RESOLUTION #3, SERIES OF 2007 – Contract Loris & Associates Burlingame Trail Design 3

ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 2007 – Lease Purchase Agreement Isis Theatre. 3

RESOLUTION #5, SERIES OF 2006 – Chicago Climate Exchange Phase II. 7

ORDINANCE #41, SERIES OF 2006 – 625 E. Main (Stage III) Subdivision. 8

ORDINANCE #49, SERIES OF 2006 – 307 S. Spring (Wienerstube) Redevelopment 16

Mayor Klanderud called the meeting to order at 5:06 p.m. with Councilmembers Tygre, Torre and Johnson present.

CITIZEN COMMENTS

1. Toni Kronberg noted February 1^st the city is holding the first public meeting on the proposed outdoor swimming pools at the ARC. The meetings are scheduled for noon and 5 p.m. at the Aspen High School cafeteria. The City is also holding meetings on the Entrance to Aspen January 31 and February 3. Ms. Kronberg said one of her solutions to traffic at the entrance to Aspen is a four-mountain gondola. Ms. Kronberg requested Resolution #3 be pulled from the consent calendar.

COUNCIL COMMENTS

1. Mayor Klanderud thanked Challenge Aspen and the Paralympics organization for bringing the Paralympic races to Aspen. Mayor Klanderud said the racers were phenomenal. Mayor Klanderud also thanked the Aspen Gay and Lesbian Community Fund for bringing 4,000 people to Aspen to attend their events. Mayor Klanderud commended Julia Hansen and Theatre Masters for the play writer’s panel at the Aspen Institute first Arts and Ideas Festival.

2. Councilman Torre said let the X games begin.

3. Mayor Klanderud commended the streets department who has done fantastic work on the streets with all the snow this winter.

4. Randy Ready, assistant city manager, announced the Voices on the Entrance to Aspen meetings will be January 31 at 5:30 and February 3 at 10 a.m. at the Aspen High School cafeteria. The public is encouraged to come; there is a website on which to sign up.

5. Councilman Torre said he attended the RFTA board meeting January 11^th and one issue discussed is the city’s direction to RFTA that REMP and EOTC are not just there for transportation issues. Councilman Torre said the RFTA board also discussed the possibility of housing loans.

CONSENT CALENDAR

Councilman Torre moved to approve the minutes of December 12, 2006; January 8, 9, 2007; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, Councilwoman Tygre abstained. Motion carried.

Councilman Torre moved to approve Resolution #4, Series of 2007, Purchase Vehicle Road Graders; seconded by Councilwoman Tygre. All in favor, motion carried.

RESOLUTION #3, SERIES OF 2007 – Contract Loris & Associates Burlingame Trail Design

Bentley Henderson, assistant city manager, told Council staff is putting together design and engineering services for a two component trail to compliment the Burlingame trail. The Deer Hill section goes from Burlingame to the west to the Airport Business Center. The Bar/X section will go from Burlingame east into town and will tie into the Highway 82 trail system. Henderson noted the east section has a time constraint to be complete by June 30^th and there will be a penalty to the contractor if not completed on time. Stephen Ellsperman, parks department, said staff hopes to do a comprehensive design package to help with the economies of scale.

Councilman Torre asked if interested parties have signed off on the Deer Hill portion not to conflict with migration and wildlife. Ellsperman noted the Burlingame plan has always included a trail in this area. The trail will follow an existing social trail and the existing utility and overhead lines. Councilman Torre asked about the funding for these trail connections. Ellsperman said the costs will be split between housing, parks and electric departments. Henderson said the percentage to each department follows that done for utility installation at Burlingame. Councilman Torre asked if the easements for the eastern portion of the trail are in place and the trail will be usable. Ellsperman said the city will have guaranteed access through that trail. Toni Kronberg asked why there are time constraints. John Worcester, city attorney, said this will be discussed during the executive session. Ms. Kronberg asked if the trail is built to withstand the weight of horses. Ellsperman said this will be built to adopted city trail standards and horses would not be precluded.

Councilman Torre moved to approve Resolution #3, Series of 2007; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 2007 – Lease Purchase Agreement Isis Theatre

Councilman Torre moved to read Ordinance #1, Series of 2007; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

ORDINANCE NO. 1

(SERIES OF 2007)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTATION RELATING TO SUCH LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT; ACKNOWLEDGING A MORTGAGE AND INDENTURE OF TRUST, CERTAIN CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION ISSUED PURSUANT THERETO, A CERTIFICATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND RELATED DOCUMENTATION; DELEGATING THE AUTHORITY TO THE CITY’S FINANCE DIRECTOR TO DETERMINE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS; AND PROVIDING OTHER DETAILS IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND RELATED DOCUMENTATION was read by the city clerk

Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #1, Series of 2007, on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Tygre. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Torre, yes; Tygre, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried

Mayor Klanderud noted second reading of this ordinance will be next Monday, January 29 at 4:30 at a special meeting along with a meeting of the Public Facilities Authority to approve issuing certificates of participation for this lease/purchase.

ASPEN COUNTRY INN RENT REDUCTION

Bentley Henderson, assistant city manager, reminded Council during the recent budget public hearing, Council indicated they wanted a resolution to insure the rent subsidy for senior residents at Aspen Country Inn will be in place. Council talked about an endowment to insure that subsidy. Henderson told Council staff looked at an endowment or making an annual contribution and decided this would only be a band aid to the problem. Staff looked at paying off the loans and concluded paying off the debt through an interfund loan would give the most flexibility to Aspen Country Inn staff to manage the rents and to manage the capital projects. Henderson recommended an interfund loan to pay the outstanding debt plus penalties. Henderson noted the rents have been set for 2006-2007 and if Council determines it is appropriate to pay off this loan, staff will watch the market to see if certain factors take effect and when there may be savings.

