 .66 25 AUG 1688 804 82 0 0 0 0 8 .51 16
SEP 1779 1468 66 1 3 16 55 146 .67 36 SEP 1535 938 79 0 0 0 0 16 .53 28
OCT 1361 1669 55 27 91 191 335 481 .67 48 OCT 1371 1204 71 1 3 10 22 92 .57 40
NOV 954 1518 41 282 427 576 726 876 .64 53 NOV 1040 1188 61 9 30 85 158 282 .54 49
DEC 782 1364 33 527 682 837 992 1147 .62 62 DEC 818 991 55 38 101 191 318 462 .47 53
YR 1625 1335 53 2258 3163 4203 5394 6751 .65 YR 1475 967 69 142 382 783 1361 2261 .54