Paul Menter, finance director, noted this proposal is more than Council directed. Staff calculated the amount of subsidy necessary to keep ACI whole. Staff discovered that this is a tax credit financed project and is a separate corporation managed by the housing authority. At the end of the tax credit term, this will become a city-owned project. Menter said staff’s concern is that the property have sufficient funds in order to maintain itself with capital funds until the city takes it over. Councilman Johnson asked from which fund the loan would come. Menter said the housing fund. Menter noted the current situation does not permit Aspen Country Inn to put any money into a fund for major capital maintenance. Menter said reducing the mortgage payments would allow ACI to do that and would protect an asset that the city will one day own. Menter said he feels option 4 is best as it does not involve gifting of funds to ACI.

Councilman Torre moved to approve the Aspen Country Inn rent reduction through option 4 as outlined in the memorandum; seconded by Councilman Johnson.

Councilman Johnson noted in the past, interfund loans have been made at or above market rate. Councilman Johnson asked if it is a policy change to recommend this loan at below rate. Menter said the policy issue of providing additional resources to Aspen Country Inn through reduced mortgage payments is in the city’s interest and is a higher need than providing above market rates. Mayor Klanderud noted this is a housing loan to housing to stabilize a housing asset. Mayor Klanderud asked if this has been reviewed by the housing board. Henderson told Council they have not reviewed this particular option but did review the idea of rent subsidies. Mayor Klanderud said with the proposal of interfund loan at market rate, the housing board should review this.

Councilman Torre withdrew his motion.

Councilman Johnson moved to continue this until reviewed by the Housing board; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried.

PEDESTRIAN PLAN FOR PARK AVENUE

Trish Aragon, city engineer, said the overall goal for pedestrian access in this neighborhood is to bring pedestrians off Hopkins along Park to King or Park Circle. There are challenges building sidewalks along Park avenue because the street was constructed on the east side of the right-of-way. Ms. Aragon noted the houses at 308-310 Park avenue were constructed very close to the right-of-way line on the east side. Ms. Aragon told Council another challenge is that the west side of Park avenue slopes down and sidewalk on that side of the street is more expensive. Ms. Aragon noted the plat requirement for 308-310 is that a sidewalk shall be constructed along Park avenue in front of these two properties. Ms. Aragon said if a sidewalk is constructed in front of these two properties, a portion of the sidewalk would be on private property, which has legal issues associated with it. Ms. Aragon said option #1 is to construct the sidewalk on the east side, which would require constructing it on private property; option #2 is to construct the sidewalk on the west side of Park avenue; option #3 is to construct the sidewalk on the east side and shift Park avenue to the west so that the sidewalk could be constructed on the east; option #4 would be to one-way Midland and Park in order to accommodate the sidewalk without impacting the travel lane.

John Worcester, city attorney, noted one reason this issue is in front of Council is that every time a development is proposed in this neighborhood, the right-of-way problem comes up. Worcester said this agenda item is more than just a solution for 308-310 Park avenue. Ms. Aragon gave Council a map of the area showing existing sidewalks. Mayor Klanderud asked if this neighborhood was determined to be rural and does not have sidewalk requirement unless the entire neighborhood wants one. Ms. Aragon said shown in pink on the map are the areas for prioritized sidewalks, which came out of the neighborhood meetings. This is not a deferred zone. Mayor Klanderud asked if staff researched the minutes of approval of 308-310 Park avenue to know why this sidewalk was required.

Councilman Johnson noted the map indicates the west side of Park avenue to be the prioritized zone; however, there are no sidewalks on the west side and on the east side walk there are two or three sidewalk links. Henderson told Council the existing agreement requires the sidewalk be installed before a certificate of occupancy for 308-310 is issued. The applicant wants to get a c/o and questioned the requirement to install a sidewalk on the east side.

Jody Edwards, representing Tim Mooney, suggested installing the sidewalk would cost about $8,000 and Mooney is offering $12,000 cash-in-lieu for the city to study the area, whether to one-way the streets, relocate the sidewalks, and get input from the entire neighborhood and come up with a solution. John Kelley, resident 111 Park avenue, and representing the owners of the duplex across the street from 308-310 Park avenue, said there has been no consistency of where sidewalks were put. Kelley pointed on the newly developed property on the west side of Park at Dale has no sidewalk. Kelley supported option 1 or 4 and vehemently opposed options 2 or 3. Kelley pointed out his clients property is elegantly landscaped. Tom Lane said if Council is going to allow Mooney to get a c/o and have the area studied, that Mooney should be agreeable to putting the sidewalk on the east side if that is the finding.

Mooney pointed out the city Hunter Creek bus sroute runs down Park avenue every 20 minutes and it does make pedestrian traffic hazardous. Mooney noted the street narrows to 18 to 21 feet in front of his property, which is below city requirements for a street. Mooney stated he is in favor of a sidewalk on Park avenue; however, the edge of the pavement on the east side of the street touches Mooney’s property. Mooney stated sidewalks normally go in the city right-of-way not on private property. Mooney noted the landscaping of the property on the west side of the street is on city property. Mooney said he needs to get certificate of occupancies in order to move into his cabin and to sell the house to the north.

Councilman Johnson said he would like to support the applicant and would also like a study of the entire neighborhood. Worcester agreed if a study is not done, this issue will continue to come up. Worcester said if the city accepts Mooney’s offer to pay towards a study and the study recommends a sidewalk in front of his property, the city will be liable to pay for that sidewalk. Ms. Aragon reminded Council any sidewalk on the west side would be 10 times more costly. Councilman Johnson asked how much a study to cover all the issues would cost. Henderson said if Council is interested in a study, staff will outline a scope of work, and would also include that the original requirement for sidewalks for this property remain, with the latitude to enable Mooney to receive his c/o. Mooney stated he does not want the property to the north encumbered with a sidewalk requirement. Mooney said his offer of $12,000 is a contribution to solving the problem for the entire area. Kelly agreed a general traffic plan should be completed.

Mayor Klanderud said she is reluctant to relieve Mooney from the sidewalk obligation. Mayor Klanderud agreed a study should be done to look at the right-of-way, the encroachments either by the city or by private property owners, whether the streets should be made one-way. Mayor Klanderud said the result of this study may require something of Mooney and he is asking to be resolved of all further commitments. Chris Bendon, community development department said the c/o issue is a matter of timing and as long as the sidewalk obligation is taken care of by $12,000 cash-in-lieu so that the city can use that money to build a sidewalk, the c/o can be issued.

Councilman Johnson said he wants a study of this area completed with no other actions. Councilwoman Tygre agreed a blanket absolution is not the right answer. Councilwoman Tygre said she does not want to see the $12,000 used as cash-in-lieu, which may not be the solution for the neighborhood. Councilwoman Tygre said this issue has been coming up for years. Council does not know what the solution may be and Councilwoman Tygre stated she would like to wait until then to allow Mooney out of his obligations or accepting a cash-in-lieu payment. Councilman Torre agreed with not releasing Mooney completely from this obligation until the solution is determined. Bendon said any payment from Mooney should allow flexibility to put money toward the neighborhood solution; the location of the sidewalk may be made in the future.

Councilman Torre moved to go forward with the comprehensive pedestrian plan for Park avenue and to allow Tim Mooney to bond for $12,000 through community development department’s discretion on wording that bond for usage in the future, allow community development department to issue both COs if all other requirements are met; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

RESOLUTION #5, SERIES OF 2006 – Chicago Climate Exchange Phase II

Dan Richardson, canary initiative, asked Council whether they want to join phase II. Richardson noted when the city joined the Chicago climate exchange last year; it was near the end of phase I, which went from 2003 to 2006. Richardson included in the packet a letter written by the NRDC urging cities not to join the Chicago climate exchange and a set of principles drafted by municipalities. Richardson pointed out the Chicago climate exchange has waived membership fees for existing members for phase II and recommended the city join phase II.

Mayor Klanderud noted this states “below the average baseline of 2001”. Richardson said for phase II that averages out to1/2 percent/year. Mayor Klanderud said the city does not have the baseline for 1998 to 2001. Richardson said staff did a lot of work and put that data together. Richardson reminded Council over the last year, the city reduced their emissions 10.5%. Richardson said through the Chicago Climate Exchange, the city has only verified through 2005 so the savings are yet to come and they will be credits. Councilman Johnson asked the difference between phases I and phase II. Richardson said phase I was a trial run, to set parameters. Phase II is a different formula. Richardson recommended the city stay involved in the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Councilman Torre moved to approve Resolution #5, Series of 2007; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Tygre. Motion carried.

ORDINANCE #41, SERIES OF 2006 – 625 E. Main (Stage III) Subdivision

Mayor Klanderud noted Councilwoman Tygre is excused because she voted on this application at P&Z; Councilman DeVilbiss is absent due to illness. Any ordinance requires 3 affirmative votes to be passed.

Jessica Garrow, community development department, reminded Council this proposal is for a mixed use building in the C-1 zone. The building has 13 sub grade parking spaces and 3 alley parking spaces. The first floor has 2 commercial spaces; the second floor has 2 office spaces, 4 affordable housing units and 1 free market unit; the third floor has 4 free market units and 4 roof top decks. Ms. Garrow told Council the project received growth management allotments and commercial design standards review from P&Z. P&Z recommended Council approve subdivision review, which is required for separate ownership of the units in this building.

Ms. Garrow told Council this proposal meets the requirements for subdivision; all infrastructure is in place. Ms. Garrow pointed out this meets the managing growth section of the AACP by providing a mixed use development in the infill area and by promoting economic diversity in one building. This proposal also meets the transportation section by providing sidewalk improvements along Main street, and it is served by transit. The proposal meets the housing section of the AACP by providing 4 on site affordable housing units facing Main street. The proposal meets the economic sustainability section of the AACP by including commercial and office space.

Ms. Garrow reminded Council there were 4 concerns raised by Council at the last public hearing. The first concern was the proposed height of the building and the perceived mass and bulkiness. The applicants have made changes to address these issues. The height has been dropped by 2’ to an overall height of 40’. Jeff Lester, architect, stated the highest point of the building is 40’; the leading edge to the street front is 37’. Ms. Garrow pointed out the third floor is 37’ and the roof decks takes this to 40’ with 3’ of glass railing. Ms. Garrow told Council the first and third floors have been each reduced by 1’ and there was no change in the height of the affordable housing floor.

Another design change was to carve away portions of the third floor on the east and west sides of the building and the curved portion is setback 14’. The roof decks have been moved to the center 1/3 of the roof to centralize the mass on the fourth floor. Ms. Garrow said staff feels the changes have improved the design and have reduced the perceived height and mass of the building.

Another concern raised at the last meeting was about the roof decks. These decks have been centralized and there are conditions placed on the roof decks to try and reduce the impacts on the neighbors. The planter boxes can be no deeper than 1.5’ to prevent growing large plants in the boxes. The plantings cannot exceed 4’ to insure that the height will not exceed 42’, which is what is allowed in the zone district. There is a prohibition against permanent shade structures, including umbrellas. The building code requires handicap accessibility to the roof, which is why there is an elevator., which counts as mechanical equipment and could go as high as 47’. The applicants have agreed to make the mechanical equipment as low as possible.

Ms. Garrow noted the applicants propose a green roof on the 1/3 facing Main street and 1/3 facing the alley. Staff feels these roofs will minimize the negative impacts on the storm water system by providing an impervious surface and will provide some energy savings to the buildings. The green roofs also provide a natural and more pleasing view from neighboring properties and from Aspen Mountain. Ms. Garrow pointed out a condition that these roofs are made of succulents native to the west and low growing.

Council also indicated concern about the parking assignments amongst the users of the building. The applicants have decided not to dictate parking to any specific users of the building. The land use code requires 6 parking spaces; the applicants have provided a total of 16 spaces. Staff supports the parking proposal.

Ms. Garrow said the affordable housing mitigation is a growth management review, dealt with by P&Z and based on a formula in the code, not based on the number of employees that may or may not be employed at a particular business. Ms. Garrow said the applicant proposes more affordable housing than is required by the code. Ms. Garrow said the formula requires the number of employees generated by a commercial space on the first and second floors. The C-1 zone recognizes 4.1 employees generated for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable space and on the second floor for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable 3.7 employees are generated. In a redevelopment, one takes the existing square footage, calculates how many employees are generated based on the formula in the code, takes the proposed building to calculate how much net leasable space there is and takes the difference between what would be generated and the existing, which is the number of FTEs generated. Ms. Garrow told Council the existing building generated 28.2 FTEs and the proposed development would generate 35.67 FTEs; the difference is 7 FTEs.

Mayor Klanderud asked about the requirement to mitigate for the free market units. Ms. Garrow said that space generates 2,547 square feet of affordable and provided on site is 2,842 square feet. Ms. Garrow noted the applicants exceed the requirement both for the free market and for the commercial. When it is a mixed use development, one can satisfy the mitigation by providing both on site. Ms. Garrow said the changes have improved the overall development and the proposal meets the subdivision criteria.

Mitch Haas, representing the applicants, told Council the applicants took the comments from the November 27^th public hearing regarding the design, height and bulk and made changes to the proposal. Haas noted the applicants believe the scope of this review is limited to subdivision review; however, they want to address the concerns raised at the last meeting. Haas said they have revised the design and have made commitments to try and address the concerns. The overall height was reduced by 2’ by dropping the floor to ceiling height on the first floor to 10’ and on the third floor to 9’. The height limit in the C-1 zone is 42’ and this building is 5’ below the height limit. The alley side is 7.5’ below the height limit. The elevator tower has been shifted back on the building and has been lowered 1’. Haas pointed out this project is not subject to any registered view planes. Only the railings around the decks will go to 40’. Both ends of the building have been pulled back to recede away from the property line and to provide additional setbacks.

Haas showed surrounding buildings heights and to the east is 37’, the Hunter Square building peak is 44’; the buildings behind are 42’9”, 46’6”, Concept 600 is 38’1”. This proposed building is lower than the surrounding buildings. Haas said this project is consistent with the allowed uses, where the uses are to go in the building, and all dimensional requirements. Haas said surrounding buildings are mixed commercial and residential uses. This building is consistent with both zoning and the transitional concept.

Haas noted the plan is to add a cornice line along the top which should pull the two-story section into the forefront. The human scale of the building has been accentuated by adding awnings over the street front windows. This building should read as a two-story building with loft space and the material pallet of the third floor has been changed. Haas said breaking the third floor up into several masses should address the boxiness of the design and increase architectural interest. Hass said the setbacks are between 10 and 14’ off the street.

Haas said roof top decks are not a regulated use in the city. They are allowed as long as they comply with height limits. Haas said the applicants feel this is an important amenity. The city has been encouraging rooftop decks as a means of supporting downtown living and vitality. Haas said there are rooftop decks on many buildings in the core. These rooftop decks are less than 10% of the entire roof and they are located to minimize visual impacts in the center of the building. Haas reiterated conditions to address concerns for the rooftop decks are planters limited to 1.5’, plantings limited to 4’ tall so that the top of the planting is below 42’.

Haas said the applicants looked at the parking supply and felt they have decreased the demand for traffic and parking from the previous use and have tripled the parking required by the city. Haas said cars not being regularly used will not be able to be stored in the parking garage. The applicants will provide one Vespa or scooter per dwelling unit. Haas said at the public hearing, concern was voiced about the walkway between this building and Hunter Square. Haas said they tried to accommodate a walkway but the Hunter Square property is going to privatize that space with fences and walls and providing a 3’ walkway would be a tunnel leading nowhere. Haas said the existing Stage III building provides no pedestrian amenities and encroaches on the sidewalk. The code does not require a pedestrian amenity but allows an automatic cash-in-lieu payment.

Haas reiterated all the surrounding properties are developed with mixed use and/or condominiumzied properties. Splitting this building into multiple ownership is consistent with the surrounding property. Haas told Council this design is less than 3:1 FAR overall limit; it is less than the 1.5:1 commercial FAR limit; less than the 1:1 free market limit for residential. The free market units in the code are limited to no more than 2,000 square feet. The code requires more commercial net leasable above grade than free market net livable, and this project meets that requirement.

The employee mitigation has been approved at P&Z upon staff and housing board recommendation. This building exceeds those requirements; they are required to house 4.5 FTEs in 2,515 square feet of housing. This proposal provides housing for 7 employees in 2,814 net livable square feet, 156% of the affordable housing requirement.

Haas pointed out the managing growth section of the AACP asks that project provide for a critical mass of local residents by providing a limited number of AH units within the urban growth boundary. This proposal has 5 free market units and 4 affordable housing units. The 4 affordable housing units will be deed restricted within the Aspen infill area. The AACP says to contain development with the creation of an urban growth boundary. This is within the infill area where development is supposed to happen.

The AACP says to foster a well balanced community through integrated design that promotes economic diversity, transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles and mixing of people from different back grounds. Haas noted this creates space for free market, deed restricted residences, space for office and commercial uses. These uses are all in one building and mixed within the floor. There will be landscaping along the Main street façade which will provide a friendly atmosphere to passers by. The AACP states the city should endeavor to bring the middle class back into the community; discourage sprawl and recognize its cost to the character of our community and open spaces. Haas said the code was written to require housing in the middle category and this proposal has 4 category 4 units in the midst of the community

The project is adding sidewalk connections and improvement along the Main street façade of the building. There is underground parking with alley access available for tenants and residents of the building. This development is served by transit and is composed of mixed uses within walking and bicycling distances. This development promotes consistency with the commercial design standards as approved by P&Z. Haas noted the AACP states when employees have the ability to live near where they work, there is less reliance on the automobile and a greater ability to become part of the community. Haas said the AACP states a healthy social balance includes all income ranges and types of people. This proposal includes a balance between office, free market, affordable and commercial uses and integrated throughout the building.

Haas said the AACP states a project should maintain a healthy vibrant diversified year-round economy that supports the Aspen community. This project should promote tourist and year round economy. There is a lack of office space in Aspen. The Aspen community includes full and part time residents. The AACP encourages higher density development in the city limits, where appropriate. Haas stated this project is appropriate. Haas reiterated this project is 100% consistent with the allowed uses and dimensions of the C-1 zone adopted by the city. Haas said this project meets compliance with the commercial design standards. Haas said the changes and conditions should accommodate Council’s concerns. This project has been approved for growth management allotments and design standards.

Lester went over the architecture and the changes, pointed out the setbacks, the 3 sectional massing out fronts and the details of the building elements. Lester showed on the rendering a dotted line illustrating the code allowed building mass at 42’. Lester said efforts were made to step the building back on the east and west sides to provide visual relief. The building has been pushed 3’ to the east to allow an access to the Hunter Square building. The center sections are 4’ to 5’ back from the front property line and are further away from the front view. Lester said the green roofs have only about 1 inch of dirt so that trees cannot be accommodated.

Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing.

Donna Weidermeyer, adjacent neighbor to the east, said a big concern is the construction of any building and how it may adversely impact her building causing moving or cracking of the building. Ms. Weidermeyer said although they have worked with the developers, no resolution has been reached. The developers said this would be a condition of approval and Ms. Weidermeyer asked that Council add that condition that they can get damages to correct any issues. Ms. Garrow noted a condition that discusses the construction mitigation plan and the stabilization plan requirement. There is no specific condition relating to these properties. Mayor Klanderud said the stabilization requirement is to protect adjacent properties. Ms. Weidermeyer said other issues are the landscaping and recovering their attorney, engineer and survey costs. There will have to be a capping between the two buildings to prevent moisture, and that issue should be addressed.

John Olsen, contractor, told Council he has met with many of the neighbors and to try and work through these issues. Jackie Whitney, property owner to the east, told Council there is a concern about the gas line between the two buildings and she would like an agreement about the gas line remaining. Ms. Whitney said there is a large tree on the Main street side, which is a city tree, and the tree will be removed. Ms. Whitney said she would like all these issues addressed before Council approves this project.

Phil Rothblum, resident to the south, said he does not want to be across the alley from the rear door of a restaurant. Rothblum told Council he has been assured that the condominium documents will prohibit any space as being used as a restaurant or commercial food preparation. Rothblum said he would like a representation of that commitment at this hearing. Haas said there will not be restaurant or food preparation in this building. Rothblum applauded Council for trying to address the character of Aspen.

Karen Wike, Concept 600, said she does not feel the changes that have been made to this project are adequate. The building is still massive and continues to loom over its neighbors. There is only 12” between the buildings to the east; why is this building lot line to lot line. The building will eliminate the sun from hitting Main street and will result in an icy street. Ms. Wike noted other buildings in Aspen with rooftop decks have no other available decks. Ms. Wike asked who would police the conditions regarding the uses of the roof deck.

Rich Wagar said he feels this will be an improvement to the area, will be a good approach on Main street from the east. Dick Coppock, Concept 600, said the roof decks will be a fourth floor. If there are no roof top gardens, the elevator is not needed. Coppock questioned the need of going up and up. Pat Althouse, Concept 600, said she heard at the last Council meeting that the applicants were directed to get rid of the roof gardens and to keep the walkway. Ms. Althouse asked what happened to those conditions.

Lindsay Smith went over the other roof decks that are more like porches and accessed through living spaces, other decks are on second and third floors, not fourth floors. Other buildings with roof decks do not have outside decks or porches and have no other means of outside access except going up on the roof. Ms. Smith said the applicants are asking for about 250 square feet more per free market unit with these decks. Ms. Smith questioned the assertion that the roof decks would increase the vitality of town. Ms. Smith said she does not feel this design has the articulation as requested by Council.

Ralph Durran, Concept 600, asked if the roof decks are owned or are open to the public of the building. Jeff Jones, representing the applicant, said they will be owned by the 4 free market units on the third floor and are not open to the other tenants of the building. Jim Smith, Concept 600, said these are modest design changes and not significant responses to Council’s concerns. Smith said the applicants ignored the requests about roof decks, open space and the loss of mountain views. Smith stated he disagrees with the conclusions that this project meets all the requirements for subdivision approval. Smith said no affordable housing is included for the measurable increase in employment. There is a change in the single purpose commercial space, the theatre, to a multi-purpose office space and there will be an increase in employees. Smith stated an inequity exists when all other projects are required to provide additional affordable housing when employees are increased.

John Calcutt, Concept 600, said affordable housing has been the cornerstone of any development in the city and adding employees should have an impact on the affordable housing. Toni Kronberg opposed this building because it takes away the mountain views, the rest of Main street has two-story buildings, which are part of the character of Main street. This building is a box and does not take into account the views of the mountain. The AACP recommends there be breaks in buildings so that mountain views are maintained. Ms. Kronberg said one of the reasons for the current moratorium is to give the city time to come up with design guidelines. This project has no pedestrian amenity, no open space and no mountain views. This building does not keep the character of the neighborhood; other buildings have courtyards and garden spaces. The views are Aspen’s most important asset.

Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

Jennifer Hall said neither removal of the roof decks and retaining the public access easement through this building and Hunter Square were not addressed by this proposal. Ms. Hall said she feels it is within Council’s jurisdiction to look at design standards and consistency with the neighborhood. Ms. Hall suggested the roof top gardens be eliminated and policing of the conditions for the roof top gardens is not the best use of the city’s time. Ms. Hall stated the issue of the public easement between the two buildings is a matter of right the public has by having used that access in excess of 18 years. Ms. Hall suggested the public might be willing to give up that easement in exchange for more open space. Ms. Hall urged Council to hold out for the best project for this location.

Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing.

Haas noted the commitments made about the roof top decks would be conditions of approval and would run with this property. Haas said this project was developed under the cap of 2,000 square feet for a residential unit and the decks are outdoor living space and are manageable sizes. The land use code would allow another 1,000 square feet of decks before they count as floor area. Haas pointed out the land use code allows that properties that do not currently have pedestrian amenities do not have to provide it in the future and cash-in-lieu is automatically approved. Haas reiterated the building is 5’ to 7.5’ below the height limit for this zone; there is no request for extra heights. Haas said the revised proposal addresses the roof top decks by making them smaller, by moving them to the center of the building, by putting the access in the center and by surrounding the decks with a green roof. Haas said a walkway between this and the Hunter Square building would be bad urban form and would lead to nowhere.

Mayor Klanderud stated she does not feel the walkway between this building and the Hunter Square building was ever meant to be public access. Mayor Klanderud said the issues appropriate to P&Z were reviewed by P&Z and this application came to Council with the approval of P&Z for subdivision review only. Mayor Klanderud said she does not feel it is correct to overturn the ruling of P&Z.

Councilman Johnson said he would like to hear more about the tree issue. Councilman Johnson stated he does not agree with the applicant’s position regarding subdivision. Councilman Johnson said he will stick with the criteria in the code for approving subdivision as outlined in the land use code. Councilman Johnson said he feels this project will generate more employees than the previous building actually did and it is not appropriate to argue this proposal should look at the previous use when it benefits them and disregard the previous use when that benefits them. The proposal will either actually create more or less employees and the proposal will either actually create more or less parking. Councilman Johnson said these both have a public cost and they have not been adequately addressed.

Ms. Garrow pointed out the condition in Section 10(b) prior to the issuance of a building permit, a tree removal permit approved by the parks department will be required. Jones told Council they have met with the parks department and the applicants have offered to replace the tree. The planter is part of the city property. Councilman Johnson said he would like to hear from the parks department on the tree. Councilman Johnson said this proposal was responsive to the concern over height and the roof decks. Councilman Johnson said his issue is not with the height but what that height accommodates and how the density will be used. Councilman Johnson said this project does have merit; there is need for additional office space in town. Councilman Johnson stated the mix of commercial, affordable housing and free market residential could have been done differently and would have created less cost to the community.

Mayor Klanderud asked what the basis was for the number of employees for the previous uses. Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council the requirement to mitigate for employees has always been on a square footage basis, assuming uses would come and go and change. A general number would allow businesses to change depending on the market. Councilman Johnson restated the mix within the space can be different than present. Haas pointed out the mix is dictated by the code, which tells how much floor each can be used for each use in a zone district. This project was designed in reliance on the codes in effect.

Councilman Johnson said he feels this project fails in the managing growth section because the proposal represents an increase in employees and does not mitigate for that impact. Councilman Johnson said all the employees who are not being mitigated for will drive. Councilman Johnson stated he does not feel this reduces the adverse impact of automobiles on Aspen. Councilman Johnson said he feels a better effort could be made on affordable housing. Councilman Johnson noted the AACP states that new affordable housing projects should reinforce and enhance the healthy social balance of the community and enhance the character and charm of Aspen. Councilman Johnson said this project contains 9800 square feet of free market and 2800 square feet of affordable housing. Councilman Johnson said he does not think that reinforces a healthy social balance. Councilman Johnson stated this project is under parked to meet the free market, affordable housing and commercial needs.

Councilman Johnson stated he does not feel the form and massing are transitional relative to Main street. Councilman Johnson reiterated there is too little employee mitigation for how many employees will be created as well as the mix of affordable housing to free market. Councilman Johnson said this project will increase traffic and pressure on the entrance to Aspen. Councilman Johnson said he feels this proposal could be amended to better address the issues he has raised. Mayor Klanderud noted this project is walking distance or transit distance within other affordable housing in the community and for commuters from down valley. Mayor Klanderud said she could approve this proposal.

Councilman Torre said this proposal is lot line to lot line and no other building in this neighborhood has the same fit. Councilman Torre stated the size and massing of this is out of context for where it is. Councilman Torre noted other buildings have landscaping, which he does not see in this proposal. Councilman Torre suggested the applicants look at what fits in the neighborhood. Councilman Torre said the applicant’s rights should not infringe on other people’s rights. Councilman Torre reiterated his issue is compatibility of this project and what it does to the neighborhood. Councilman Torre said Council comments at the last meeting were strongly against roof decks and that the applicant was going to look at the roof decks. Councilman Torre suggested these decks could be consolidated into a single deck, shared amenity. Worcester entered into the record “Smith Exhibit 1”.

Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #41, Series of 2006, to February 12; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

ORDINANCE #49, SERIES OF 2006 – 307 S. Spring (Wienerstube) Redevelopment

John Worcester, city attorney, noted Councilman DeVilbiss has been recused. Worcester said the applicants represent they are willing to proceed knowing they need 3 affirmative votes for approval of an ordinance.

Jessica Garrow, community development department, told Council this is an 18,000 square foot lot in the C-1 zone, which currently has a 6,000 square foot commercial building and a vacant parking lot. The proposal is for a mixed use building with 47 parking spaces sub grade, storage and mechanical equipment. The first floor has 12,000 square feet of net leaseable space. The second floor is split level and includes commercial and office space of 11,000 square feet and 12 two-bedroom affordable housing units; 6 units at category 3 and 6 units at category 4. This affordable housing proposal has been reviewed and approved by the housing board. The third floor has four 2,000 square foot 2 bedroom free market units and two free market studio units. The proposed building complies with the residential requirements in the C-1 zone and the highest point is 42’.

Ms. Garrow said there are 6 reviews associated with this proposal; commercial design standard review and growth management review for commercial and the affordable housing has been completed by P&Z. Council is the final authority for subdivision review and for a growth management approval for multi-year allotments. The applicant needs 5 future growth management allotments. Subdivision approval is required because this is a mixed use building with multiple ownership.

Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council multi-year development allotment is part of the growth management system and is rarely used. The growth management system allows a certain number of units per year, which is considered an acceptable level of growth. The system recognizes there maybe legitimate reasons to exceed the annual limit and allows Council to grant extra allotments, if the project is exceptional. Bendon said in review of multi-year allotments, Council gives directions from where those units come. Exceptional project status is a criterion, not a pre-determined measurement. Council reviews the project and makes a finding in how that project relates to community objectives. Bendon said the code specifies community objectives and a project does not need to meet all of those objectives.

Ms. Garrow said this is a subdivision because the building is being divided for multiple ownership. The hard infrastructure for this building is already in place. Ms. Garrow said this building meets for criteria for subdivision approval; however, if Council does not approve a multi-year allotment for growth management, one of the subdivision review requirements is that a projects has received all growth management allotments. Ms. Garrow noted staff finds this project meets a majority of the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Ms. Garrow said economic sustainability, the project include 14,000 square feet of affordable housing, which will help contribute to the mass of year-round residents. The project also has commercial and office space that will contribute to Aspen’s wealth generating capacity and will benefit both locals and tourists. Ms. Garrow reiterated there are six category 3 and six category 4 affordable housing units. The project exceeds the affordable housing requirement by almost 11,000 square feet. Housing for 27 FTEs will be provided on site.

This building will exceed the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code by 50%, which is a significant commitment to green building. The applicant will commission an energy audit after 3 years of occupation and if the building is not performing up to the 50% requirement, the building must be upgraded to the building owner’s expense.

Ms. Garrow told Council the applicant has made changes to the proposal since original submittal and P&Z review. There has been discussion about how a new building should fit into the community, whether it should represent the past. This is a large site. Some of the positives of the design are covered outdoor restaurant seating along Spring street. There are 30 and 60’ building modulations along Hyman Avenue which represents the historic modulation in Aspen. There are varying architectural styles on the building. Staff does take issue with the lack of transition between the more modern piece at the corner at Hyman and Spring and the traditional pieces along the streets. The building is, in general, all one height.

Ms. Garrow stated overall this building meets the exceptional criteria because of the amount of affordable housing, the impact on the economic sustainability, and the quality of design. Ms. Garrow said this computer modeling is based on the CC, C-1 the city has received XXXX; this is a massing model.

Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11:09 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

Andy Wisnoski, architect with Poss & Associates, used computer modeling to show the site and the proposed building. Wisnoski told Council the design was based on the historic 30’ and 60’ of the town. Wisnoski said this site is in a transitional zone moving from CC, C-1 to a residential area and the corner addressed the transition with a two-story building. Wisnoski said they designed with the eclectic neighborhood in mind. Mike Hall illustrated with the board called photo montage. Wisnoski said the architecture combines historic and more modern elements and creates a dialog between the pieces.

Wisnoski noted the roof heights have been varied from two-stories to three-stories, the building is stepped back along the street and the higher roofs are back from the street, which creates a diversified street scape. Wisnoski told Council the Wienerstube will be tenants of the building and a space on the east side has been created for them including an outdoor eating space. This space will face east, which is more desirable for a morning restaurant.

Wisnoski noted the proposed two-level parking garage accessed from the alley. The alley will ramp down in a parallel system because of the one-way alley, which is the safest way to deal with this. Wisnoski pointed out the affordable housing on the north side of the building to get south views. These units are elevated, each unit has its own private deck. Wisnoski said they are just starting discussions on how this can be a green building; one element may be a green roof. No roof decks are proposed for this building. Wiesnowski showed on the building cross section how the split level floor works with the affordable housing and commercial/office space.

Stan Clauson, representing the applicants, told Council this building is less than the allowable floor area on site. The commercial floor area allowable is 1.5:1 and the proposed is 1.2:1. The overall floor area allowed is 3:1 and the proposed is 2.58:1, which is 15% less than the mass allowed. Clauson reminded Council they adopted a code amendment that limited size the free market units to 2,000 square feet and these free market units are in conformance with that. Clauson said there are 47 on site parking space; 19.7 parking space are required by code. The number of parking spaces is dictated by building two levels of parking. Clauson noted originally they proposed on grade parking off the alley plus cash-in-lieu; however, at P&Z’s suggestion, they increased the parking to 47 spaces.

Clauson reminded Council this is a lot containing a 6,000 square foot commercial building plus a vacant lot containing parking spaces, not connected with this property. The commercial parking is marginally useful. The proposal is for 12,000 square feet of commercial on the ground floor; the second floor is 10,500 square feet of commercial and/or office space. Also proposed are 12 two-bedroom affordable housing units. Clauson reiterated the affordable housing units more than mitigates for the employee generation.

Clauson said there is a letter of objection from neighbors to the south along Spring Street. Clauson pointed out there is a highly articulated façade along Spring street with energy and activity to that side with the proposed outdoor dining. Clauson said this development proposal was submitted before the moratorium. Clauson told Council he reviewed the proposed commercial design standards and this project fits in with a number of criteria proposed by those standards such as reflected by the scale and massing of traditional buildings. There are 30’ and 60’ modules in this design and a high degree of variation, breaking up the façade elements. Clauson noted one of the items in the economic sustainability report of 2002, which states “continue efforts to develop affordable housing within an area adjacent to the urban growth boundary through infill in the commercial core”, which this project does. Another recommendation in the economic sustainability report is to develop new regulations for the commercial core based on vertical zoning that generally requires retail at the ground floor level.

Clauson went over the site plan, showing the proposed outdoor dining, the decorative pavers, the street trees, entry for the affordable housing, entry for the free market units, recesses to provide relief, planters along the building and the recesses.

Councilman Johnson asked if the alley were two-way, could one of the ramps be disposed of. Clauson said that would require ramps perpendicular to the alley and with the current height requirements for ADA would take out a commercial space.

Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing.

Toni Kronberg said she has concerns with height, scale and massing of the building. Ms. Kronberg said most buildings in the commercial core are two-stories; this is supposed to be a transition zone and is proposed at three-stories. Ms. Kronberg said she does not think it is compatible with the character of the neighborhood; this is one big building. Ms. Kronberg said buildings are supposed to adhere to the 30’ width of buildings. Ms. Kronberg said the character of Aspen is based primarily on views of Aspen mountain, which this building would block.

Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

Rich Wagar said he feels Council has done a great job keeping Aspen an awesome place. Wagar said he likes the flexibility to look at new concepts.

Mayor Klanderud entered into the record a letter from the Nelsons opposed to the project.

Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing.

Ms. Garrow pointed out each of the affordable housing units will have one parking space. Councilman Johnson said this is a model project of what the infill was supposed to accomplish providing affordable housing, affordable commercial space; it shows the highest and best use for property in Aspen is not a parking. Councilman Johnson said the preservation of a locally owned/serving business is an indication of the applicant’s commitment to this community. Dedicating one parking space/affordable housing is a model. There is more affordable housing than is required. Councilman Johnson said this proposal proves that the 1:1 ratio between free market and affordable housing is possible. Councilman Johnson said he likes the architectural response to the building across the street. Councilman Johnson said for the next meeting he would like to know what type of tenants are expected. Steve Marcus, owner, told Council he is trying fill this up with as many local businesses as possible. Councilman Johnson said he understands how the building is broken up and how it addresses the 30/60’ increments. Councilman Johnson said Council has addressed second level outdoor spaces to help fulfill the pedestrian amenity, which the applicants could look at.

Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #49, Series of 2006, to February 12; seconded by Councilman Johnson.

Councilman Torre said he would like the public more involved and not have Council looking at this after 11 p.m. Councilman Torre said he would like to see more street articulation. If Council is to look at this as an exceptional project, it needs to hit all the criteria. Councilman Torre said this is a big project and its impacts will be great. Councilman Torre said Council should take their time in reviewing this. Mayor Klanderud said this project is what was envisioned when infill was considered. Mayor Klanderud said this is a large lot to do a good design and project.

All in favor, motion carried.

Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and to extend the meeting to midnight; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

Councilman Johnson moved to go into executive session at 11:35 p.m. pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(a) acquisition of property, the trail easement for Bar/X; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. At the executive session were Bentley Henderson, John Worcester, Steve Barwick, Chris Bendon, Randy Ready, Stephen Ellsperman and Kathryn Koch.

Councilman Johnson moved to come out of executive session at 12:15 a.m.; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried.

Councilman Torre moved to adjourn at 12:15 a.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.

Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk