HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.205 S Mill.27A-87 - gordon restaurant commercialC�o�r�s Cornr�r'cr�-�. 233�-0�3 3� �oo�
� C��ntr�b� �� ��
,i
� �.��i�- :�� l �',� 11
r
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICERJS 0134'
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
LAND
Cityi
00113
USE APPLICATION
63721
(303) 925-2020
FEES �y %4 QO
u /A-
;
47331 GMP/CONCEPTUAL
- 63722
- 47332
GMP/PRELIMINARY
- 63723
- 47333
GMP/FINAL
- 63724
- 47341
SUB/CONCEPTUAL
- 63725
- 47342
SUB/PRELIMINARY
- 63726
- 47343
SUB/FINAL
- 63727
- 47350
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
- 63728
- 47360
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL
FEES:
00125
-63730
- 47380
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH z"' -
00123
-63730
- 47380
HOUSING
00115
-63730
- 47380
ENGINEERING �3 "
SUB -TOTAL
County
00113
-63711
- 47431
- 63712
- 47432
- 63713
- 47433
- 63714
- 47441
- 63715
- 47442
- 63716
- 47443
- 63717
- 47450
- 63718
- 47460
REFERRAL
FEES:
00125
-63730
- 47480
00123
-63730
- 47480
00113
- 63731
- 47480
00113
-63732
- 47480
GMP/GENERAL
GMP/DETAILED
GMP/FINAL
SUB/GENERAL
SUB/DETAILED
SUB/FINAL
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
HOUSING
ENVIRONMENTAL COORD.
ENGINEERING
SUB -TOTAL
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00113 - 63061 - 09000 COUNTY CODE
- 63062 - 09000 COMP. PLAN
- 63066 - 09000 COPY FEES
- 63069 - 09000 OTHER
SUB -TOTAL
TOTAL =
Name: Phone:
Address: Project:
Check a Date:
Additional Billing: k of Hours:
1987 Commercial GMP Submission
1987 Commercial GMP
and Special Review Submission
August 1, 1987
Submitted To: The City of Aspen
Planning and Community Development Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Applicant: Mr. Gordon Naccarato
Owner of Gordon's Restaurant
205 South Mill Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-7474
Architecture: Harry Teague Architects
210 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2556
Prepared By: Joseph Wells, AICP
DOt @MUS & MUS
an association of land planners
608 e. hyman avenue
aspen, colorado 81611
phone: 303 925-6866
Table of Contents
Page
I. COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
1
SUBMISSION
A. Description of Proposal
1
B. Commercial GMP Evaluation Criteria
8
1. Quality of Design
8
a. Architectural Design
8
b. Site Design
9
C. Energy
10
d. Amenities
11
e. Visual Impact
12
f. Trash and Utility
13
Access Areas
2. Availability of Public Facilities
14
and Services
a. Water Supply/Fire Protection
14
b. Sewage Disposal
14
C. Public Transportation/Roads
14
d. Storm Drainage
15
e. Parking
15
3. Provision of Employee Housing
16
II. SPECIAL REVIEW PROCEDURES
19
A. Bonus Commercial Square Footage
19
B. Reduction in Trash and Utility Access
20
Requirements
III. APPENDICES
A. Council Resolution No. 20, Series of
1980, Awarding 20,500 Sq. Ft.
Commercial Allocation to Mill Street
Plaza and Council Action Exempting
the Employee Housing from GMP
E. Selected Information from Original
GMP Submission
C. Gordon's Seating Analysis and
Employment Information
D. Owner's Letter of Consent to Make
Application
I. Commercial GMP Submission
A. Description of Proposal
This submission, filed on behalf of Gordon Naccarato,
owner of Gordon's Restaurant, requests Commercial GMP
approval to permit the enclosing of the second -level deck
and the construction of a new exterior restaurant entry
stair at the Mill Street Plaza Building. The deck is
currently used by the restaurant for outdoor dining during
the summer season, as anticipated in the original GMP
submission for the complex.
Upon approval and completion of the enclosure, a new
bar seating area and entry for the restaurant as well as a
new coatroom and 2 new restrooms will replace the existing
exterior dining patio. The existing entry stair will be
covered with a new slab and an enclosure will be built at
the base of the stair.
In 1980, the City approved a commercial GMP alloca-
tion of 20,500 sq. ft. in order to permit the construction
of the 28,550 sq. ft. Mill Street Plaza Building (see
Appendices A and 6). The breakdown of square footages is
as follows:
GMP Allocation
20,500
sq.
ft.
Replacement Sq. Ftge.
6,500
sq.
ft.
Bonus Employee Housing
1,550
sq.
ft.
Total: 28,550 sq. ft.
The Mill Street Plaza Building site is six city lots
(Lots D through J, Block 81, Aspen Townsite) located in
the CC zone district. Therefore, a total of 27,000 sq.
i
ft. of commercial space is permitted by right on the
18,000 sq. ft. site.
In addition, Mill Street Plaza Associates received
special review approval (see Appendix A) to build 1,550
sq. ft. of on -site restricted housing under the bonus
provision that permits special review consideration of an
additional .5:1 bonus floor area, including .2:1 commer-
cial space if .3:1 of the bonus square footage is re-
stricted housing.
Mill Street Plaza Associates did not seek approval to
construct the 1,033 sq. ft. of bonus commercial space
permitted by special review as a result of the bonus
restricted housing constructed. It is that bonus commer-
cial square footage for which we are currently seeking
approval.
It is important to note that it is the intent of this
proposal to provide a more gracious and comfortable bar
area so that guests arriving for their reservations will
have a comfortable place to wait for their tables. This
is not a proposal directed toward expanding the res-
taurant's dining facilir.'ems, but rather is intended to
resolve some functional conflicts presently being ex-
perienced at the restaurant.
At present, the waiting area for guests arriving for
lunch or dinner is limited to a small bar with four stools
and a cramped entryway. There is no bar table seating for
couples or bigger parties. In addition, coatroom and
restroom facilities are inadequate.
The enclosing of the patio will, for the most part
only resolve these problems. Because of the accessory
2
uses included in the plan, seating in the main dining room
can only be expanded with the addition of 3 tables and a
total of 12 seats; at the same time, the outdoor dining
area which includes seating for 32 will no longer be
available.
Commercial GMP Procedures request information
covering nine areas of concern, as follows:
1. Water System. water will continue to be
supplied by the existing 6 inch City water main in
Hopkins. Estimated increased demand will be minimal as
only two small restrooms are anticipated; water service to
the new bar will simply replace service to the existing
bar.
2. Sewer System. The project is served by the
existing 12 inch Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
line in Mill Street. Impact on the system resulting from
the additional two restrooms is negligible.
3. Storm Drainage. Storm drainage will be
largely unaffected by the proposal. The amount of
impervious surfaces will not increase. Roof drainage will
be piped to the existing 48 inch storm sewer in Mill
Street.
4. Development Summary. With the exception of
increased FAR square footage, elements of the proposal
impact only in a very minor way the area and bulk require-
ments of the Code. Open space areas for the existing
project as originally approved include the main level
walkways, the lower level courtyard and the 9 foot setback
area on the north side of the project; the total square
footage equals 5,306 sq. ft., or 29.5% of the site. Areas
3
which must be deducted from open space calculations as a
result of this proposal are the area under the new star
(approximately 180 sq. ft.) and the area underneath the
north deck which replaces the existing entry stair (ap-
proximately 200 sq. ft.). The remaining open space square
footage therefore, exceeds 5,220 sq. ft., or over 29% of
the site, still well in excess of the 25% open space
requirement.
The
increase in
FAR square footage
will be
limited to no
more than 1,033 sq. ft. Lot coverage is
unaffected by
the proposal.
Existing landscaping
is unaf-
fected by the
proposal with
the exception of the
reloca-
tion and addition of pots of
evergreen shrubs and
flower-J_P/f4�
ing plants.
'.A4p
5. Estimated Traffic Count Increases. In
order to estimate increased traffic (peak hour) on
adjacent streets resulting from the proposal, we have made
the following assumptions, which we believe are conserva-
tive:
o Peak capacity in the bar of 34 bar patrons.
0 50----p-prcent of bar patrons assumed to be
patrons who would be eating at the existing
restaurant in any case.
o Because of location, only 50 percent of new
bar patrons would drive.
o Ridership of two persons per car.
0 100 percent occupancy of bar at peak times.
4
Increased traffic at peak times would therefore
equal 4.25 new peak hour trips, as follows:
1 --
34 (patrons) x 50° (new customers) x 500 (driving)
= 4.25
2 (persons/car)
Nq n@w vehicles will be stationed in the
building as a result of the proposal. Deliveries and
tranh pick-up are actually expected to decline because of
the addition of a gun system in the new bar (presently all
drinks must be mixed from individual bottles).
At peak times, the restaurant will continue to
serve lunch from 12:00 P.M. to 2:00 P.M. and dinner from
6:30 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. during the summer season. During
the winter dinner only is served from 6:00 P.M. to 10:00
P.M. Provision of off-street parking is discouraged by
Coda and no new on- or off-street parking will be provid-
ed. All RFTA bus routes are within one block of the
proposal; the Rubey Park transit center is 3 blocks away
(see Vicinity Map on following page). No bike paths are
provided through the Commercial Core.
The location of the project continues to be the
greatest disincentive to auto use. The site is within
comfortable walking distance of the majority of accommoda-
tions in the City's lodge districts and is a popular stop
for shoppers in the area.
6. Proposed Uses. At the present time it is
anticipated that all of the space associated with the
proposal will continue to be utilized for restaurant -
related purposes for the duration of the 20 year lease
period.
5
r
jj
I,i I
d - SPA a.
,
O �� SPA I Ng 1
L�
SCE I
r r '
i
t; U it ll O S
w
PAC PiSTttl(,t OMIQ�'{
--- -- — • zot�;;r�� �lsr�i�r �v�'caKSEs
V I C f N ! r Y tt A P L�
...-------• --- f Fb'3TE5
n
a -k gh ✓rA 11 C 0 ✓►7s
related purposes for the duration of the 20 year lease
period.
7. Effects of the Proposed Development. This
proposal will unquestionably have a positive effect on the
adjacent uses in the Mill Street Plaza. we believe the
whimsical architectural statement which is made with the
addition and the new stair will add visual interest to the
courtyard and encourage a higher level of pedestrian
activity in this area. Because the addition is on the
north side of the courtyard, no further shading of the
courtyard occurs as a result of the proposal.
Gordon's, as one of Aspen's most popular res-
taurants, is a strong anchor for the immediate neighbor-
hood; improvements to the restaurant further strengthen
the viability of the other commercial uses in the area.
The proposal has been limited to the deck area
internal to the complex; enclosing of the deck in the
northwest corner of the complex has not been considered
because of the visual impact on the Berko Building.
The overall height of the proposal, which has
been limited to 28 feet, is well under the height limit
established for the block, as established by the zone
district regulations (40') and the Jerome viewplane
(approximately 45').
8. Proposed Construction Schedule. Upon ap-
proval, construction on the project will begin immediate-
ly; the project will be completed in one phase, with
completion currently anticipated by Thanksgiving of this
year.
6
9. Employee Housing Proposed. An analysis in
support of our position that the number of persons
employed at Gordon's will not increase as a result of this
proposal is included in Section I.B.3., page 16. Briefly,
the reason this will be the case is that the outdoor
dining presently used during the summer season will be
replaced by the bar and other support uses included with
this proposal. Food preparation and service generates
more employees at the restaurant than does bar service.
7
B. Commercial GMP Evaluation Criteria
1. Quality of Design
a. Architectural Design. By virtue of
the proposal's location in the center of the existing
complex, in an area where the buildings have been set back
from the property line, the pro,ject's impact on neighbor-
ing developments, themselves a variety of architectural
styles, is relatively minor. The height of the bar,
approximately 28 feet, is well below the 40 foot height
limit in the zone district as well as the Hotel Jerome
viewplane,.which is some 45 feet above grade at the site.
The key design concepts for the project
center on the transparency of the enclosure and on
h,hfipr�ph�,�y maintaining the integrity of the-origIn-al--detailing of the
building (see architectural drawings on following pages).
U
In order to maintain as much transparency
as possible, a glass box is proposed above and set back
from the existing masonry parapet which surrounds the
deck. The horizontal articulations in the proposal
refract on those of the existing complex. The eave height
is the same as that for the existing roof and the existing
parapet line is maintained throughout. The parapet covers
the lower portion of the proposed structure so only
approximately six feet of new construction is exposed
above it. Flexibility to shift the addition in relation
to the deck is limited because of the need to work with
the existing structural system.
The vaulted roof form is derived from the
arched form chosen originally to define the entryways into
the shopping areas and presents a minimum aspect to the
viewer from Hopkins Street. The vault will be reflected
on the interior of the space for added visual interest in
the bar area.
I` Building materials will be the same as, or
compatible with, the material specified originally for the
complex. The metal roof will be detailed like that of the
It;,l���',1( existing ones and will therefore have a very similar
(w")��`' appearance. The brick and tile used originally will be
reused in those areas where glass is inappropriate. An
�Sadditional material which blends with the expanse of glass
may also be specified.
Colors will be selected from the palette
for the existing building, including charcoal grey,
sienna, black and sandblasted metal. Exterior illumina-
tion will be compatible with the present lighting scheme
for the restaurant. The existing restaurant signage will
be relocated; no new signage is presently anticipated.
b. Site Design. while open space
provided with the original project exceeds Code require-
/7 ments, we believe the appearance of some of these areas
1. )) AtAWt4In.
can be improved upon with the addition of large planters
filled with ever -green shrubs and flowering_ olanrG_. Five
°I'OW
of these will
be
placed at street
level in the setback
10)
area along Hopkins
Street, as shown
in the plan, with a
CJ�
'cif, „
sixth at the
base
of the existing entry stair. Smaller
planter boxes
will
also be added to
the second level deck
area_ at the
present entry, similar
to those already in
use.
All of the utilities presently serving the
project are underground and this will continue to be the
case with the new project.
9
We believe the construction of a new entry
stair for the restaurant will not only improve pedestrian
n
circulation for the project but will also provide in-
cree.s-ed_.-�_fg�. The more central location and higher
visibility of the new stair location allows patrons
walking to the restaurant from the east to quickly
identify the access to the restaurant. The present stair
is steep and sheltered from the sun. The new stair will
have a more generous riser/tread relationship and will
also receive sun during winter months.
C. Energy. When the Mill Street Plaza
Building was submitted for GMP review in 1980, a number of
commitments were made in regard to energy conservation
"1' which exceeded Code requirements at the time (see Appendix
B). The existing system is a forced air system dis-
tributed through ceiling diffusers; a separate system of
air chilled with swamp coolers is also available (see
Appendix B). To a degree, the applicant is limited in the
energy conservation measures which can realistically be
undertaken because of the necessity to extend the existing
system to the space and also by design considerations}µrw��
For instance, the desire to maximize the transparency of
the building dictates increased glazing on not only the
south side of the space, but the north side as well.
In order to assure that the project is an
efficient one in terms of energy conservation, we propose
to incorporate the following elements into the construc-
tion documents for the project:
o A new double door airlock entry will
replace the single door currently in
use.
10
�C,`�
�00\� ��j o Thermal insulation which exceeds the
' } Iy(w�I _o �W/M r City's requirement_f R_20 in floors,
walls and ceilings will be required.
f Proposed Standard:
iV
? 2 1 Roof R-40
S��n'�?1�{��5_ jh��►"''� M Unglazed Exterior Walls R-30
vt, {�t�rb i entiYh1�
y•y yd ��� Low E Glazingon north
,�l,X�rsj�ilk"M ` side with aminimum
value throughout of -- R-2
Floor (as stated in
prior submission) R-38
o Expandable foam insulation will be
utilized at all exterior door and
window frames to reduce air infiltra-
tion.
o Hot water lines, which must be
extended relatively long distances,
will be heavily insulated to increase
efficiency.
o Water saving fixtures will be speci-
fied for the new restrooms.
d. Amenities. Open space provided
originally with the proposal exceeded significantly that
required in the zone district (29.5% of the site); while
it is not possible to improve on this commitment, open
space reduction has nonetheless been limited to less than
.5% of the site, so that open space still exceeds 29%.
With regard to open space improvements, the
11
emphasis has been on improving the appearance of the
existing open space areas in the vicinity of the res-
taurant by adding large planters, as discussed previously.
Pedestrian access in and around the project
appears to be more than adequate; bicyclists are required
to use the streets through the commercial core, as no bike
trails are anticipated in this area. Because the existing
bike rack installed originally at Mill Street Plaza is
clearly sufficient to meet the needs of both the project
and the immediate neighborhood, we propose to install a
bike rack similar in design to the original in an a ter-
nate location where the City has identified that there is
a need for one.
e. Visual Impact. The height of the
proposal has been established to not only relate the
addition to architectural elements of the existing
building but also be minimize the visual impact of the
project. Because construction is limited to generally the
center portion of the Hopkins Avenue facade, in an area
where the original building mass has been set back some 9
feet from the property line, visual impact on neighboring
properties is relatively minor. we have avoided additions
in the northwest corner of the complex in order to not
impact further on the historic Berko Building adjacent to
the property.
It is important to note that the maximum
height of the bar area (approximately 28 feet) is well
below the 40 foot height limit in the CC zone district.
In addition, the Hotel Jerome Viewplane, one of a number
established to protect from obstruction mountain views
from designated parks and other public places, is higher
than the zoning height limit when it crosses over the site
12
-- some 45 feet above the ground plane. This is the only
viewplane which extends over the project site.
We believe the project is totally consis-
tent with established community goals relative to visual
compatibility as evidenced by the height limit established
for the area and the absence of other limitations on
height established through the creation of viewplanes.
f. Trash and Utility Access Areas. We
have included an analysis of toazhZzervice area require-
ments for._the Mill Street Plaza Building and a comparison
to the actual area provided in Section II.B., page 20,
where we are requesting approval of a reduction in
required area. While the overall area available appears
to meet that required, the area set aside for trash
facilities, approximately 14 feet by 13 feet, does not
meet the minimum requirement of the Code, which is 25
linear feet with a depth of 10 feet.
The owner of Mill Street Plaza has stated
that he has previously received special review approval
for a reduction and it seems logical that such an action
has been taken by P&Z since the building was built with a
reduced trash storage area. It should be noted that the
trash area requirement is the same with the proposed
expansion as it is for the existing building.
The addition of a full -service bar will
permit the inclusion of a gun system, with interchangeable
tanks, for all mixers. At present, all drinks must be
rt7ix@d fr orn bottles; this contributes greatly to the trash
generated by the restaurant. Bottle trash generation will
be significantly reduced by this proposal.
Historically, the owners have scheduled
extra trash pick-ups at additional cost during those very
few peak times when trash generation is a problem.
Z. Availability of Public Facilities and Services
a. Water Supply/Fire Protection. The
Aspen Water Department has confirmed that adequate
capacity exists to provide for the needs of the project
without system extensions or upgrading. Water service
will be provided through the existing 6 inch City water
main in Hopkins. Estimated increased demand will be
minimal as only two small restrooms are being added. The
applicant commits to the payment of fees associated with
the fixtures added as a result of the project.
The Aspen Fire Marshall has reviewed the
drawings for the project and has agreed that service to
the project can be provided without the necessity of
upgrading facilities. The Fire Department is one block
from the project and response time is estimated to be
approximately 5 minutes.
b. Sewage Disposal. The Aspen Con-
solidated Sanitation District has confirmed that the
capacity of the existing sewage collection system is
adequate to accommodate the project. Sewer service will
continue to be provided through the existing 12 inch
District line in Mill Street. The applicant commits to
the payment of any fees associated with increased sewer
service.
c. Public Transportation/Roads. The
project is within one block of all RFTA bus routes and
14
within three blocks of the Rubey Park Transportation
Center. The site is also little more than one block from
Aspen's pedestrian mall.
As the analysis of estimated traffic count
increases on page 4 suggests, the increase in peak hour
demand resulting from the proposal is expected to be very
slight, less than 4 cars.
d. Storm Drainage. As a result of this
proposal, an existing concrete patio will be replaced by a
metal roof with built-in gutters. Because there is no
increase i.n impervious surfaces, the impact on the
existing storm drainage system will be negligible.
Storm drainage from the new roof will be
directed to the exiting internal drainage system in the
building and then into the 48 inch storm sewer in Mill
Street, as at present. The-C-i-ty Engineer has requested
and we have consented to maintain the existing rate of
flow for storm water runoff and avoid shedding additional
water onto Mill Street or Hopkins Street.
e. Parking. Consistent with current
auto -disincentive goals and parking requirements for the
CC zone district, no off-street parking is included in the
proposal. The restaurant is within comfortable walking
\ distance (1,500 feet) of the majority of accommodations in
the L-1 and L-2 zone districts. In addition, as stated
previously, the project is within 1 block of all RFTA bus
routes. Because of increasing congestion in the commer-
cial core as a whole, a growing number of Gordon's patrons
arrive and depart the restaurant by taxi.
3. Provision of Employee Housing As we have discussed
15
previously, the intent of this proposal is to permit
better support facilities to be constructed for the main
dining room at Gordon's, so that dining patrons may wait
for their tables in a more comfortable setting and so that
some of the conflicts that presently exist because of the
present layout of the restaurant can be eliminated. These
include the �i_s-_ associated with arrival at the res-
taurant as well as with bar service and the occasional
"bar -only" patron and the inadequacy of the restrooms and
their location away from the bar and waiting area.
The summer season is the peak season of employ-
ment for Gordon's. The restaurant presently serves lunch
and dinner during -summer; during the winter, only dinner
is served. In addition, during the summer, the restaurant
uses the deck for outdoor dining. During the winter, the
/ restaurant has a peak seating capacity of 101 seats for
dinner only; during the summer, maximum seating is 133 for
lunch and 101 for dinner (see Appendix C, Table 1).
We have included in the second section of
Appendix C the restaurant's listing of full-time (more
than 30 hours a week) and part-time employees for the 1987
summer season and the 1986-'87 winter season, which
demonstrates that summer employment is considerably
higher. The restaurant employed 45 persons full-time and
7 persons part-time during the winter 1986-'87 season and
presently employs 51 full-time and 14 part-time this
summer.
Because the restaurant is closed roughly four
month of the year, the number of full-time equivalent
employees is considerably lower, if the Housing Off ice's
standard of a minimum of 2080 hours worked on an annual
basis is used as a basis of calculations. The third
section of Appendix C is a listing of full-time equivalent
employment by restaurant department for calendar year 1986
and a second listing for the first six months of 1987.
Total hours worked in each department have been divided by
2080 hours to determine full-time equivalent employment.
For calendar year 1986, full-time equivalent employment
was 26.1 employees and thus far for 1987 the figure is
28.4 employees. The figure for 1987 will be higher
following conclusion of the summer season.
In this format, these calculations do not permit
comparison between the summer and winter season; they do,
however, allow a comparison to the standards normally
utilized in the Code for employees per thousand sq. ft. of
commercial space. The restaurant presently leases 4,620
sq. ft. in the Mill Street_ Plaza._,_
Main Dining Room and Kitchen 3,000 sq. ft.
Bakery 620 sq. ft.
Outdoor Dining 1,000 sq. ft.
TOTAL 4,620 sq. ft.
Using the maximum standard of 5.25 employees per 1,000 sq.
ft. (net leasable), and including the outdoor dining area
presently used only a portion of the year, anticipated
employee generation would be 24.3. As the calculations of
actual full-time equivalent employees indicate, this
figure is already being exceeded in both winter and
summer.
As a result of the proposal, full-time equi-
valent employment at Gordon's will decline. This will be
the case because of two key factors -- first, food
17
preparation and service is a significantly larger com-
ponent of the employee generation figures than is bar
service; secondly, the number of seats available for
dining will decline following construction. while the
peak seating capacity in the main dining room will
increase slightly to 113, the 32 seats for outdoor dining
in summer are eliminated, so that peak dining remains the
same year-round.
In order to provide the City with adequate
information to verify that there has, in fact, been no
increase in employees at the restaurant following con-
struction, we propose to provide the City with an af-
fidavit regarding the level of employment over the course
of the past year (we propose to use the period of Septem-
ber 1, 1986 through August 31, 1987) and to repeat the
procedure again in September, 1988.
In the event that following the second account-
ing there proves to have been an increase in full-time
equivalent employment over the course of the year, we
propose to make contributions under the City's cash -in -
lieu program for that incremental increase up to a maximum
commitment of 5.25 employees. To assure payment, we will
provide a Letter of Credit to the City upon final approval
of the project.
We believe the provision that permits an
n applicant to demonstrate that there will be no increase in
employment was incorporated into the Code as a relief
valve for minor applications such as this which do not
qualify for the 500 sq. ft. GMP exemption but nonetheless
have limited impacts on the community and limited ability
to bear the burden of a significant employee housing
13
exaction. In this case, a cash -in -lieu contribution for
5.25 employees would approach the dollar amount budgeted
for construction of this project.
19
II. Special Review Procedures
A. Bonus Commercial Square Footage
As discussed earlier, when GMP approval was granted
in 1980 for the existing Mill Street Plaza complex,
5�-vr�ip�
'J approval was also given to 1,550 sq. ft. of bonus area for
restricted housing under the provisions of the Area and
i')V4" ' Bulk Requirements (Section 24-3.4) for the CC zone
e lyrti� v el
., 0 district.
Those provisions permit up to .5:1 bonus floor area
by special review, of which up to .2:1 can be additional
commercial space if the balance of .3:1 is committed to
restricted housing. The construction of 1,550 sq. ft. of
bonus restricted housing permits consideration of addi-
tional bonus commercial area of 1,033 sq. ft. Such a
request was not included with the original GMP submission.
Under Section 24-3.5, the criteria to be considered
by P&Z in order to judge the appropriateness of a Special
Review submission relate very closely to various GMP
scoring criteria, discussed previously, as follows:
1. Compatibility of the proposal with sur-
rounding land uses and zoning (considering a number of
listed elements). Please refer to the GMP Quality of
Design Sections I.6.1.(a), (b), (d) and (e) as well as the
Development Summary, Section I.A.
2. Availability and adequacy of public
facilities and services. Please refer to the GMP Public
Facilities and Services Sections I.8.2.(a) through (e).
')0
B. Reduction in Trash and Utility Access Require-
ments
A minimum of 40 linear feet (with a minimum depth of
10 feet) for a utility/trash service area is required
under current code provisions (Section 24-3.7(h)(4)) for
the existing complex of 27,000 sq. ft. of commercial
space, 1,550 sq. ft. of employee housing and the 1,000 sq.
ft. expansion (total of 29,550 sq. ft.). Of this area a
minimum of 25 linear feet must be reserved for trash
facilities.
The utility/trash service area as constructed is 44.5
linear feet with a depth generally of 13 eet. The area
reserved for trash, however, is limited to 14 linear feet.�ic'rv>",>�
t� rri, y.hr /4
The owners of the complex recall having previous1y�
-wtioX �
received special review approval pursuant to Section 24-
3.5(b) to reduce the area for trash facilities; the trash
area requirement would be the same with the expansion as
it is for the existing complex. To date, we have been
unable to locate a record of such an action by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. Therefore, we have
included with this submission a request for special review
consideration by P&Z of the adequacy of the utility trash
service area to serve the proposed expansion.
The review criteria to be considered by P&Z in its
consideration of the appropriateness of a reduction in
trash and utility access requirements are as follows:
1. The adequacy of trash vehicle access. The
I alley behind the Mill Street Plaza Building is perhaps the
most orderly of all the alleys in the Commercial Core, due
to the effectiveness of off -alley trash storage require-
ment for new construction. There are presently no trash
21
storage containers or other significant encroachments into
the alley right-of-way to interfere with trash vehicle
access to the site.
2. Amount of trash likely to be generated.
Presently, because of constrained bar facilities at
Gordon's, all drinks served in the restaurant must be
mixed from bottles. The addition of a full service bar
will permit the inclusion of a gun system, thereby
allowing the restaurant to convert to a system of inter-
changeable tanks for all mixers. This will cause a
significant reduction in bottle trash generation, which is
a significant component of the restaurant's trash genera-
tion.
3. Unique measures to facilitate trash
removal. The existing trash storage area is well or-
ganized, protected from the elements and elevated to
minimize ice buildup. Three 6'8" x 3'6" trash containers
l✓�t0 presently serve the needs of the complex adequately. At
peak times, increased pick-ups are scheduled at an
additional cost to the owners in order to handle trash
requirements for these limited periods.
4. Provisions for trash compaction. In recent
months, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission have
been investigating trash compactor systems which might be
appropriate for the entire Commercial Core area. Such a
system is only feasible if all the building owners in each
block are prepared or required to participate in the cost
of such a system.
5. Comments of City Engineer and Trash Service
Personnel. In an initial conversation with Engineering,
Jay Hammond has confirmed that he is unaware of any
22
problems in the area; this will have to be confirmed with
a site specific review, however, following submission.
6. Adequacy of area for utilities. A portion
of the existing area was set aside for transformers and
other utilities equipment for the building. We believe
these facilities are adequate to serve the needs of the
complex for the foreseeable future. No additional equip-
ment or service is necessary to meet the needs of this
project.
riTSTIMUMM
23
MOW
E4
is
LE
I W(O
Tr --
IS
p
9
__-
NEW-
'�_
��j ram+ �_ ■
G
U
I�
D
A
�'
S
:�
S
T
L
Is
1'
A
T
I 0
U I3 ll U �'
S 0 U T li li
t � v �► T t o
�� -
III. Appendices
Appendix A
2JJ7
Regular Meeting Aspeh Cit Coin
November 24, 1980
Councilwoman Michael pointed out the Council is Constantly put'in the position of sitting
and judging whether to protect staff or not. Councilwoman Michael asked Grueter to
address the question of reliance. Grueter said the document of reliance says you have to
be fair; if the city tells someone they can do something, the city cannot come along in
the middle and change their mind. Grueter told Council most of the cases in Colorado deal
with situations where a building permit was issued. Grueter told Council he had not
read all the Colorado cases cited by the applicant's attorney. Grueter said the applicant
is relying on the expenditure of funds for architects, etc. along the line. Grueter opine.
they have not gone far enough through the process to rely on detrimental reliance. Grueter
said there are two ways this can go; the applicant may get sent back to square one or the
city can try to negotiate. Councilman Behrendt said if the applicant would not change to
50 year deed restrictions, his vote would be to deny. Councilman Parry pointed out the
city approved the project with a five-year restriction and that is how the applicant
continued to plan. Hecht pointed out to Council if an applicant comes in under GMP and
does not have to go through subdivision, they are home free.
Councilman Behrendt moved to table; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor,
motion carried.
RESOLUTION #20, SERIES OF 1980 - 1981 Commercial GMP Allocations
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Resolution E20, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Behrendt and Collins. Motion
carried.
RESOLUTION #20
(Series of 1980)
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, September 1, 1980
was established as a deadline for submission of 1981 applications for commerical and
office development within the City of Aspen, and
WHEREAS, in response to this ordinance, three commercial projects, totaling
40,420 square feet of commercial and office space, were filed for the 1981
commercial allotment of 24,000 square feet, and
WHEREAS duly -noticed public hearings were conducted before the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission on September 23, 19B0, and before the Planning and Zoning
Commission on October 7, 1980, to consider the Growth Management applications and
evaluate and score these applications in conformance with criteria established in
Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and Zoning Commissio;
did evaluate, rank and score the projects submitted in the following order:
P and Z HPC
Average Average Total
Park Place Building
(8800 square feet) 18.6 12.6 31.2
Ajax Mountain Associates, A2
(11,120 square feet) 19.5 11.5 31.0
Mill Street Station Mall
(20,500 square feet) 18.7 11.7 30.7
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24-10.3(a), the Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended, and City Council concurs, that additional commercial
square footage in the amount of 6,000 square feet be added to the 1981 commercial
quota, and
WHEREAS, City Council also wishes to utilize 10,420 square feet of prior years,
unallocated quotas in order to approve all three projects,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, hereby allocates commercial development allotments to the Park Place
Building in the amount of 8,800 square feet, to Ajax Mountain Building, t2, in
the amount of 11,120 square feet, and to Mill Street Station Mall, in the amount
of 20,500 square feet, and that these projects are authorized to apply for any
further development approvals required by the City of Aspen to secure building perms,
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 4,719 square feet of addtional commercial
construction authorized in accordance with Section 24-10.3(a), in conjunction with
the 1980 allotments, be subtracted from the remaining unallocated quotas of prior
years.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Resolution 020, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilwoman
Michael. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Collins and Behrendt. Motion
carried.
ORDINANCE #54, SERIES OF 1980 - Nicholson Rezoning to RB
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the
public hearing. Sunny Vann, planning office, pointed out the Council had requested the
unit be deed restricted tc "low income"; this has been changed in the ordinance.
Councilman Behrendt moved to read Ordinance #54, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilwoman
Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE 454
(Series of 1980)
AN ORDINANCE A1.1F.NDI`:G THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE. CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
SEC. 24-2.2 BY CHANGING TliP ZONING OF LOTS C, D, AND THE WEST 1/2 OF E, BLOCK
61, CITY AND TOl•;1:SITE OF ASPEN, INDEPENDENCE SUBDIVISION FROM R/MF to R/MF RB
3118
I Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 1981
SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Epicurean
Jack Johnson, planning office, told Council this is a reques t to condominiumize 21 spacesi
in the Epicure building. The Epicurean received a commercial GMP allotment for 10,041 '1
square feet in 1979. This allotment will expire in September if the applicant does not
submit plans sufficient for a building permit issuance. The engineering department has q
noted this is not an adequate condominiumization plat, and the applicant will need to
resubmit a plat. Johnson told Council there is additionally 1,959 square feet of employee
housing space divided into three units. The applicant is proposing this housing be
restricted to the middle income category.
Johnson told Council the planning office has reviewed this and has recommended that six
month minimum leases apply to the three housing units. The P 6 Z reviewed this and
n
recommended middle income guidelines. The applicant is requesting that the three parking !
spaces that would be required for the employee units be waived per the review criteria on '!
the basis of the proximity to public transport and the closeness of the downtown core. i
The two studios will rent for $412 and the one bedroom for $635. These are 550 square
feet and 850 square feet respectively. Johnson told Council the basement will probably
be used as restaurant space; the second floor will be 8 units; the third floor 9 units and,
the top floor the employee housing.
The is special review required for the waiving of the parking requirements. Johnson told
Council the engineering and planning departments are in support of auto disincentive in the
commercial cial and support this application; however, they would like to bring to the
attention of Council, as the city continues to exempt the residential component of the
commercial core, this is compounding the parking problems in the downtown. Johnson said
as future applications come through, the staff will start looking more critically at
parking association with the residential aspects of the downtown. Councilman Parry said
he would like agreement from applicants to join in a parking structure sort of like a I
sidewalk district. lgtlp
The planning office recommends exemption of the employee units and approval of the no
parking request. The employee units should be restricted to the middle income guidelines „
with a six month minimum lease restriction. Mayor Edel again strongly opposed the i
middle income guidelines; the city is getting no affordable units if they are all to
be middle income.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the application for subdivision exception for the
purposes of condominiumizing theEpicure Plaza building subject to the following conditions:
(1) compliance with the engineering department comments, (2) deed restrictions of the
three employee units at the middle income price guidelines, (3) restrictions to six month
minimum leases with no more than two shorter tenancies per year on the three employee
housing units: seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, with,the exception of Mayor
Edel. Motion carried.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the Epicure Plaza request for exception from GMP for the!
three employee housing units and approve the request that no parking be required for these:
units subject to the following condition: employee units restricted at the middle income
guidelines with six month minimum leases and no more than two shorter tenancies; seconded
by Councilman Collins. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Edel. Motion carried.
J
SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Brandt
Councilwoman moved to approve the Brandt subdivision exception for purposes of condomini- '.
umization subject to the following conditions: (1) submission of a condominium plat showing
each units, common elements, parking, etc., to be signed and recorded following construe- ;
tion of the second unit; (2) deed restriction on both halves of the duplex to six month
minimum leases with no more than two shorter tenancies per year; seconded by Councilman
Collins. All in favor, motion carried. II
i
Mal -or Edel requested a work session to discuss the issue of the pricing of employee units.
This was scheduled for June 24, 1981, at noon.
EXEMPTION FROM GMP FOR EMPLOYEE HOUSING - Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Colette Penne, planning office, told Council this is a request to use a .5 FAR bonus for
employee housing; exemption from GMP for employee housing , and exemption from the parkingi
requirements for the employee housing. This is located in the CC zone. This project
went through GMP in September 1980 and was alloted 20,500 square feet in addition to the
retention of 6500 existing square feet. Three employee apartment are included in the plani
and are part of the FAR. One of there units will be substandard in size. Ms. Penne told i
Council the present plan reflects some changes, one is that the existing Mill street y
station is being removed. This has been reviewed and approved by HPC. There will be l
three studios, two at 548 square feet and one at 530 square feet. The employee units
are part of the .5:1 ri.R bonus and the Applicant did not select to t-ike advantage of the
bonus for the —mmerci=l s^ware footage. P s 7 r2c:•-.mended approval of the exemption of I
the employee units from GMP, conditioned,upon them being deed restricted, and voted to
waive the parking requirements.
Councilwoman Michael moved to exempt from GMP the employee units in the Mill Street Shop- 1,
ping Plaza subject to the following conditions: (1) deed restricting the employee hous-
ing units as per Section 20-22 of the Aspen Municipal Code, (2) that these deed restrictions
be for the low income category of the housing authority guidelines, (3) that these deed i
restrictions be recorded prior to the receipt of a building permit; (4) that the parking
requirements for the employee units be waived; seconded by Councilman Parry.
Councilman Parry pointed out these should be middle income units like the previous applica=
tions. Tony Mazza, representing the applicant, agreed he would like to receive what the
other applicants have gotten. Ms. Penne explained she had taken this a(•nlication to P & Z
with no guidelines recommendations. P 6 Z recommended low and said they granted to recom-
mend low auirclines from now on. P:ayo: F.del requested that P 6 Z attend the study session
on June 24.
All in favor, motion carricl.
Appendix B
Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Growth Management
Plan Submission
APPROVAL REQUEST
The enclosed GMP submission is based upon the re -use of
all of the commercial space located on the property at the
S.V. corner of Mill and Hyman. Because of this, application
is being made fora GMP allotment, commercial section, for
the difference between the existing square footage and the
proposed total square footage. All areas devoted to employee
housing have been exempted from the allotment request,
in accordance with Section 24-10.2 (f) of Ordinance No. 48
(Series of 1 977) .
Proposed
total commercial space
27,000
G.S.F.
Existing
commercial space ( less)
6,500
G.S.F.
Requested commercial allocation 20,500 G.S.F.
This Application, then, is for 20,500 G. F.S. of commercial
space, as defined in Section 24-10.5 of the above Ordinance
No. 48.
Applicant is building approximately 1,550 square feet of
employee housing, which consists of three studio units.
Applicant is not requesting any commercial for the employee
units which it is constructing.
Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Growth Management
Plan Submission
INTRODUCTION
1. PROJECT NAME:
2. LOCATION:
3. PARCEL SIZE:
4. CURRENT ZONING:
ZONING UNDER WHICH
APPLICATION FILED:
MAXIMUM BUILDOUT
UNDER CURRENT
ZONING:
5. TOTAL BUILDOUT
PROPOSED:
6. BONUS AVAILABLE:
7. SPECIAL REVIEW
REQUIRED:
HISTORIC DISTRICT
REVIEW:
MILL STREET SHOPPING PLAZA
Mill Street
18,000 S.F.
Commercial Core,
City of Aspen Zoning Code
Commercial Core,
City of Aspen Zoning Code
27,000 S.F. (Commercial)
9,000 S . F. ( Bonus Provision)
36,000 S.F.
28,550 S. F. ( Finished Structure)
-6,500 S.F. (Existing Structure)
22,050 S.F.
Applicant is building 1,550 s. f.
of employee housing, which is
part of the proposed .5 bonus
ratio. This entitles Applicant
to a bonus of 1 , 000 s . f. of
commercial space which Applicant
is not taking advantage of.
Employee Housing Units will be
subject to special review by the
City Planning E Zoning Commission.
For alteration of existing exteriors
and addition, and new building.
Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Growth Management
Plan Submission
PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Surroundinq Zoninq 5 Land Uses
Map No. 1 locates the project in the Commercial Core (CC)
zoning district and the Historic Preservation District.
Surrounding zoning is predominately CC, with some park and
public uses in a three block radius as well as several indivi-
dually designated historic structures. The latter includes the
Wheeler Opera House adjacent to the side to the north.
Surrounding land uses are a six of commercial (retail and
office) and upper -floor residential apartments with some
undeveloped land. Immediately adjacent structures are the
Wheeler, Sabbatini Sports, Aspen Supply (Sardy's) , the
Isis Building, The Bank of Aspen, Berko Studio and the
Mother Lode Building.
PROJECT NARRATIVE: Development Outline
Existing commercial space
Existing space to be removed
Net existing commercial space
New commercial space
New employee housing
New total (commercial E housing)
Open space E landscaping
Lot coverage
Total
6,500 S.F.
- 0-
6,500 S.F.
20,500 S.F.
1,550 S.F.
28,550 F.S.
27%
73%
1000 (18,000 S.F.)
Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Growth Management
Plan Submission
Energy
Project evaluation is focused on the ability of the project , its
spaces and uses, to maximize conservation of energy.
Inciilatinn
Based on the current standards of City Ordinance 45 (series
1976) for thermal insulation, the project will improve upon
required standards significantly, as follows:
THERMAL CODE (MIN) PROJECT STANDARDS
WALLS R-20.00 R-25.00
ROOF 25.00 38. 00
GLASS 1.43 1.82
PERIMETER 10.00 12.00
FOUNDATION
Design
The architectural desirin will incorporate flat roofs with high
insulating performance to take advantage of the insulative
qualities of accumulated snow. Awnings on southerly exposures,
combined with decidious trees, will minimize potentially
uncomfortable heat gains and cooling requirements.
Conservation Devices
Plans for the project include the use of roof -mounted solar
collectors on the third floor roof where they will not be visible
Mill Street Shopping Plaza
Growth Management
Plan Submission
from below. Final determination of collector use has not been
made yet, but they will be utilized to their complete economic
potential, most likely for hot water heating and snow -melt
assist.
Heat recovery devices will be used wherever possible to
reduce space and water heating requirements. Automatic -
reset thermostats will be used in all spaces to reduce night-
time heating requirements. Thermo -syphon loops will be
integrated wherever feasible so as to avoid use of recirculat-
ing pumps.
If any fireplaces are used for the apartments (none are
presently shown) they will use complete outside air ducting
and heat recirculation devices.
Amenities
The evaluation is focused on provisions of usable open space
and bicycle paths.
The project will provide more than the minimum required
open space*; this will benefit both the pedestrian passing
by as well as project users. Through provision of awnings
and permanent protection from sun, rain, and snow, in
addition to completely landscaped court and sidewalk
pedestrian paths designed for safety and user- convenience,
the project provides amenities in proportionate excess to
its enclosed floor area.
Bicycles would not be designed for within the complex,
however, racks will be provided on the grounds at the
various entrances to the project.
* 4,883 S.F. of open space is 40. 6 0 of the undeveloped lots.
Appendix C
APPENDIX C
Table 1
GORDON'S RESTAURANT
Seating Analysis
HOURS OF OPERATION:
Summer:
Lunch from 12:00 P.M. - 2:00 P.M.
Dinner from 6:30 P.M. - 10:00 P.M.
Winter:
Dinner Only 6:00 P.M. - 10:00 P.M.
EXISTING SEATING (PEAK):
Main Dining Room: 41
I174--P6 Tables for 4 64
3 Table for 5 15
1 Table for 6 6
2 Tables for 8 16
-1rl1 Total 101 Seats
�nCW�a Bar Seating_ Iq5
Bar Stools Total 4 Seats
Outdoor Dining (_Summer Only)-
8 Tables for 4 Total 32 Seats
PROPOSED SEATING PEAK
Main Dining Room:
19 Tables for 4 76
3 Tables for 5 15
1 Table for 6 6
2 Tables for 8 16
Total 113 Seats
Bar Seating:
12 Bar Stools 12
7 Tables for 2 14
Stand -Up Tables 8
Total 34
Outdoor Dining:
None Total 0
fmnv,,- /98
�10
SUI'1MEj-z ' ?�-
Gs 01
.1L'L. 17, 1507 16:311 116
=60RDONS
oy •p"OA a.,d�.
? '01/25/81
EMPLOYEE I.J("T J:Y FIEPARTM.r'NT
SOC SEC EMPLOYEE NAME TELEPHONE :110,J)
DEPARTMENT - 28-5 52 RST-P!R SERV P, "IAR
40- 70-556S ANDER"ON, STEVEN N"Y„E 30719?5-3342 06-12-06
302-56-7399
BALDWIN, PAULA S.
303-925-41',"
^ , : , -" ;
5 22- ? 5-•,',210
DEI.I-, TROOKE ANDREM (p)
?03-925-".509
06-24-07
404-92-5262
RUDREAU, ERIC IA VID (p)
303-920-1 '%:
(11' l 1-01
561. 71-01,'61
RURTON, ANTHONY PAUL.
.7•03-9,7" -.9457
07-22- 85
575-62-5328
CHOCK, FRANKLIN GEE YING
303-9:' ; t:'.'';
i11 01,-•.5
0"9.60••.',9,'.?
COI_�MAN, STFPKP,NIf_ F'.
30,',-925-3366
06�-21-07
4,99-52-7407
EMERY, SHELDON
303-9:' , : , : '
,-,,; ,;;..9,7
35011•46-1986
JOR5TAD, SUSAN KAY
703-925-4135
11-?2-85
137 64-4'57
KING, IAN MALCOLM
303- '.: - ', )
, 1 '( -2,1)
M3-40 11,7,'•
I.YONS, STEF'HEN
703-915-1.733
07-12-•04
571-27-3231
MALLET, FRANK T.
303-9215-5473
"A lR•,17
004- 62; 0150
MCHIIGH, ,JOHN JAY
303-920-1 97
05-211-05
261-95-4570
MEARS, GREGORY •JOHN(p)
303-927-4229
0/-012--17
461. A9 `C29
MOLI.IGCH3, F'HI1.IPPF
.',03-920-31?5
05-29- 05
524-31-465 5
NEI-SON, BARRARA SEARS(p)
303-925-727'
S it) -U7
064-40--0123
fAlll. IJT, KENNETH M,
30.71-rl.5-5017
05-28-05
471-70-9070
PETERSEN, KIRK ALLEN
303—i'
i "'• 37
560-671-8481
rMITH, PrREK CUTLER
303-945-4917
06-19-07
028-44-8202
TYE, MARK
303-9r'-: ;'..;'
0 ;'•,:4
5:i.8- 66--0938
WALLACE, RONALD
303-925-6297
01..-',0-,'7
561-96-0034
WILLIAMS, RORERT �p�
303-.' „' :
;!' '.0 •,i1
57).•-7P.-5905
kIII LJAMS, CURTiPTIAN JAY
- -
07-10-87
COI',v F .'3
8
5
"T0Y e-.�s
GOR"ION 'S
0 7 / 2 1,7
EMPLOYEE
LIST BY DEPARTMENT
Soc SEC
-----------
EMPLOYEE NAME
-------------------------
TEI EPND?dE
------
I;IRFfi
-
DrEPIMMENT
- 2C-574 R :T-P/R CLE.ANINO
321-65-4937
DURAN, ,IOSE (F)
- -
1.' "'^ ':'.•5
5 2 2 - A9. 8132
DURAN, RCYEs
.',03-927-7119
11-2?-f,5
5 55-02-0837
LUI S, •JOSE
-
-.? 1,11" -W
560-20-C714
LUIS, ANTONIO(
OfM4-E7
593-91-629 5
PERF7., RAMON
303-9.':� -
-11 ? ; 6
524-76- 4821
S",NCI117., hATIAS
303-9?_0-?2M
12-10-P r
523-95-4431
TOPETE, RAFAEL CONTRERAS 303-920-2238
05-22-a7
COUNT 7
to
D��Ls%t'• 7�
GORI10N I S 07/7 J/87 ",'+i;!: 3
EMf'LOYFF LIST 1,Y DFF'A;;TMENT
SAC SEC EMPLOYEE NAME TELEPHONE ,+1.(!:A
DFF'ARTrENT - 28-578 RST-P/R FOOD PREP
73 56-.6G2 PALDWIN, RONA D JAMES 303-925-4159 12-15-84
094-62-0291
PEH, CHRISTOPHER
303-925-3073
06-1./-17
515-•53-1171
DRTDGMAN, JANE
- -
06-26-07
523-47-5135
DEWEY, JASON
303-923-5037
0' 0I U7
111L•60-010`
FFRTIG, EDWARD 1.
303-925-4950
17.-07-64
526-06-9340
GORTON, JOEL �)
-
. '?-J1
2',?- 70. 1690
HUNT, CAROL ANNE
303-9?.5-87 57
12-04-86
279-54-4743
.JOHNSONy .IEFFREY
303-9'• < ',"ix,'
12 .!)3 ?6
3 3• `1-0072
KONRA.DT, GFRP,Y
303-925-49;S
05-18-87
066-42-18349
MULBERRY III, •JOHN B.
303-
11
261-79-371,3
MURRAY, GFOfFREY RODFRT
•303-927-4020
11-19-86
537-62-6196
NACCARATO, GORDON S.
.. . " I ,':r;
u' 10 04
537-60-0435
NACCARATO, REDFCCA V.
303-920-1466
07-10-84
465-60-8502
PENA, VICTOR
303-920-301',
!'S••).';-I,)
110-64-3055
UNFIT, MICHAF.L H01_MES(P)
303-975-6034
06-30-87
554-21-773A
RUIZ, FILEMON
303-�*:": "•...
!; i.z' -34
246..72-9940
SINK MS, St►SA4 ANN
3031-920-3156
1:-If-04
083-52-4430
STEIN, MATTHEW R03 RT
303-925-5281
-'1•J5
ot. - 11.- 9141
TVEITE, ERIK T'FRN
30.',-925•-1677
06-27-07
462-06-6995
WILSON, .IEFFREY P.
303-Y "• , - ! '
0„ - 24 -;!7
COUNT 20
GORDON'S 07/25/S7 PAGE 4
EMPLOYEE LIST T:Y DIPARTMENT
SOC SEC EMPLOYEE NAME TELEPHONE
DEPARTMENT — 20-584 RST—P/R GENERAL
192•-40. 7201 RUTI.FR, MARGARET MARY(# 303-9'.0-3114 02-23-97
536-62-2735 COULTER, WARREN LEE .1 !t '0—n5
107-41-7522 A^'NIELE, MARIO 303-963-240 12-24-84
39°-70-7886 DANIELE, ROBIN KAY 303-9". I ; ,.7--' 5
4F--,'0-7471 EMERY, DORIAN (p) ?03-91.25-5V! 2 06-12—S6
551-76-6738 LITTLE, RICKI LYNN 303— : I ' -12 -:?b
5;'.4- 06--9327 MCLAIN, PAMELA R. 3011-923-4945 07-01--87
555-19-5. l(t MOUNTAIN, HAGGIS 303-9:'-, � . .
546- 00- 4300 SCHLITsf.RT, .IANJCF M, 303-92 5—0572 07-10-84
COUNT 9
CU'cUON'C 07/?`/I'7
EMPLOYEE LIST BY DEPARTMENT
SOC ;FC F-MPI OYES NAM TFL FPHONL 11TREU
------------------------------------ --- --
TlI-PhRTMF U — 29-7* R'u—P/R DAKFRY
283-50-3385 I,RADRICK, LINDA 303-927-557' -'JI
527- S9- 9170 BROWN, FLUATIFTH FAY 303-925-7797 06-22-87
527-29-97% FRANCKEN, LAURA DETH�r-) 303-925-777'"", 1--V
217-4 .-4274 MAN,,IIFSTCR, JEAN FOWLER 303-92`-9, 6 O 11-20�-81,
006-60-9170 SMITH, .LEAN DWYER 303-963 t i' 31
51; 5- 72-79511. TOWNFP,, TIMiOTHY MTCHAFI. 303-920-1466 07-31-84
COUNT 6
5�i1�1Hw
PAU
IL--xa71e
•
se•,n c� � �, a r
AI�Xan�
Anawal+
Arderso n
c I ean-,�X
�Dutom) T .
Ll' s/ �J.
Ict", , / T. Imo,,, S, A • (p)
c,�ock
M C Till ) a.
Tdul
104or5e-n
S;ci Ma n
-y
Uecrlh
�jI Ila•,,s ) R - 6)
'�ar cz
—S, A &---
-cy6 I eTMY) Dress
�joi,Von
Lorc colo
FAO GK,ti►,o h
M or►�6
Mc EIC'n
Hurra y
New rr-b, G.
Naccarc+v,-F
-::Fen,5;-
9�UtZ
si 1"Ick s
;-F—s iz�;Ivv�+At.
0
.ba
Iry yam,
ai ice. ��/��. �7T�yvi✓. �iL)�c� f�<�
M/il ivlrZ-1411 1aM 01= `tows
r Jlil. 3, 1987 21:56:07
GORDON'S 07-01-87 Ff,G 1
(/(; REGISTER YEAR ENDING tOL-30-971 Mar�fi�s G1OSd MCrt4 s
-C �� �C�
r"L O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/N/S OTHER GRJSS FIT FT CA SIT SUI OTHER NET
AI.EY.P.NDCR, JFFFRE.Y 150-56-0654 HRS-REG 572.25 O/T 201.95 D/T
1916.77 145.60 0.00 0.00 0.01 9.00 1312.37
ANMdRLT, FRED 5551-43-7321 H^,S-REG 322.20 O/T 10.90 D/T
1079.20 54.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2234.01
ANDE.RSON, STEVF.N WAYNE 440-70-5566 HRS-REG 570.30 O/T 13.50 IVT
1910.24 67.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4378.12
F"LDI?IN, Pf.1A.A S. 302-56-7399 HRS-REG 513,85 O/T 1.40 D/T
1721.18 7.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7028.22
YELL, PROOKE ANT,RFW 522-25-3.'.1O HRS-REG 6.10 0/7 .00 D/1
20.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20,43
BORTON, ANTHONY PAUL 561-71-8961 H S-RIG 420,25 O/T .00 D/T
917.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8217.53
i;CCCK, rP,rNKLIN GEE. YI'!G S75 h9R2 54. (V E62.0 D/T
990.03 109.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9314.33
COI EMAN, ^TFF1 ANTE P, 049-60-.',929 HRS-REG 11.20 0/T .00 D/T
37.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.51
U."ULTER, bIR RFIN LEE 536-62-2735 HMS-REG 432.80 O/T 12.80 D/T
2795.99 31,65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7234.64
EMERY, SHUDON 489-52-7457 URS•RED 35.00 O/T .00 D/T
117.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 117.23
Hl!GG'N, 1:11PH SCOT T 2 65-90-5764 HRS-REG 240,85 O/T .00 D/T
806.75 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1256.75
JO STAD, !;l1SAN KAY 359-46-1906 HRS-REG 535.65 O/T 26.70 D/T
1076.30 00.61 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 10446.91
K.1';C. IAN MALCOLM 137-64-4259 H S-REG 635.10 O/T 37.85 D/T
2130.71 190.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4571.06
LYONS, STEPHEN 043-4f-1633 H';S-REG 540.25 O/T 10.50 D/T
102515-D 31.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10071,25
MALLET, FRA1!!C T. 571-27-3231 HRS-REG 26.60 O/T .00 IVT
89.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 89.11
-62-0150 HnS-REG 5`,1.40 O/T 21.60 D/T MG�IUCH, .lOHN ,!AY 004
1108.00 65.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8723.21
MOLLICCI:I, PII.IP('F -49-599 HRS-rEG 237.35 O/T 5.60 D/TI6f1
476.90 1141.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4503.80
.00 HEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 2250,00
317.76 308.33 105.70 0.00 0.00 !:IS!',';8
.00 ?MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 1100.00
264.22 157.73 61.54 0.00 50.00 590.52
.00 MEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 2400,00
593.81 313.04 96,94 0.00 269.07 '1•1.15
.00 MFALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 5,00.00
306.72 502,52 180,77 0.00 0.00
.00 MFALS $ 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 1.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.91'
.00 MEALS S 0.00 DEC!. TIPS f 7300.00
106.77 537.55 63.53 0.00 109.74 11."Q
400 MEALS f 0.00 DLCL TIPS f 8225.00
136.92... 665.97 131.48 0.00 50.00 i
.00 MEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 2.68 0.00 0.00 30.00 4,33
.00 MEALS f 0,00 DECL TIPS f 4400.00
398.00 517.28 106.22 0.00 427.02 13 6,12)
.". TEALS f 0.00 TlFCI. TIPS 1 0.00
1.22 8.38 0.17 0.00 30.00 77,46
.00 MEALS f 0.00 PtCL TIPS i 410.00
60.65 89.86 15.60 0.00 0.00 6.10.54
.00 MEALS f 0.V, DFCL TIPS f 9290.00
171.44 746.95 103.95 0.00 101.58 .12,97
.00 MEALS f 0.00 PCCL TIPS f 2250.00
0.00 326.83 1301.44 0.00 414.57 1491.?-
.00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 8954.00
104.39 720.09 132.56 0.00 0.00 160121
.00 Mr
(AL" f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 6.37 0.00 0,00 0.00 74
.00 MERI.S f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 7550.00
168.47 623.72 64.17 0.00 91.45 5.�•:
.00 MEALS f 0.00 I'FCL TIPS f 4010.00
75.90 322.02 17.07 0.00 55.31 2.3.37
GORDOI'S, 07-01-87 PAGE 2
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (06-30-87)
REG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S 0THiR GROSS FIT FT CA SIT SI'I (?THFtR NETT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- - ---- -
PAOL UT, KENNETH W.
1001.87 0.00
PETERSEN, KIRK A11E1"
800.22 0.00
SCCKMAN, DO"IALD KEITH
1678.46 28.16
SMITE, DCREK CUTLER
87.41 0.00
TYE, M!iRK
2.960.74 12.67
OWNS, PAN. ANTHONY
1261,41 127.16
WEAVER, DP-.RRY ALIEN
1730.50 292.22
kll.l?"M RODFRT
423.06 0.00
064-40-0101 Hi;S-REG 202.75 O/T .00 D/T
0:00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2001.87
471-70-9070 HR"-RCG 230.90 O/T .00 D/T
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1250.22
337-54-1045 IIRS-REG 501.10 O/T 5.60 D/T
0.00 0.00 O.CO 0.00 64% .62
560.63-04,",1 HRS-REG 2:4.60 O/T .00 PVT
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82,41
028-44.8202 517.90 O/T 1.30 D/T
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5573.41
1.7.•7-57-3416 HRS-REG 513.95 O/T 2101.60 D/T
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6413.57
560-43-5071 4:i;S-RF.G 517.10 O/T 58.10 D/T
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. 3931.02
561-96-0334 Hit S-RCG 126.30 O/T .00 TO
0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 723.06
DEPT r'S_•rci RESTAURANT SFRVICC I RA H"S-REG 8704.50 O/T 297.0 D/T .00
28216.40 1263.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 108988.66 4724.83 7792.68 1844.36 0.00 2499.73 1.2_623,01
DUr.AN, ,Ifi;'rl
321-65-4907 I:FcS-RCG
2'5.90
O/T
.00 D/T
1535.40
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1535.40
D!32,G'I1 RIFY.",
522-49-0232
1,85.20
O/T 20.75 D/T
4111.20
186.7.5,
0.00 0.00
0.00
0,00
4297.95
WIN), .10."•E
555-02-0307 HRS-REG
420.45
O/T
2,125 D/T
2522,70
29.25
0.00 0.00
0.00
4.04
254'_.95
LUI S, ANT('•PIIO
560-20-8714 HRS-RCG
14,^,.10
O/T
900 D/T
881.60
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
3?8.60
M1I.IU", f!L.I:rRTO
456-70-9123 HRS-REG
247.30
O/T
3.55 D/T
14,013.80
31.95
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1515,75
MOLINA, LO,;FN,,,o
531-25-4673 III;S-RFG
94.95
O/T
.00 IVT
569.10
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
569.70
PINF7, r.CON
593-91-620,5 HRS-RCG
647.70
O/T 70.40 II/T
3816.20
631.60
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
4519.80
.00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 1000.00
142.21 143.13 .17.97 0.00 313.51 3651Q5
.00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 450.00
108.34 39.39 27.16 0.00 60.00 5t5•0
.00 MEALS t 0.00 DCCL TIPS S 4750.00
529,17 01,65 155.98 0.00 0.00 557.12
.00 MFAL^ S 0.00 DFCL TIPS $ 0.00
0.00 5.09 0.00 0.00 30.00 4S
.00 MFALS t 0.00 DFCL TIPS t 2600.00
723.35 398,50 193.84 0.00 0.00 1657.72
.00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS t 502`.00
03.36 458.57 115.17 0.00 216,73 511,74
.00 MEALS t 0.00 DFCL TIPS t 1000.00
432.09. 281.07 95.52 0.00 210.00 t012.39
.00 MEALS t 0.00 TlrCL UPS t 300.00
0.00 514.70 0.54 0.00 40.00 330.32
.00 MrFAL� t
0.00 DCCL
TIP" S
0.00
0.00 109.78
21.10
0.00
0.00
1101.52
.00 MEALS t
0,00 DEC',
TIP: t
0.00
0.00 307.30
132.17
0.00
0.00
".••43
.00 MEALS t
0.00 DECL
TIPS t
0.00
77,26 181.82
65.01
0.00
0,00
2218.06
.00 MEALS :
0.00 DFCL
TIPS t
0.00
0.00 63.53
10.84
0.00
0.00
014,23
.00 MEAL; $
0.00 IiFCL.
TIPS t
0.00
63.71 108.38
44,11
0.00
0.00
1291.^5
.00 MEALS S
0.00 DECL
TIPS S
0.00
0.00 40.73
7.71
0.00
0.00
521,26
.00 MFGLS S
0.00 DECL
TIPS t
0.00
232.85 323.17
137.77
0.00
0.00
3':' •,0t
GORDOLI' S 07-01-87
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (06-30-07)
REG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTHER Gilt" OS^ FIT FICA SIT
PAGE 3
SDI OTHER NET
RAMIREZ, .J0RGF
559-60-4241 H^S-REG
276.75
O/T
2.30 D/T
.00
MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
1660.50 20.70
0-00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1681.20
25.64
120.21
37.81
0.00
;:AMORA„ CON7.A.L0
519-08-6572
H S-REG
117,75
O/T
.00 D/T
.00
MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
1126.50 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1126.50
13.65
80.54
27.50
0,00
SA,NCHEZ, MRTIAS
524-36-4821
HITS-REG
672.30
O/T 69.20 1i/T
.00
MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
4033-,90 622.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
4656,60
244.27
332,95
143.3t
0,00
TOPETC, RAFA,fI. CONTRrRi"S
523-95-4431
Hf;-CCC
15.30
O/T
.00 D/T
.00
KFALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
91.80 0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
91.30
0.00
6.56
0.00
0.00
DFPT 28-574 RFSTAIJU NT
CLEANING
HRS-REG
3G51.70
O/T 16,11.45
1i/T
.00
21910.20 1516.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
23426.25
657.38
1674.77
630.83
0.00
0.00
0.00 1.495,54
0.On,
0.00 1004.71
0,00
0.00 39.36,07
0.00
0.00 15,N
0-00CIO V3197
BALDIdIN, RONALD JAMES
?.73-56-2662 HRS-I;EG
60C.15
G/T 47.55 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
UPS f
650.00
5398-25 575.92
0.00 0.00
0.00
500.00
7124.17
1053.82 509.38
237.96
0.00
647.79
3025.22
BE.H, CIIRI:TOPHER
094-62-029.1 I;RS-RI.G
".70
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
52.20 0,00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
52.20
0.00 3.73
0.00
0.00
0.00
4^,",7
DFWfY, Jam
523-47-517F, Hr;S-P,cG
113.60
O/T
2.75 D/T
.00 MEALS $
0.00 DCCL
TIPS 4
NCO
1101.60 20.25
0.00 0.00
0.00
100.00
1221,85
97.35 87,36
15.93
0.00
5.36
1055>05
DIERL.A,M, KYLE.
058-68-07 59 II.",S-REG
207.75
G/T
3.40 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
122'_.50 30.40
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1253.10
0.00 89.SO
0.00
0.00
0.00
1163.50
FCRTIG, UNAARIi I.
118-0-8105 III;S-F;EG
7213.00
O/T
.00 D/T
,00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
600.00
10350.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
1000.00
11.950.00
1686.42. 854.43
453.60
0.00
0.00
1731'5
HUNT, CARBi. ANNE
2.59-78-1658 HRS-REG
649.C5
O/T
48.4A D/T
.00 MEALS f
0,00 DFCL
TIPS f
100,00
4451.50 466.95
0.00 0.00
0.00
250.00
5268,45
502,70 376.69
157.30
0.00
197.44
3^34,32
JCIIHSON, ,IFFF,^,I"Y
279-54-4743 11RS-RCO
667,90
O/T
74.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
99.00
4007.40 666.00
0.00 0,00
0.00
2.01.00
4972.40
616.67 3`5.53
143.25
0,00
0.00
372.95
KONRADT, FERRY
733-52-0872 HRS-REG
42.00
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
252.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
252.00
18,87 18.02
4.62
0..^,0
0100
2J0,19
LOPICCOLO, RJTA ANN
433-:'1-3247 }Ir;r_GEG
296.00
O/T
0.90 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DCCL
TIPS f
50.00
1776.00 80.10
0.00 0.00
0.00
200.00
2106.10
210.62 150.58
54-22
0.00
0,00
1600.;3
MACKINNON, NEIL
944-41-0116 HITS-1;EG
183.80
O/T
S.65 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
11011.80 77.85
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1180.65
3.33 04.41
30.13
0,00
0.00
MARI);O, FR",1; THOMf S
fr,,) .`,]-f,054 HI;S RECi
7`.45
0/T
.00 D/T
00 HEALS t
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
( .0,^
452.70 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
452.70
0.00 32.37
0.00
O.CO
0.00
;20,33
GORDOA'S 07-01-1017 PAGE 4
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (06-30-27)
Ucl O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S CiHER Cf;0-S F1T FICA SIT S D 1 OTHER NET
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
MCEIDERRY IT I, JOHN P. 066.42-1849 Hf;S-R1 653.30 O/T 66.70 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 100.00
3919.80 600.30 0.00 0,o0 0.00 250,00 4370.10 547.25 348.21 140.28 0.00 14.00 37,10,16
MURI;AY, GFOrF CY ROPCRT 261-79-3763 HRS-RF.0 732.80 O/T 61.35 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS S 257.00
5626.80 736.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 6872,00 620.72 491.35 171.63 0.00 435.54 4943.76
NACCARP,TO, GORDON S. 537-62-6196 HOS-CEf, 10il4.00 �/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 14 CL TIPS $ 0.00
15000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
0,00 15000,00 63,00 1072.50 514.98 0.0 680.50 12669.02
NACCARATO, RUECCA V, 5.',9-60-0415 II!;S-f;EG 10"-0011/ /T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0,00 IiECL TIPS $ 0.00
15000.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 O.CO 0.00 15000.00 0.00 1072.50 347.52 0,00 2305.00 171344,73
PENA, VICTOR 465 60-85107 Hf;S-REG 645.85 O/T 117.80 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0,00 DECL TIPS S 250.00
3875.10 1060.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 5435.30 304.19 388.62 166.60 0.00 0.00 417.5,07
RU SS, ADAM SC,OTT 067-54-4467 HRS-i;CG 196.80 0/7 22.70 D/T .00 MEALS t 0,00 DICL TIPS S 0.00
1130.80 199.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1380.60 150,31 98.71 40.77 0.00 0.00 1n90.31
RU17., FIIFMON C54-21-7786 Hf;S-REG 632.80 O/T 77.85 D/T .00 MFALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 650.00
6323.00 1167.75 0.00 0.00 0.00. 1000.00• 9145.75 69.91• 653.92.. 340.65 0.00 73,04 7152.73
-rY.D,I.E III, L.OREN70 556-90-6861 hR5-RCG 70.90 O/T 20.20 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL. TIPS $ 0.00
125,40 181.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 307.20 0.00 21.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 2�5,•'.;
INNICKS, SUSAN ANN 246-72-9940 HRS-REG 656.45 O/T 09.45 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 600.00
5833.00 1120.35 0,00 0.00 0.00 500.00 8053.35 759.25 575,81 282.66 0.00 150.00 5605.63
`1TEIN, MATTHEV ROPERT 0,13-52-4430 H S-REG 71113.00 O/T ,00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 900.00
10350.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1000.00 12150.00 1405.49 068.73 509.73 0.00 5119,47 8016.`3
UII SUN, JE.FFRE.Y P. 462-06- 6995 HITS-REG 5.50 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 UFCl. TIPS S 0.00
33.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 0.00 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.64
1760
I:EF'T 2O-`,73 RESTAURANT FOOD PREPARATION h1RS-REG-fF+�4P•r 0/T 647.70 D/T .CO
97433,85 6984.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 5500.00 114090.92 8070.40 8156.77 3616.83 0.00 321R.14 8Gft60.73
DUTLCR, M"IRGARET MARY
601.90 0.00
DP.'.IEI-C, ma:jO
101,15.00 0.00
P•ANIELE, RODIN KAY
5687.50 0.00
FMEF;Y, UO^IA!!
2224,10 0.00
152-40-7201 HRS-RIG 95.15 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 608.90 19.55 43.54 5.21 0.00 0.00 540.60
107-44-3522 ITS -RIG 703.00 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 4913.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 6113.14 21151.14 3787,74 1512.31 905.34 0.00 518.35 9514,40
378-70-7=i HRS-REG 605.40 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 IiFCL TIPS S 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 6187.50 520.64 442.41 ,'-06.11 0.00 35.00 4923.1,4
4C 51-7471 FIRS-GFG 296.55 O/T .00 TUT .00 MEALS $ 0.00 Il[CL TIPS $ 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2224.10 259,26 159.02 43.35 0.00 0.00 1.7,52.47
GORDON'S 07-01-f7 PAU
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (06-30-37)
F;CG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTH_R GC05� FIT FICA SIT ^DI OTHER NET
--------- --------- ---- ---- ----- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
LITTLE, RICKI LYNN 7)1-76-6738 HRS-REG 215,60 0/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0,00 DECL TIPS 3 0.00
1,5,09.20 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1509,20 0,00 107.91 26119 0,00 0.00 1,175,1.0
MD',INTAJN, HAGGIS C55-19-5621 HRS-REG 335.55 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL. TIPS $ 0.00
2516,60 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2516.60 211.80 179.94 50.89 0.00 316.18 1.757.80
SCH11i.;ERT, JANICE M. 546-CO-4300 HRS-REG 1044.00-,/T .00 P/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 IiFCL TIPS $ 0.00
15000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1000,00 16000.00 42.57 1144.00 103.80 0,00 960.00 13747..')3
337.525
DEPT 29-534 RE5TAHRANT GEM RAL HRS-REG 7201 25 O/T .00 D/T .00
37671.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7613.14 50197.44 4041,56 3589.13 1340.28 0.00 1827.53 33633.34
R�APRICK, LINDA 283-50-33E5 HRS-RFG 37.05 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DELL TIPS S 0.0")
240.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 240.82 17.20 17.22 4.25 0.00 0.00 202.L5
BROWN, EL.I7APCTH FAY 527-i^-",]70 HRS-REG 7.25 0/T .00 P/T .00 MEALS 1 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
37.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.87 0.00 2.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.02
FRl',NCKL"N, L.AURA PFTh 5,27-29-979A HITS-I;EC 11.10 b/T .00 P/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 PFCL TIPS f 0.00
6L.05 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 61.05 0.00 4.37 0.00 0,00 0.00 `5.,>?
11GRRIPL:R, DEBORAl1 LYNN 399-56-4729 HF;S-REG 54.00 O/T 5.90 P/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
432,00 70.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 502.80 58.00 ?;.95 15,30 0.00 0,00 393,55
MA►NI STFR, x m Fowi.rn ?75-46-4274 HRS-RFC 634,25 O/T 50.75 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 100.00
3541.69 418,65 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 41-60.34 361.75 304,61 111,09 0.00 0.00 31,,22.67
S61E1.?O'4, KUNLUN ANTE 214-66-1403 HRS-REG 1'8.0 5 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DELL TIPS $ 90.00
797,67 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 887.67 78.27 43,47 17.11 0.00 0.00 635.80
SMITH, JU"; DWYER 006-60-9130 HRS-RES 653.35 O/T 67.45 P/T .00 MEALS $ 0,00 DUL TIPS $ 530.00
70901.10 1061.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 500,00 9199,17 1040.94 657.08 365.27 0.00 5.00 6!, 60
STF.I":, i:('„ e, M. 1714-48-•4740 HRS-REG 190.15 O/T .00 P/T .00 MEAL" S 0.00 DELL TIPS $ 175.00
1521.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200,00 1876.20 67.84 135.58 32.10 0.00 0.00 1;f1,5.,3
TOWNFn, TTMi3THY MICIIP.EL 535-72-7951 HRS-RE.G 1,05. 50 O/T 62.45 P/T .00 MCALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 450.00
4452-95 687.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 6090.00 544,86 435.44 172.17 0.00 353.96 4133.57
DEFT 29-`V3 REPECCA'S REEECCA'S FAKEF;Y HRS-REG, 2330.70 O/T 1i;6,55 P/T .00
18135.25 2238.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 1400.00 23163.62 2168.98 1656.57 717.29 0.00 358.96 15719.P2
60 s
All- Z�v
y
/57, 3�z
ram. /
e Ho �f t2va� BUYS t i c�/vrC�ed
T e
7�0
y� �
�y
GnJcDONs
01-01-87
PAGF 1
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (12-31-86) ci n,crt�s
Q7 9 ci o-, ie-J -3
rn0 4A
RE:G O/T
---------------------------
D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S
---------------------------
OTHER
GROSS
------------------
FIT FICA
---------
SIT
------------------
SDI
OTHER
---------
NET
-
ALF_Y,f,NPIR, JEFFREY
158-56-0654 HRS-REG
348.00
O/T
8.80 Ii/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
500.00
1165.68 44.25
0.00 0.00
0.m
0.00
1709.93
116.97 122.26
28.77
0.00
10.00
77-S.93
ANAWA,LT, FRED -
555-43-7321 HRS-RIG
100.60
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS S
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
336.98 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
336.98
14.75 24.09
3.73
0.00
0.00
294.41
ANDERSON, STEVEN NAYNF
440-70-5566 HRS-RLG
597.24
O/T
9.20 Jl/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DFCL
TIPS f
1000.00
2007.21 46.27
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
3053.48
271.30 218.32
69.49
0.00
0.00
1474.37
BAL.DWIN, PAULA
302-56-7399 HRS-REG
434.46
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
1335.00
1379.10 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
2714.10
287.12 194.06
65.91
0.00
40.00
792.01
BLACK, ROB
554-00-1125 HRS-REG
407.52
O/T
8.15 Ii/T
.00 MEALS $
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
1764.13 54,64
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1818.77
0.00 130.04
0.00
0.00
25.00
1663.73
BURTON, ANTHONY PAUL
561-71-8961 HRS-RIG
777.96
O/T
9.10 Ji/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
8289.00
1928.25 27.41
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
10244.66
529,33 732.49
73.85
0.00
235.00
384.99
BUTERA, THOMAS RICHA;;D
164-60-4034 HRS-REG
48A.75
O/T
7.80 IVT
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DFCL
TIPS f
1250.00
1630.42 39.22
0,00 0.00
0,00
0.00
2919.64
292.72 208.75
74.11
0.00
125.00
969.06
CHOCK, FRANKLIN GEE YJNG
575-62-5828 HRS-REG
1078.14O/T
49.58
IVT
.00 MEALS S
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
12915.00
2166.49 149.34
0.00 0.00
0,00
0.00
15230.83
841,64 1039.00
119.53
0.00
100.98
164.43
DAHLDERG, DCSRA LYNN
468-70-674B HRS-RFG
460.50
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEAL^ f
0.00 DECL
TIPS $
4520.00
1828,76 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
6408.76
883.03 458.23
125.24
0.00
85.24
277,02
DE DOUTEJLLER, PHILIPPE
41,6-49-5829 HRS-RCC•
922,30
O/T 21.16 D/T
.00 HEALS f
0,00 IiECL
TIPS $
15000.00
1853.27 63.71
0.00 0,00
0.00
0.00
16916.98
405.31 1209.56
25.67
0.00
182.04
94,10
HEMMETER, MARK MAYNARD
`176-78-5691 HRS-REG
30.33
O/T
3.36 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
1410.00
11137.04 16.90
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
2663.94
181.51 190.47
40.36
0.00
40.00
P012'O
HUGGIN, HUGH SCOTT
265-90-5764 HRS-RIG
22.30
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
74.69 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
74.67
0.00 5.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
49.35
JORSTAD, SUSAN KAY
758-46-1986 HRS-P,EC
1012.73
O/T 24.57
D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
9100.00
2062.47 83.93
0,00 0.00
0.00
0.00
11246.40
872.76 804.12
55.12
0.00
301.45
112.95
KING, JAN MALCOLM
137-64-4259 HRS-REG
131.00
O/T
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DFCL
TIPS f
0.00
438.77 0.00
0.00 0,00
0.00
0.00
438.77
0.00 31.37
3.78
0.00
30.34
373.10
KLASSFN, STEPHEN G.
463-02-SA14 HRS-RFG
55-2.30
O/T 32,61
D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
710.00
1849.91 163.87
0.00 0.00
0.00
0,00
2723.78
280.87 194.75
69.82
0.00
240.00
12,i?.,4
LYOHS, STEPHEN
043-48-1633 HRS-REG
11-13.63
O/T 15.56
JVT
.00 MEALS f
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
12370.00
2257.87 46.90
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
14632.77
678.71 1049.82
117.92
0.00
67.79
390.5.3
MCHOCH, JOHN JAY
004-62-0150 HRS-REG
1150.63
O/T 88,4E
IVT
.00 MEALS 1
0.00 DECL
TIPS t
5230.00
3202.85 355.73
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
8738.58
810.81 628.39
186.43
0.00
440.41
1>'i ,:)1
GORDON'S
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (12-31-86)
REG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTHER
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ------
01-01-R7
PAGE
GROSS FIT FICA SIT SDI OTHER NET
--------------------------------------- --- -
MCNAILY JR., ROY GR-�G 540-65-1308 HRS-RIG 272.74 O/T .00 D/T .00 MCALS S 0-00 DFCL TIPS f 1150,00
913.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-00 2063.53 0-00 147.54 0.00 0.00 100.00 665.9!
MELIN+",FR, EDWARD 339-62-2765 HRS-REG 69.54 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DELL TIPS $ 100.00
232.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0.00 332.93 16.68 23.81 4.34 0.00 0.00 188.1(
NEWCOMD, RANDOLPH W. 216-64-1579 HRS-RIG 74.83 O/T 7.50 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 600.00
150.40 22.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-00 772.97 112.00 55.26 5.70 0.00 0.00 0.01
OFFFR, DAVID 554-86-4953 HRS-REG 288.07 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 IIECL TIPS $ 550-00
964.94 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-00 1514.94 140.54 108.32 ?5,46 O.UO 0-00 1;�),;2
ORRACH, THOMAS RANDOLPH 55)"51-0724 H^S-RIG 95.72 O/T 10.73 D/T -00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 200,00
324.00 53.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 577.86 52.00 41.31 14.10 0-00 0-00 270,15
PAUL III, KFNNETH W. 01,4-40-0183 HRS-REG 1229.65 O/T 8-71 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0,00 DECL TIPS $ 3675.00
3631.41 49.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 7356.27 402.80 525.97 96.17 0,00 1779,48 176.85
SECKMAN, DONALD K. 337-54-1045 HRS-REG 901.01 O/T 27.17 IUT -00 MEALS f 0-00 IJFCL TIPS S 2715.00
3017.97 136,49 0.00 0.00 0-00 0.00 5869,46 523,20 419,67 129.76 0.00 47.08 34.75
TATEP, FRANCIS 201-33-3107 HRS-REG 366,37 O/T 1R.51 D/T -00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0-00
1227.14 92.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1320.07 27.98 94.39 12101 0-00 0-00 1185.69
THORPE III, E. KENT 167-46-1260 HRS-RCG 2n9.00 O/T ,00 D/T -00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS f 1782-7R
1445.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-00 0.00 3227.78 368.11 230.79 92.52 0,00 230,27 523,31
TYE, MARK 028-44-R28,'_ HRS-RIG 760.51 O/T -00 D/T -00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS S 2931q.00
3802.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6740.55 727.18 481.75 179.34 0,00 162.45 2251.13
WARING, PAUL 137-57-3416 HRS-REG 751,24 O/T 21-68 D/T -00 MEALS $ 0,00 I'ECL TIPS f 1,1,00.00
2415.43 109.02 0.00 0.00 0-00 0.00 4124.45 116.44 294.90 04.75 0-00 45.50 1982.86
WEAVIR, DRf;RY ALLEN 560-43-5071 HRS-REG 100.60 O/T -00 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
336.97 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0-00 336.97 ?5.55 24.09 3.72 0.00 80.05 '203,54
WII.I.JAME, CHRISTIAN JAY 571-7R-5905 HRS-RCG 167.10 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0-00 DECL TIPS S 100.00
559.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 659.67 0-00 47.17 0.00 0.00 0,00 512.50
KEPT ?R-552 RESTAURANT SERVICE 8 BAR HRS-RF.G 15344.77 O/T 372.25 D/T .00
46205,85 1556,90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,6870.53 8979.31 9786.23 1718.10 0-00 45,13.08 22756.03
ARREOLA, HECTOR 5R9-20-9176 HRS-REG 451.21 O/T 12.50 D/T -00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
-1384.84 100.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-00 2425.05 24.01 177.63 1-86 0.00 200.00 208t,F0
PECIRRA, JOSE LUIS f50-23-1452 HRS-REG 261.47 O/T 37.46 IUT -00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
1480,95 284.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 1765.09 105.75 126.19 23.80 0.00 0.00 1509135
coi;i�arl's 01-01-S7 PAGE 17
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (12-31-86)
kEG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTHER GROSS FIT FICA SIT SI11 OTHER NET
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --
CONTRERAS, ANTONIO 520-40-3658 HRS-R[G 622.34 O/T 114.97 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DELL TIPS S 0.00
3258.60 926.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4134.69 192.76 299.21 34.93 0.00 0.00 3657.77
DIIGAN, JOSE ;21-65-4987 HRS-kEG 16.70 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
100.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.20 0.00 7.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 93.r,4
DI111"AN, REYES 512-47-8232 HRS'-RED 141.7.32 O/T 289.33 D/T .00 MFALS t 0.00 DELL TIPS f 0.00
8625.22 2559.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11194.60 454.08 799.70 247.20 0.00 0.00 9603,61
GUTIERREZ, FLORENCIO 556-22-1161 HRS-REG 797.37 O/T 59.9f, D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS 0400
4688.46 5?2,90 0100 0.00 0.00 0.00 5211,36 351.63 372.61 116.52 0.00 200.00 4170,'0
MEAAS, I6NACIO G, 566-90-1777 HRS-REG C5.78 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
278.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 278.90 0.00 19.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 2::l0,96
MOIINA, ALBERTO 456-78-9123 HRS-REG 677,43 O/T 29.30 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
4064.53 263.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4328.28 324.96 309.47 107.59 0.00 0.00 3.10"),:6
MOLINA, LORENZO 530-25-4673 HRS-REG 65".11 O/T 48.89 IUT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
3954.66 440.01 0.00 0.00 0100 0.00 4394,67 1236.23 314.22 60.62 0.00 0.00 3723.'0)
PALOMERA, MARTIN 575-38-4582 HRS-REG 516.81 O/T 82.46 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 UECL TIPS f 0,00
3100.86 742.14 0100 0.00 0.00 0.00 3843.00 184.37 274.77 34.94 0.00 0.00 f;9192
PENA, VICTOR 465-60-8502 HRS-REG 602.03 O/T 13.70 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
3612.18 123.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3735.48 219,54 267.09 78.28 0.00 0.00 3171.57
PEREZ, RAMON 593-91-6295 HRS-REG 200.75 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
1204.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1204,50 34.52 86.12 13.45 0.00 0.00 10.55141
SAMOR,'„ CON7ALO 519-09-6572 HRS-REG 55R.90 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS t 0100
3353.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3353.40 '1119,42 239.77 75.01 0.00 0.00 2819,10
SANCC 7 JR., ANDRES 520-64-4836 HR"-RF.G 514.52 O/T 53.63 D/T .00 MEAD t 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
2014.56 407.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2421.99 62.95 173.17 9.35 0.00 0.00 2176.51
SIANCCFZ, MATIAS 524-36-4821 HRS-kEG 108.80 O/T 6.90 D/T .00 HEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
652.30 62,10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 714.90 71.87 51.12 22.12 0.00 0.00 069.79
TVEITE, ERIK 5113-41-9141 HRS-REG 546.68 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
2491.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2491.99 0.00 178.18 0.00 0600 0.00 2313,01
DFPT 28-574 RESTAURANT CLEANING HRS-REG 8057.72 O/T 747.12 D/T .00
45266.70 6431.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51698.10 2481.14 3696.40 630.67 0.00 400.00 44289,89
BALDWIN, RONALD JAMES 273-56-2662 HRS-REG 1798.29 O/T 97.17 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
10845,48 1133.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 12229.63 1531.48 874.35 477.20 0.00 2224.98 711-0.62
GOJ;UON' S
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (12-31-86)
RFG O/T JVT S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTHER
------------------------------------------------------
01-01-87
PAGE 1
GROSS FIT FICA SIT S11I OTHFR NET
DJLUCIA JR., ANTHONY M. 189-56-2957 HRS-REG 378.00 O/T 2,0.40 JVT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL. TIPS f 100.00
2149.13 255.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2504,73 0.00 179.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 22".64
FERTIG, EDWARD I. '118-60-818,`, HRS-RF.G 1429.00 O/T 293,65 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
14940.00 4404.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 19744.75 3425.14 1411.7/5 745.24 0.00 344.52 13418.10
GALVIN, CHRISTI14E M. 072-62-5931 HRS-REG 516.10 O/T 45.?3 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
3953.60 523.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4477.22 645.92 320.11 158.33 0.00 0.00 3751,04
HARRIS III, GEORGE W. '66-29-169D HRS-REG 1141.09 O/T 73.03 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
1808.15 821.58 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 2629.73 453.66 183.03 98.78 0.00 265.36 1623,'%0
HUNT, CAROL ANNF 25-9-78-169R HRS-REG 80.00 O/T 9.70 Ii/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
480.00 87.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 567.30 61.04 40.56 15.73 0.00 0.00 449,97
JAFFEF, ALEX 096-44-8161 HkS-REG 279.08 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
1668.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1668.48 0.00 119.30 9.88 0.00 0.00
JOHNSON, JEFFREY 279-54-4743 HRS-REG 13R.60 O/T 16.10 JVT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
831.60 144.70 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 976.50 136.73 67.82 29.79 0.00 0.00 740.!.6
MA7UR, ROHDAN 065-54-9950 HRS-REG 124.32 O/T 1.10 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS S 0.00
745.92 7.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 755.82 6.06 54.03 13.24 0.00 0.00 .5:i.49
MULDFRRY III, JOHN R. 01,6-42-1949 HRS-REG 216.95 O/T 30.80 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
1301.70 277.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1573.70 234.11 112.69 57.18 0.00 220.00 754.72
MCHUGH, MICHAEL 075-46-9881 HqS-REG 421.53 O/T 21.50 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
4215.30 322,50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4537.80 477,29 324,45 162.33 0.00 131.70 3442,03
MOLLJCHI, CHARLES 49R-52-5-89E HRS-REG+ 319.76 O/T .00 D/T ,00 MEALS f ' 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
2558,08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2558.08 102.18 182.90 54.95 0.00 0.00 1,1218,(15
MURRAY, GEOFFREY ROJ:LRT ,'-f,1-79-3767 HR5-REG 219.60 O/T 12.2` D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 IlFCL TIPS S 0.00
1756.80 147.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1903.80 0.00 136.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1767,41
NACCA,U O, STANTON W. 534-82-7509 HRS-REG 805.59 O/T 85.511 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS t 0.00
6641.83 961.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 7853.77 142.86 561.54 58.12 0.00 2353.82 4737,43
NACCA.RATO, CORDON S. 537-62-6196 HRS-RFG AOSg 006T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
29500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29500.00 1157.46 2109.25 622.71 0.00 7849.78 17760,CO
NACCARATO, RFFECCA V. 539-60-0435 HITS-RCfv2086.00 0/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 0.00
29500.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 29500.00 81.35 2109,25 347.21 0.00 7050.84 19911,35
REISS, ARAM SCOTT 063-54-441.7 HRS-REG 127.00 O/T 9.26 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
762.00 82.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 844.80 97.50 60.40 24.50 0.00 0.00 662.10
RU17, GUSTAVO 520-72-2081 HRS-REG 572.45 O/T 7.49 JVT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS f 0.00
4007,15 78.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4095.79 190.19 292.13 `5.49 0.00 274.96 3271,0?
CORDON'S 01-01-87 PAGE 11
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING, (12-31-86)
PEG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S OTHER GROSS FIT FICA SIT SDI OTHER NCT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ -
RUJ7, FILFMON 554-21-7786 HF;S-REG 17101.75 O/T 185.24 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
13017.50 2778.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 1.S296.10 622.58 1165.17 3A5.18 0.00 157.99 13965,t'l
SEMPLE III, LOREN7.0 S`6-90-6861 HRS-REG 478.23 0/T 18.27 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
2869.38 164.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 3033.81 138.42 216.92 4B.14 0.00 0.00 263011.3
SINNJCKS, SUSAN 746-72-9940 HES-RCG 1436.65 O/T 200.05 IVT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
11893,20 2410.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 14553.40 .516.37 1040.57 299.25 0.00 2285.11 1011?,!.0
SPAETH, JAMES P. 3C4-74-7823 H"S-RFG 359.03 O/T 85.1,9 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
3590.30 1285.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4875.65 1003.80 348.61 202,94 0.00 39.73 3280,57
STEIN, MATTHEW ROE.+ERT 083-52-4430 HRS-REG 1333.81 O/T 215.61 IUT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
13502.82 3142.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 16045.42 2375.09 1204.45 722.55 0.00 488.00
VARF, TAI MOnNINCSTAR 521-98-7268 HRS-REG 2125.59 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
1353.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1353.54 0.00 96.78 7.77 0.00 0.00 1248,i9
WILI.JAMS, MARK HARTLEY 554-55-6540 HRS-REG 544.95 O/T 139.8` D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
5949,50 2097.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 8547.25 1293.29 611.13 266,73 0,00 1123.47 52`,?.6.3
I-7,3o1.�7
DFPT 28-578 RESTAURANT FOOD PREPARATION HRS-REG 4$2 'O/T 1576.74 D/T .00
169741.46 21129.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 2450.00 193421.27 14692.52 13829,60 4863.24 0.00 24810.26 135125,65
B^YhNT, JACLYN ANN.
4269.52 340.07
COULTER, WARREN LEE
727,41 0.00
DANJCLE, MARIO
18600.00 0.00
DANIELE., ROBIN KAY
4430.39 0.00
DWIGHT, KELLY ANNIOUE
2029.48 10,06
EMERY, DORIAN
1960.17 0.00
LJTTIE, RICKI LYNN
198.80 0.00
MOONTAIN, HAGGIS
3206.82 0.00
634-60-8691 HRS-REG 569.28 O/T 30.23 D/T .00 MEALS $ 0.00 11ECL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4607.59 77.65 329,59 8.20 0.00 688.38 3505,77
536-62-2735 HRS-REG 64.95 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS t 0.00 DECL TIPS $ 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 727.41 73.94 52.01 18.97 0.00 65.86 516,61
107-44-7522 HP,S-RCS. 1423.00 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DFCL TIPS $ 7135.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 26235.00 4434.31 1875.00 1151.17 0.00 1748.91 9'�:9,11
39E-70-7886 HR;,-REG 602.3A O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TJPS f 0.00
0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 4480.39 380.98 320.35 125.80 0.00 191.00 3462,?4
`,1°-80-4541 HRS-REG 405.0` O/T 2.00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS S 550.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.5,39.54 0.00 185.15 50.45 0.00 0,00 1803,94
489-52-7471 HRS-REG 302.97 O/T .00 D/T .00 MFALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1960.17 114.21 140,15 28.92 0.00 0.00 1676,07
`51-76-673,0, HRS-REG 28.40 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 198.80 0.00 14.21 1.21 0.00 0.00 1:!3,.),9
"`•19-`621 HRS-REG 494.67 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DCCL TIPS f 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3246.82 285.89 229.29 72.46 0.00 53.09 256h,0
CORDON'S
P/R REGISTER YEAR ENDING (12-31-86)
REG O/T D/T S/C-TIPS V/H/S
---------------------------------------------
SCHIIAFRT, JANICE M.
35500.00 0.00
VIL'OH, ROBIN JENNY
3144.04 81.05
DEPT 23-584 RESTAURANT
74116.63 431.18
01-01-87
PAGE 20
OTHER CROSS FIT FICA SIT SDI OTHER NET
------------------------------------------------------------ ---. -
544-80-4300
HRS-RCG .9088.O&IT
.00 D/T
.00 MEALS f
0.00 UFCL
TIPS S
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 500.00
36000.00
1196.83 2574.00
241.97
0.00
6580.88 25406.:(2
-54111-95-0224
HRS-REG
531.37 O/T 10.37
D/T
.00 MEALS S
0.00 DECL
TIPS f
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
3225.09
0.00 230.59
0.00
0.00
0.00 291?1>1i0
6510.05
GENERAL
HRS-RCG
-64a&.-Fr-6/T 42.60
D/T
.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 1000.00
83232.81
6563.81 5951.14
1699.17
0.00
9328.12
BRANDIN, SUSAN 569-47-4069 HRS-REG 254.45 O/T 6.10 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
2035,60 73.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2108.80 69.00 150.78 17.50 0.00
HERRITiER, DEBORAH LYNN 399-56-4729 HRS-REf> 169.90 O/T .00 Ti/T .00 MEALS 1 0.00 DECL TIPS f
1359.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1359.20 183.00 97.18 45.93 0.00
MAJAICA, LUZ ISELA 546-88-2020 HRS-REG 92.30 D/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
507.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 507.E5 0.00 36.30 0.00 0.00
MA4CHESTER, JEAN FOWLER 279-46-4274 HRS-REG 179.55 O/T _ .10 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
987.52 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 988.34 111.17 70.67 1118.88 0.00
MCCUTRFS, MOLLY SO 524-67-9491 HRS-REG 86.65 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS S 0.00 DECL TIPS f
476.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 476.58 0.00 34.08 4.A5 0.00
RACICOT, SUZANNE YVETTE 527-67-".615 HRS-REG 275.94 O/T 8.80 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
1497.46 72.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1570.06 175.26 112,26 44.31 0.00
SANCI:E1, MARIA ELENA 550-50-9367 HRS-REG 75.44 O/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TJPS f
347.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 347.85 0.00 24.87 0.00 0.00
SHEI TON, KATHLEEN ANNE 214-66-1403 H(i,-REfi 320.30 0/T .00 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS t
1761.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1761.63 148.56 125.96 36.99 0.00
SMITH, JEAN DIWYER 006-60-9130 HITS -RIG 1510.89 O/T 136.50 IVT .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS t
15108.80 2047.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 17406.30 2294.78 1244.55 716.88 0.00
STEIN, DONNA M. 134-45-4740 HRS-RLG 693.53 O/T 159.39 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
4629.11 1554.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 6333.11 710.82 456.39 233.86 0.00
TOWNER, TIMOTHY MICHAEI 535-72-7951 HnS-nEG 140.6E D/T 6.10 D/T .00 MEALS f 0.00 DECL TIPS f
947.08 64.05 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1011.13 0.00 72.30 0.00 0.00
DEPT 77-58O REBECCA'S REBECCA'S BAKERY HP.S-RIG 3799.61- O/T 316.99 D/T .00
29658.48 3812.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 450.00 339-10.65 3692.59 2425.34 1129.00 0.00
0.00
10.00 1861.52
0.00
0.00 1031,09
0.00
0.00 471,J5
0.00
0.00 777.,',?
0.00
0.00 437,';5
0.00
0.00 1: 'j, )1
0.00
0.00 321.78
0.00
0.00 1450.12
0.00
317.99 12832,10
0.00
0.00 4982.04
0.00
0.00 938.1,13
327.99 26345,73
Appendix D
ANTHONY J. MAZZA
FRANK J. WOODS. III
M &. w PFto>?EFrrirs
SCITE 301A
205 Sou ni MILL 8'rREE.T
AsPE.N. CoLoR.Ano 81611
June 7, 1987
Steve Burstain
Department of Planning and
Community Development
City of Aspen
Aspen, Co. 81611
Re: Mill Street Plaza Building; Gordon's
Dear Steve
AREA Ccmu 303
TELF.PjioNF_ 925-8032
Our letter is to confirm that Mill Street Plaza Associates is
the record owner of the Mill Street Plaza Building, Block
81, Aspen Townsite, We have authorized Mr. Gordon Naccarato to
proceed with an application for GMP approval of an expansion to
Gordon's Restaurant of approximately 1,000 sq.ft.,as submitted.
Sinc ly,
M L STR ET AZA ASSOCIATES
Ant ony J. Mazza
Managing Partner
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED- 1,38
DATE COMPLETE:
PROJECT NAME:
Project Address:
APPLICANT: ( ( (T ( /1G
Applicant Address?
REPRESENTATIVE -
Representative Ad ess/Phone:
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
3
STAF/F MEMBE r :
TYPE OF APPLICATION: %
PAID: ES NO AMOUNT: �1 �yo �LA,
1 STEP --APPLICATION:
P&Z MEETING DATE:
DATE REFERRED:
2 STEP APPLICATION:
CC MEETING DATE:
DATE REFERRED:
REFERRALS:
City Attorney
City Engineer
✓ Housing Dir.
v Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir. Hlth.
V Aspen Consol.
S.D.
Mtn. Bell
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
Fire Marshall
Fire Chief
v Roaring Fork
Transit
PH a T-
�+ z
PUBLIC HEARING(:fYES NO
AO a
INITIALS: QVA
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
INITIALS:
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
tV B1dg:Zon/Inspect
4— Roaring Fork
Energy Center
Other
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: f INITIAL:
City Atty ✓ City Engineer Bldg. Dept.
Other • I`I o US n D�f c
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: S ttyQ S � fi r l t t
CASE DISPOSITION
GORDON'S RESTAURANT EXPANSION (MILL STREET STATION)
HPC: HPC reviewed the proposal for historic compatibility on July
27, 1987 and granted conceptual review approval subject to the
condition that the applicant further address at final HPC review
transparency of the addition and seating back the addition from
Hopkins Street. On October 13, 1987 Final HPC review was granted
to the proposal as presented subject to the condition that the
mica slate tiles be replaced by plum slate tiles.
P&Z: The Planning and Zoning Commission evaluated the Gordon's
application on September 22, 1987. The project received a score
of 26 points, which exceeds the minimum threshold of 25.8 points.
Also considered and approved by P&Z were the following special
reviews:
a. Bonus FAR: P&Z approved the request for bonus FAR subject to
the conditions that:
1. The three studio employee units in the Mill Street
Station shall be properly occupied under the appro-
priate employee housing guidelines to be verified by
the Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to
issuance of a building permit . The leases for all
employee units in the building shall henceforth be
subject to review every six months by the Housing
Authority to insure property occupancy and rental rats.
2. The exterior staircase shall be constructed according
to design option #8 approved by P&Z on September 29,
1987, containing all drainage within the staircase and
channeling it into a single drain.
b. Reduction in trash and utilities area: P&Z approved a reduc-
tion of the trash and utilities access area subject to the
condition that the applicant agrees to provide either a
fourth trash dumpster in a configuration where it is
physically possible to be filled, as determined by the
Engineering Department, or a trash compactor.
CITY COUNCIL: On October 12, 1987 City Council adopted Resolution
87-24 (attached) allocating commercial GMP allotment to Gordon's
Restaurant.
sb.commquota2
RESOLUTION NO.
(Series of 1987)
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A COMMERCIAL ALLOTMENT TO GORDON'S
RESTAURANT IN THE MILL STREET STATION BUILDING
THROUGH THE 1987 CC/C-1 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPETITION
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24-11.5(a) of the
Municipal Code as amended, August 1 of each year is established
as a deadline for submission of applications for commercial
development allotments within the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this provision, one application was
submitted for evaluation in the CC and C-1 competition category,
entitled Gordon's Restaurant Expansion, requesting 1,033 square
feet; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the
Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission") on
September 22, 1987 to consider the CC and C-1 GMP Competition, at
which time the Commission did evaluate and score the project; and
WHEREAS, the Gordon's Restaurant project met the minimum
threshold of 25.8 points by scoring 26 points; and
WHEREAS, due to exemptions from the commercial quota, there
is less than thirty (30%) percent of the original quota available
in the CC and C-1 zone district; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-11.3(k) of the Municipal
Code, a minimum of thirty (30%) percent of the original quota
shall be available; and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered the representations and
commitments made by the applicant in scoring the project and
granting special review approvals for bonus floor area ratio and
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
reduction in required trash and utilities service area, including
but not limited to the following:
1. The additional space from the enclosure is designed
primarily for additional waiting room in Gordon's and
will allow for 34 bar seats and 113 seats in the
restaurant, compared to the existing capacity of 4 bar
seats and 105 restaurant seats.
2. Architectural features of the addition include a
maximum height of 28 feet, significant transparency,
setback from the existing masonry parapet surrounding
the deck, and a new external staircase, as meet final
review approval by the Historic Preservation Committee.
3. The exterior staircase shall be constructed according
to diagramatic design option #8 approved by the
Commission on September 29, 1987, containing all
drainage within the staircase and channeling it into a
single drain.
4. Energy conservation features of the project include:
thermal insulation which exceeds the City's require-
ments of R-20 in floors, walls and ceilings as specif-
ied in proposed standards in the application, heavily
insulated hot water lines, and water saving fixtures in
the new restrooms.
5. Five (5) large planters filled with evergreen shrubs
and flowering plants will be placed at street level in
the setback area along Hopkins Street, as shown in the
application. Smaller planter boxes will be placed on
the second level deck area at the present entry.
6. A bicycle rack similar in design to the existing rack
on the site will be provided and installed at the
applicant's expense in a location where the Commercial
Core and Lodging Commission has identified a need for
one, as determined by CCLC prior to issuance of a
building permit for the addition.
7. The applicant agrees to provide either a fourth trash
dumpster in a configuration where it is physically
possible to be filled, as determined by the Engineering
Department, or a trash compactor. The trash arrange-
ment shall be determined prior to issuance of a
building permit.
2
; and
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
8. The applicant shall provide a letter of credit for
employee housing cash -in -lieu to house 5.25 employees.
An agreement shall be made, to the satisfaction of the
City Attorney and Housing Authority prior to issuance
of a building permit, stating the arrangement by which
a cash payment shall be made by the applicant to house
the equivalent of 100% of all employees generated,
based on affidavits provided to the Housing Authority
to verify the number of employees during the next two
(2) years.
9. The three studio employee units in Mill Street Station
shall be properly occupied under the appropriate
employee housing guidelines to be verified by the
Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to issuance
of a building permit. The leases for all employee
units in the building shall henceforth be subject to
review every six months by the Housing Authority to
insure proper occupancy and rental rates.
10. The applicant shall provide to the satisfaction of the
Building Department a mechanized means for handicapped
access to the second floor restaurant functioning
during the hours of restaurant operation.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council having considered the
recommended Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission scoring for this
project does wish to grant the requested allotment to Gordon's.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Aspen,
Colorado that 1,033 square feet of the CC/C-1 zone district
commercial quota is hereby allocated to Gordon's in the Mill
Street Station building.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of Aspen,
Colorado that this allocation shall expire pursuant to Section
24-11.7(a) of the Municipal Code in the event plans, specifica-
tions and fees sufficient for the issuance of a building permit
3
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
for the proposed expansion are not submitted on or before May 1,
1990.
Dated:
, 1987.
William L. Stirling, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk of the
City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a
true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado at a meeting to be held on
the day of , 1987.
sb. log
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
4
CITY OF ASPEN
MEMO FROM STEVE BURSTEIN
P I-e-� YH rt : AA 11 f, V, vi i
�/44Y1t,(, 1r15t,1)6� I �jVL,"
AAl - ovt
Do �pn, Avi AJ14, v Nlca 7
F'n%,arl�.
v�o .
6
Aspen /Pitkin.:.:Planning Office
1.30 sil,galenastree t
aspen" T�csoloxad6" 81611
December 17, 1987
Mr. Jake Vickery
Harry Teague Architects
210 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81612
RE: Gordon's GMP Plan: Planters
Dear Jake,
I have reviewed your December 14, 1987 letter requesting an
extention until May 15, 1988 to install the five planters as
represented in the Gordon's GMP application and referenced in
item #5 of City Council's resolution. You have asked us to allow
you to post a bond guaranteeing the landscape improvements and to
consider other landscape designs that may be more acceptable.
We are willing to work with you on this matter. Since there was
no reason that the landscaping could not have been installed at
the same time as the building construction, and you have there-
fore saved money, we would hope the landscape improvement will be
of higher quality than that originally proposed.
Please submit to the Planning Office prior to issuance of any
certificate of occupancy for the addition a cost estimate for
installing the planters and vegetation and a bond agreement to
the satisfaction of .the City Attorney with the May 15, 1988
deadline for installation. In the agreement please state that
the revised landscape proposal will be submitted by no later than
April 1, 1988, and will be reviewed and approved by the City. The
Planning Office will give staff approval to your proposal if we
determine that the proposed landscaping is equal to, but prefera-
bly higher in quality than what was represented in your GMP
application.
If there are any.questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Steve Burstein, Planner
cc: Jim Wilson, Chief Building Inspector
Bill Drueding, Zoning Official
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
sb.gl2
H� 4 R R Y
T E A
G U E
A R C H T E C T S
December 14, 1987
Mr. Steve Burstein
Pitko/Aspen Planning Dept.
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO
8 1 6 1 1
RE: Gordon's GMP - Planters
Dear Steve;
As per our phone conversation today, we herein request an extention
until May 15, 1988 to install the five planters as required in item
#5 of the resolution for Gordon's bar addition.
Installing planters in the winter makes little sense; planting would
die and empty planters would be detractive. We would be willing to
bond an appropriate amount to guarantee our compliance. In the
process of doing a detailed design, we have realized the planters may
obstruct display windows and be objectionable to the other tenants.
The requested extention would further allow us to reconsider this
problem, in hopes of finding a better solution acceptable to your
department.
Sincerely-",�J49
Jake Vickery
-2- I-Ilit � '9/�
CONDITIONS OF DRAWING FUNDS AGAINST LETTER OF CREDIT
In consideration for the granting of a commercial growth
management allotment pursuant to resolution No. 24C1987 a copy of
which is attached hereto.
The City of Aspen, Colorado shall have the right to draw funds
against this letter of credit under the following circumstances.
On or before June 15, 1988 the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority shall make a determination of employees generated by
Gordon's Restaurant located in Aspen, Colorado.
This determination shall be made according to the provisions of
the City of Aspen Resolution 24 and the City of Aspen Employee
Housing guidelines, applicable to the project which allows
Gordon's to satisfy the employee housing requirement attendant to
such approval, by paying cash in lieu of actual housing for any
new employees generated by the allotment up to 5.25 employees.
Upon the determination of Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority
that new employees were generated, the director of housing shall
provide his written demand and certification to the bank based on
a schedule of the dollar amount necessary to satisfy the cash -in -
lieu obligation of Gordon's, and such funds shall be
unconditionally released to the Aspen/ Pitkin County Housing
Authority on account of the City of Aspen, Colorado.
CASE DISPOSITION
GORDON'S RESTAURANT EXPANSION (MILL STREET STATION)
HPC: HPC reviewed the proposal for historic compatibility on July
27, 1987 and granted conceptual review approval subject to the
condition that the applicant further address at final HPC review
transparency of the addition and seating back the addition from
Hopkins Street. On October 13, 1987 Final HPC review was granted
to the proposal as presented subject to the condition that the
mica slate tiles be replaced by plum slate tiles.
P&Z: The Planning and Zoning Commission evaluated the Gordon's
application on September 22, 1987. The project received a score
of 26 points, which exceeds the minimum threshold of 25.8 points.
Also considered and approved by P&Z were the following special
reviews:
a. Bonus FAR: P&Z approved the request for bonus FAR subject to
the conditions that:
1. The three studio employee units in the Mill Street
Station shall be properly occupied under the appro-
priate employee housing guidelines to be verified by
the Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to
issuance of a building permit . The leases for all
employee units in the building shall henceforth be
subject to review every six months by the Housing
Authority to insure property occupancy and rental rats.
2. The exterior staircase shall be constructed according
to design option #8 approved by P&Z on September 29,
1987, containing all drainage within the staircase and
channeling it into a single drain.
b. Reduction in trash and utilities area: P&Z approved a reduc-
tion of the trash and utilities access area subject to the
condition that the applicant agrees to provide either a
fourth trash dumpster in a configuration where it is
physically possible to be filled, as determined by the
Engineering Department, or a trash compactor.
CITY COUNCIL: On October 12, 1987 City Council adopted Resolution
87-24 (attached) allocating commercial GMP allotment to Gordon's
Restaurant.
sb.commquota2
A G E N D A
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
September 22, 1987 - Tuesday
5:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
lst Floor
City Hall
REGULAR MEETING
I. COMMENTS
Commissioners
Planning Staff
II. MINUTES
September 1, 1987
III. PUBLIC HEARING
A. GMQS Code Amendment (cont'd)
B. Gordon's Commercial GMQS Scoring
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. Gordon's Special Review
B. Marshall Lot Split
V. ADJOURN MEETING
**PLEASE REMEMBER TO ATTEND JOINT P&Z/COUNCIL WORK SESSION
REGARDING CODE ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 AT 5:00 P.M.
A.COV
MEMORAN DUI-'_
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission and Special Reviews
Case #2737-073-38-004
DATE: September 16, 1987
LOCATION: Mill Street Station, 205 S. Mill Street, Lots D through
J, Block 81, Aspen Townsite. Gordon's Restaurant is located on
the second floor of the building.
ZONING: Commercial Core/Commercial Core Historic District
APPLICANT: Gordon Naccarato, owner of Gordon's Restaurant, has
prepared the application with authorization of Anthony J. Mazza,
Managing Partner of the Mill Street Station Building. In effect,
the owner of the building is the applicant.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests Commercial GMP
allocation of 1,033 square feet for the enclosure of the second -
level deck and construction of a new exterior entry stair.
Special review approvals for bonus floor area and further
reduction in the trash and utilities access area are also
requested.
QUOTA AVAILABLE: Approximately 9,000 s.f. of the 10,000 s.f. in
the annual CC-C-1 zone district commercial quota has been used up
through GMP Exemptions to Elli's (about 8,500 s. f.) and Ute
Mountaineer (500 s.f.) this year. According to Section 24-
11.3(k), 30 percent of the original number of allotments shall be
available when exemptions reduce the number below that level.
Consequently, 3,000 s.f. is available in the CC/C-1 zone district
for the 1987 competition. Final tabulation of the quota will be
made prior to the City Council meeting dealing with allocations.
The Gordon's proposal is the only application in the 1987
Commercial GMP competition.
PROCESS: The Planning Office will summarize this project at your
meeting of September 22, 1987, review procedures with you, and
provide a suggested assignment of points for the scoring of the
application. The applicant will give a brief presentation of his
proposal. A public hearing will be held to allow interested
citizens to comment. At the close of the hearing, the Commission
members will each be asked to score the applicant's proposal.
The total number of points awarded by all the members, divided by
the number of members voting, will constitute the total points
awarded to the project. A project must score a minimum of 60
percent of the total points z�vailable under categories 1,2, and 3
amounting to 25.8 points to be eligible for a GMP allotment. A
project must also score a minimum of 30 percent of the points
available in each category 1 and 2 and provide deed restricted
housing for a minimum of 35% of the employees generated by the
project to be eligible for allocation. The minimum points are as
follows:
Category 1 = 5.4 points;
Category 2 = 3.0 points; and
Category 3 = 8.75 points.
Should an application score below these thresholds it will no
longer be considered for a development allotment and will be
considered denied. Bonus points cannot be used to bring an
application over this minimum threshold.
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGS: The Planning Office has assigned points
to the application as a recommendation for you to consider. The
following is a summary of the ratings. A more complete explana-
tion of the points assignment for each criterion is shown on the
attached score sheets, including rationales for the ratings.
Availability
Quality of Public
of Facilities/
Design Services
10.5 5
Employee Bonus Total
Housing Points Points
Commitment
15 -- 30.5
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION: According to the Planning
office's recommended scoring, the Gordon's Application meets the
threshold number of points in each scoring category. Sufficient
quota is available for the project. Positive features of the
project include the placement of planters on Hopkins Street and
the architectural concept of placing the addition in the middle
section of the building. Problems with the level of transparency
on the Hopkins elevation and exacerbating the existing trash
problem may be dealt with through the special reviews for bonus
floor area and trash and utilities area reduction, as discussed
below. The Planning Office recommends that you concur with its
point assignment to approve the project and recommend to Council
the allocation of 1,033 square feet for the construction of
Gordon's addition.
2
SPECIAL REVIEWS:
I. Bonus Floor Area: The applicant is requesting special
review approval to use the unutilized bonus floor area available
to the building via the prior placement of on -site employee
housing. As you know, with .3:1 FAR used for employee housing,
1.7:1 FAR may be used for commercial space in the CC zone
district, arriving at a total FAR of 2:1. According to the
applicant's calculations, 1,033 square feet remain available.
The Building Department will need to verify the existing FAR and
resultant FAR to insure compliance with area and bulk require-
ments prior to issuance of a building permit. The Zoning Official
stated that there is a violation in the use of one of the
employee units for Gordon's office and storage. This violation
was also confirmed in an inspection of the restaurant by an
Environmental Health Officer. Not only does this change Mill
Street Station's employee housing program but it effects the
internal FAR ratio for calculation of bonus FAR. All employee
units must be occupied for employee housing purposes as verified
by the Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to issuance of
a building permit. Since this is not the first violation
discovered of the occupancy of these units, we recommend that the
leases of all of the employee units in the building should be
reviewed every six months by the Housing Authority to insure
proper occupancy and rental rates.
Section 24-3.5(a) of the Municipal Code states the criteria that
P&Z must consider in granting bonus FAR as follows:
Criteria: (1) "the compatibility of the development with sur-
rounding land uses and zoning, including size, height and bulk,
proposed site design characteristics, including landscaping and
open space and visual impacts such as viewplanes."
Response: On July 27, 1987 HPC reviewed the proposal for historic
compatibility and granted conceptual review approval subject to
the condition that the applicant further address at final HPC
review (1)transparency of the addition and (2) setting back the
addition from the Hopkins Street facade. HPC was concerned with
upsetting the existing low scale of Mill Street Station as viewed
from Hopkins Street and overwhelming the scale of small Victori-
ans on the block. Comments in the 1980 application and in the
P&Z and HPC's reviews and scoring of the architecture focus on
these same aspects of compatibility. The applicant's presenta-
tion has also emphasized the concepts of transparency and setback
from the existing masonry parapet. We suggest that these quali-
ties of design be better realized.
Staff finds the height of the addition and vaulted roof to be
acceptable in terms of minimizing visual impacts. However, the
view of Aspen and Shadow Mountain from Hopkins Street would still
be affected. There was talk at the HPC meeting of using glass
3
bricks on the Hopkins Str(-c:t e'i tion to increase transparency.
This concept met with in.tial thusiasm by the Committee and
should be further explored. Set packs of approximately 2-3 feet
were also discussed and should be further considered.
The applicant indicates that shifting the addition back on the
deck is limited because of the need to work with the existing
structural system. While no analysis of this factor has been
presented by the applicant, Stan Stevens of the Building Depart-
ment stated on September 16, 1987 that he would anticipate the
need for a new rafter supporting system for the deck to support
the load of a new masonry wall. Consequently, it may be as easy
structurally to set the addition back 2 feet as it would be for
the proposed 8" setback.
Criteria: 11(2) Whether the applicant has documented the availab-
ility and adequacy of water supply, sewage treatment, roads, and
parking facilities to serve the proposed development."
Response: Staff is satisfied that the site has adequate public
services available for the additional floor area.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the
request for special review of bonus FAR subject to the following
conditions:
1. The three studio employee units in the Mill Street Station
shall be properly occupied under the appropriate employee
housing guidelines to be verified by the Zoning Official and
Housing Authority prior to issuance of a building permit.
The leases for all employee units in the building shall
henceforth be subject to review every six months by the
Housing Authority to insure proper occupancy and rental
rates.
2. The addition shall be designed with greater transparency and
set back farther from the Hopkins Street elevation to the
satisfaction of the Historic Preservation Committee, as
determined at final HPC review.
II. Reduction of Trash and Utilities Area: The applicant is
requesting, in connection with the increase of commercial space,
reduction in the trash and utilities area requirement. It is
argued that the existing trash area, noted to be approximately 13
feet by 14 feet (182 s.f.), is adequate for the trash generation
caused by the expansion.
Section 24-3.5(b) states the criteria for this review to include
consideration of the following matters:
Criteria: (1) Adequacy of trash vehicle access.
4
Response: Both the Planning Office and Engineering Department
have noticed congestion in the alley due to parked vehicles and
multiple service delivery vehicles. There may be an enforcement
problem with illegal parking unrelated to this application. We
have notified the Police Department and anticipate increased
ticketing and towing if the situation does not improve. In
general, we agree with the applicant that adequate trash vehicle
access is available and not a constraining factor.
Criteria: (2) Amount of trash likely to be generated.
Response: The Engineering Department states in a memorandum dated
September 16, 1987 that it does not appear reasonable to predict
no increase in trash even if the bar area does not generate more
trash. 20 to 30 additional meal seatings per day (winter) are
estimated by the Engineering Department. Neither the applicant
nor referral agencies have indicated an abundance of room for
additional trash in the present set-up of three dumpsters for the
entire building. The Engineering Department recommends an
additional dumpster or provision of a trash compactor to accommo-
date the anticipated additional trash.
Criteria: (3) Unique measures provided for enclosed trash bins.
making them easily moveable by trash personnel.
Response: No unique measures are provided. Additional pick up
service is not a criteria for reduction in trash area.
Criteria: (4) Provision for trash compaction.
Response: A trash compactor system for the building is one of the
recommended options.
Criteria: (5) Comments of Aspen trash and city engineering
personnel.
Response: Engineering Department comments have been submitted.
Criteria: Utility placement and maintenance.
Response: Access to utility meters appears to be constrained
given the food locker in the trash/utilities area.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends
approval of a reduction of trash and utilities access area
subject to the condition that"'a fourth dumpster be provided in
the trash area in a configuration acceptable to the Engineering
Department, ,,"or that a trash compactor be installed,: to be deter-
mined prior to issuance of a building permit.
r�e (r 4:) 9 1.'Vkf; N
gordons
5
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET
PROJECT: GORDON'S COMMERCIAL GMP DATE:9/22/87
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (exclusive of historic features) (maximum 18
points). The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to the quality of its exterior and site design and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building (in terms of size, height, location and
building materials) with existing neighboring developments.
RATING: 1.5
COMMENT:The deck enclosure and new entrance add bulk to the
Hopkins Street elevation which the applicant states has minimal
visual impact because of transparency and set -back from the
facade However, brick and tile walls are not transparent, and
an 8" set -back is not enough to maintain the integrity of the
Hopkins Street facade, as viewed by staff and by HPC at Concep-
tual Review. Maintaining a low scale of the building from the
Hopkins Street elevation was one of the key concepts of the
original design - to better relate to the Berko Building and
other small scale structures on other side of Hopkins Street -
highly scored by HPC and P&Z in the 1980 GMP competition. This
is somewhat compromised by the addition. Adding bulk to the
middle part of Mill Street Station is more acceptable than adding
on to the western side further overshadowing Berko's.
b. SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed landscaping and open space areas, the extent of
undergrounding of utilities, and the arrangements of
improvements for efficiency of circulation (including access
for service vehicles) and increased safety and privacy.
RATING: 2
b 2
1
L4 t. 1
�or�ak; SGDr,eS�-c,� � � ���
COMMENT: Thc- _ addition of 5 pl,_-n_ters at street level in the
setback area along opki.ns Stret.'-_ will impro.- the character of
this open spice area. It is not clear who has responsibility to
maintain landscaping in planters. We note this will help
compensate for landscaping not provided but shown in the original
application. No improvements have been proposed for service
vehicle access in the alley, which has been identified by the
Engineering Department as a problem area.
C. ENERGY - Considering the use of insulation, passive solar
orientation, solar energy devices and efficient fireplaces
and heating and cooling devices to maximize conservation of
energy and use of solar energy sources.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: The potential for further energy conservation is
limited in this small addition according to the Roaring Fork
Energy Center. Thermal insulation of walls roof and ceiling and
air lock door are commendable They appear to off -set heat loss
of glazing Higher R-value of glazing was suggested. Stan
Stevens questions how masonry walls will achieve the R-value
represented (R-30) and will review plans at building permit stage
to insure compliance
d. AMENITIES - Considering the provision of usable open space
and pedestrian and bicycles ways.
RATING: 2
COMMENT:Planters and commitment to install bicycle rack are
amenities of this project for the existing development. These
amenities are fairly standard and commensurate in scale with the
proposal's size The bicycle rack relocation and installation
should be determined through CCLC
e. VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of
buildings to maximize public views of surrounding scenic
areas.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: The relatively small addition at 28' height will
obstruct a portion of the view of Aspen Mountain from Hopkins
Street but this is not within an identified viewplane. Given the
existing setback from the street and the backdrop of the Wheeler
opera House the addition's impact is not great, but would be
minimized by further setback
f. TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS - Considering the quality and
efficiency of proposed trash and utility access areas.
RATING: 1
COMMENT:The applicant states trash generation will be reduced
because of the inclusion of a "gun" system in the full -service
bar, eliminating some glass containers_ Engineering Department
accepts that there may be a reduction in bottles, but br2lieves
there will be additional trash from greater winter seating
capacity. A fourth dumpster or trash compaction is needed. The
existing trash and utilities area is noted to be cramped space
for dumpsters due to the placement of a large cooler in that
space
SUBTOTAL: 10.5
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10
points). The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to its impact upon facilities and services and shall rate
each development by assigning points according to the following
formula:
0 -- Indicates a project which requires the provision of new
services at increased public expense.
1 -- Indicates a project which may be handled by existing level
of service in the area, or any service improvement by the
applicant benefits the project only and not the area in the
general.
2 -- Indicates a project which in and of itself improves the
quality of service in a given area.
(In those cases where points were given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two services (i.e., water supply and fire protec-
tion] the determination of points shall be made by averaging the
scores for each feature.
a-. WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the capacity of
the water supply system to provide for the needs of the
proposed development without system extensions and without
treatment plant or other facility upgrading. Also, consi-
dering the ability of the appropriate fire protection
district to provides services according to established
response times without the necessity of upgrading available
facilities.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: Both the Aspen Water Department and Fire Marshal
indicated this expansion may be handled by the existing level of
water and fire protection services in the area.
3
b. SEWAGE DISPOSAL - Considering the capacity of sanitar,:
sewers to dispose of the wastes of the proposed development
without system extensions and without treatment plant or
other facility upgrading.
RATING:
COMMENT: Heiko Kuhn stated the Aspen Metro Sanitation District
can adequately service the proposed expansion.
C. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS - Considering the ability of the
project to be served by existing City and County bus
routes. Also considering the capacity of major streets to
provide for the needs of the proposed development without
substantially altering existing traffic patterns or over-
loading the existing street system or causing a need to
extend the existing road network.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: The proposed expansion can be adequately served by
existing RFTA bus routes. The small increment of new traffic
generation can be accommodated by existing streets.
d. STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the capacity of the drainage
facilities to adequately dispose of surface runoff of the
proposed development without system extension.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: The proposed expansion should create no change to the
existing drainage facilities. Engineering Department found the
drainage plans acceptable.
e. PARKING - Considering the provision of parking spaces to
meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed
development which are required by Section 24-4.5 of the
Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect
to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and
safety.
RATING: 1
COMMENT:No off-street parking is included in the proposal, nor
required by Section 24-4.5 for commercial development in the CC
zone district Engineering Department noted problems caused by
the applicants' illegal parking in the alley.
SUBTOTAL: 5
4
3. }PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points) - The Commis--
sion shall assign points to each applicant who agrees to provide
low, moderate and middle income housing which complies with the
housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City
of Aspen and with the provisions of Section 24-11.10. Points
shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0 to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 4% housed
41 to 100% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 12% housed
RATING: 1.5
COMMENT: The applicant has argued that no new employees will be
generated by the proposed expansion. The Housing Authority
concurs; therefore 100% of all new employees would be housed and
the maximum number of points should be given. Additionally, the
applicant has committed to provide a letter of credit for cash -
in -lieu to house 5.25 low-income employees. The cash payment
would be made up to a maximum of 5.25 employees if the Housing
Authority determines, based on affidavits, that an increase has
occurred in the next two (2) years. The Housing Authority
recommends approval of this program, provided that the applicant
is responsible for housing all employees even if more than 5.25
employees are generated. The applicant will clarify this aspect
of the program at the P&Z meeting.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 8 points) (Note to exceed 20% of the points
awarded in Sections 1, 2 and 3) - Commission members may, when
any one determines that a project has not only incorporated and
met the substantive criteria of those sections, but has also
exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an
outstanding overall design meriting recognition, award additional
points. Any Commission member awarding bonus points shall
provide a written justification of that award for the public
hearing record.
BONUS POINTS: 0
COMMENT: The Planning Office has no recommendations for bonus points.
5
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1:
Points in Category 2:
Points in Category 3:
SUBTOTAL: Points in Cate-
gories 1, 2, 3
Points in Category 4
10.5 (minimum of 5.4 points needed
to remain eligible)
5 (minimum of 3 points needed
to remain eligible)
15 (minimum of 8.75 points
to remain eligible)
30.5 (minimum of 25.8 points needed
to be eligible)
TOTAL POINTS: 30.5
-y�
-Z
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Planning Office
GORDONS.COMM
n
_lM
To: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department CL /�_
Date: September 16, 1987
Re: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made
a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following
comments:
1. It appears that the submission might be procedurally incor-
rect. The submission might need to be submitted as an amendment
to the 1980 Mill Street Station Commercial GMP submission. The
City Attorney will have to address this. If the application is
not an amendment, we need to know if we can consider existing
conditions versus promises made in 1980.
2. There were a number representations made in the 1980 upon
which the project scoring was based, which representations were
not provided as indicated. Although these discrepancies need not
affect the scoring of the current application, they should at
least be considered in case they affect the acceptability.
a. An elevator was included in the 1980 submission but was
not constructed. The Engineering Department has seen no
indication that pedestrian use of the building has been
adversely affected by this omission, although their scoring
at that time was based on the idea of the elevator. The
exception might be accessibility for handicapped persons.
b. Landscaping was indicated in 1980 which has not been
provided. Again, this was an item which figured into the
scoring, but again, it might not be significant enough to
detract from the current application.
3. Storm drainage - The project will not change existing condi-
tions.
4. Trash - The existing utility area would have been large
enough, but there is a cold storage locker which has been
installed in it. There are currently three dumpsters located in
the utility area. The Wheeler Opera House reported that tenants
of the Mill Street Plaza Building have used the Wheeler dumpster
when the Plaza dumpster is full.
The discussion of trash generation in the submission was not well
L►
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Steve Burstein - Planning Department
FROM: Bill Drueding - Zoning enforcement Officer L lwb
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
DATE: September 17, 1987
On September 11, 1987, I met with Jake Vickery, Architect,
who represents the applicant. In lieu of detailed building plans
I expressed the following concerns:
- The new stairway be included in F.A.R. calculations.
- The new stairway intruded into or reduced required
open space.
Mr. Vickery said that these concerns were being dealt with
at this stage.
I have been having a recurring enforcement problem.
Gordon's has been using the adjacent designated employee unit as
an office for the restaurant in violation of City codes. I have
received a letter form Gordon's stating they will discontinue
this illegal use. I would like any approval contingent upon
further assurance of code compliance.
WD:lo
sbecgmp.bd
offices:
517 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
303/925-5973
mail address:
506 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
f �� 444-1
DOMMUs &weLLs
an association of land planners
r,
October 27, 1987
Mr. Paul Taddune, City Attorney
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Paul,
In order to comply with Paragraph 6 of City Council Resolution
24/87, having to do with resolving with the CCLC a bike rack
location, I attempted to reach Jon Busch last week, to see if
CCLC had previously established a priority list of locations.
Jon was out of town and was unable to return my call until
Monday. He confirmed that, while the CCLC had discussed the need
for additional bike racks, no list of priority locations had been
established. Since he was leaving town again immediately he
didn't have time to poll the Board members; Jon did suggest,
however, that in his opinion, the area most in need of a bike
rack is in front of Carl's Pharmacy/Aspen Times Building. I
asked Jon to place us on the next CCLC agenda (next Wednesday,
November 4) to confirm that location or an alternative site. For
the time being, I just want to confirm that the Carl's site is an
acceptable location from our standpoint.
(a7 k s ,
Joseph Wells, AICP
JW/b
cc: Steve Burstein
Jon Busch, Chairman, CCLC
608 east hyman avenue o aspen, colorado 81611 o telephone 303 925-6866
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office 4VZ
RE: Caary-over of Unused Commercial GMP Quota
DATE: October 26, 1987
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends that City Council direct
us to prepare a resolution eliminating the unused 1987 commercial
quota.
BACKGROUND: City Council approved Resolution 87-24 on October 12,
1987 allocating 1,033 square feet to Gordon's Restaurant in the
Mill Street Station building from the CC/C-1 zone districts
commercial quota. This used up all the available quota in CC and
C-1 zone districts in 1987. Time did not allow discussion of
carry-over or elimination of unused commercial quota in the other
zone districts. Council directed staff to bring this item to a
future meeting.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Quota which Council can either carrry-over or
eliminate this year in other commercial categories are:
Office Zone District* 3,905 square feet
NC/SCI Zone Districts 7,000 square feet
CL and Other Zone Districts 3,000 square feet
* Addition of a 95 sq. ft. cooler at Little Cliff's was
approved by HPC exempt from the Office GMP.
The Planning Office believes that there is little rationale to
carry-over the unused 1987 commercial quota in the above categor-
ies. Significant commercial development and redevelopment have
occurred in Aspen during 1987. While that activity has been
almost exclusively in the CC and C-1 zone districts, there is no
apparent need to increase the quota in other categories for 1988.
If you agree with us, we recommend that you direct us to prepare
a resolution eliminating the 1987 commercial quota.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to direct the Planning Office to
prepare a resolution eliminating_the unused 1987 commercial GMP
quota in the Office, NC/SCI, CLartd--6tn6) zone districts."
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
sb.q
Move to amend Paragraph 8 of Resolution 24/87 by changing the
last 5 lines of the existing language to read
"a cash payment shall be made by the applicant to house the
equivalent of 100% of all NEW employees generated, based on TWO
affidavits provided to the Housing Authority to verify the
number of employees AT THE RESTAURANT. THE FIRST AFFIDAVIT
SHALL VERIFY THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE YEAR PRIOR AND THE
SECOND AFFIDAVIT SHALL VERIFY THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES FOR THE
YEAR FOLLONING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR
THE PROPOSED ADDITION."
RESOLUTION NO. IJ L4
(Series of 1987)
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A COMMERCIAL ALLOTMENT TO GORDON'S
RESTAURANT IN THE MILL STREET STATION BUILDING
THROUGH THE 1987 CC/C-1 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPETITION
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24-11.5(a) of the
Municipal Code as amended, August 1 of each year is established
as a deadline for submission of applications for commercial
development allotments within the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this provision, one application was
submitted for evaluation in the CC and C-1 competition category,
entitled Gordon's Restaurant Expansion, requesting 1,033 square
feet; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the
Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission") on
September 22, 1987 to consider the CC and C-1 GMP Competition, at
which time the Commission did evaluate and score the project; and
WHEREAS, the Gordon's Restaurant project met the minimum
threshold of 25.8 points by scoring 26 points; and
WHEREAS, due to exemptions from the commercial quota, there
is less than thirty (30%) percent of the original quota available
in the CC and C-1 zone district; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-11.3(k) of the Municipal
Code, a minimum of thirty (30%) percent of the original quota
shall be available; and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered the representations and
commitments made by the applicant in scoring the project and
granting special review approvals for bonus floor area ratio and
; and
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
8. The applicant shall provide a letter of credit for
employee housing cash -in -lieu to house 5.25 employees.
An agreement shall be made, to the satisfaction of the
City Attorney and Housing Authority prior to issuance
of a building permit, stating the arrangement by which
a cash payment shall be made by the applicant to house
the equivalent of 100% of all employees generated,
based on affidavits provided to the Housing Authority
to verify the number of employees during the next two
(2) years.
9. The three studio employee units in Mill Street Station
shall be properly occupied under the appropriate
employee housing guidelines to be verified by the
Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to issuance
of a building permit. The leases for all employee
units in the building shall henceforth be subject to
review every six months by the Housing Authority to
insure proper occupancy and rental rates.
10. The applicant shall provide to the satisfaction of the
Building Department a mechanized means for handicapped
access to the second floor restaurant functioning
during the hours of restaurant operation.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council having considered the
recommended Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission scoring for this
project does wish to grant the requested allotment to Gordon's.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Aspen,
Colorado that 1,033 square feet of the CC/C-1 zone district
commercial quota is hereby allocated to Gordon's in the Mill
Street Station building.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of Aspen,
Colorado that this allocation shall expire pursuant to Section
24-11.7(a) of the Municipal Code in the event plans, specifica-
tions and fees sufficient for the issuance of a building permit
K.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Alan
FROM: Steve
RE: Mill Street Station Noncompliance with Prior Approval
DATE: September 22, 1987
Paul Taddune, Chuck Roth and I talked this morning about non -
compliances of the Mill Street Station 1980 GMP applications and
the relationship of those problems to the Gordon's application.
Four areas of non-compliance have been identified: employee
housing unit use, food locker in trash/utilities area, landscap-
ing, and omission of elevator. Paul is taking the position that
no approval should be given for further expansion of Mill Street
Station unless compliance with the original application is
achieved.
We discussed this matter and arrived at the Planning Office
position that prior errors on the side of the Building Department
and Planning Office in granting building permits and C.O.'s
should not be the grounds for denial or conditions of approval of
this new application.
Do you believe that the applicant should be put on notice of this
issue tonight and that it should be brought to Council for their
resolution?
U � (1411; jnr'e 5 t140
-Z ) �) vyj C , p 4u ri v e l �
3Vpc 4fpren1 4141,Xd
_-e V 4s-�44
F,TT9,r� W..\ JN
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office iNk
RE: Resolution Allocating Commercial Quota to Gordon's and
Carry-over of Unused Commercial Quota
DATE: October 12, 1987
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends that City Council approve
Resolution allocating commercial quota from the 1987
GMP CC/C-1 commercial competition.
REQUEST: The only application for commercial quota in the 1987
GMP competition was for 1,033 square feet for expansion of
Gordon's Restaurant in the Mill Street Station Building at 205 S.
Mill Street.
QUOTA AVAILABLE: 9,000 square feet of the 10,000 square feet
available in the annual CC/C-1 zone district commercial quota has
been use up through GMP Exemptions to Elli's (8,500 square feet)
and Ute Mountaineer (500 square feet) this year. According to
Section 24-11.3(k), 30 per cent of the original number of
allotments shall be available when exemptions reduce the number
below that level. Consequently, 3,000 square feet is available
in the CC/C-1 zone district for the 1987 competition.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE VOTES: HPC reviewed the proposal for historic
compatibility on July 27, 1987 and granted conceptual review
approval subject to the condition that the applicant further
address at final HPC review transparency of the addition and
seating back the addition from Hopkins Street. Final HPC review
is scheduled for October 13, 1987.
The Planning and Zoning Commission evaluated the Gordon's
application on September 22, 1987. The project received a score
of 26 points, which exceeds the minimum threshold of 25.8 points.
The scoring summary sheet for this project is attached hereto.
Also considered and approved by P&Z were the following special
reviews:
a. Bonus FAR: P&Z approved the request for bonus FAR subject to
the conditions that:
1. The three studio employee units in the Mill Street
Station shall be properly occupied under the appro-
priate employee housing guidelines to be verified by
the Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to
issuance of a building permit . The leases for all
employee units in the building shall henceforth be
subject to review every six months by the Housing
Authority to insure property occupancy and rental rats.
2. The exterior staircase shall be constructed according
to design option #8 approved by P&Z on September 29,
1987, containing all drainage within the staircase and
channeling it into a single drain.
b. Reduction in trash and utilities area: P&Z approved a reduc-
tion of the trash and utilities access area subject to the
condition that the applicant agrees to provide either a
fourth trash dumpster in a configuration where it is
physically possible to be filled, as determined by the
Engineering Department, or a trash compactor.
CARRY-OVER OF UNUSED COMMERCIAL QUOTA IN OTHER CATEGORIES: The
CC/C-1 zone district was the only commercial competition in 1987.
There would be no quota in the CC/C-1 zone district available for
carry-over after allocation to Gordon's. The quota which Council
can either carry-over or eliminate this year in other commercial
categories are:
Office Zone District 3,905 square feet*
NC/SCI Zone Districts 7,000 square feet
CL and Other Zone Districts 3,000 square feet
* Addition of a 95 sq. ft. cooler at Little Cliff's was
approved by HPC exempt from Office GMP quota.
The Planning Office believes once again that there is little
rationale to carry over the unused commercial quota in the above
categories. Significant commercial development and redevelopment
has occurred in Aspen during 1987. While that activity has been
almost exclusively in the CC and C-1 zone districts, there is no
apparent need to increase the quota in other categories for 1988.
If you agree with us, we recommend that you direct us to amend
the proposed resolution to add a section eliminating 1987
commercial quota, for signatures by the Mayor.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to adopt Resolution
r
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
2
m
z
0
aM
V
F•i
a
a
a
a
W
E
z
a
a
N
•
O
U
N
G
3
O
O
w
41
w
41
A.
v
U
G
0
0
U
M
I
I
I
I
I
4-J
w
I
O
41
3
EN
rn
,'�IJII
r
rn
N
N
S4
N
�
N
C
v
v
o N
°
4
N
•�
° 041
rn
U
U
O G
N
°
w
a °
o
N >1
U
U
(L
w
•.a
u �+
v
C] •�
�
•.� �
v
I
fl
ou
N O tr
O
q
. 4J "1
ro U�
a
\
a
G D
O
.�i 04 r- C
O
04
rl
7 S],
E4
w
0, N cp • 1
E
E:
yv
N
v
•� N F4 B
UN a!HC
O
0• 1 u
e
w
p
U
G]
v v 1 N
u]
N
=(QEiu
Lo C1 Cn
m
w
m
41
�.4
4-1v
v U c
o
w
• 4 ni G
U
u M-14 .4
O
,c v u C 7 N
[
U 41 Q1 a) N RS
,q >
J�.1 3 .0 O "
O
>,
u•,,c .+u
.0 W
rov�41�
z
41
<cnw �E-+
M y
3 V)acnw
N
>
9
> c
°
O
a
r•I N (•'1 •a II1 1D
�., fd
r-i N M C L(1
a
N
a
U
ai
H
O
ca
N y
� H
c z
•.1 N
O Q
a w
N
c
0
m
0
ZLLV, Itk�
&LEv• .1lfb`
F.LEy• II ``a
T:,6e.u�
Uo�k�Hs tom.
ob
I
PLAN- ilia
Hai+
'jo MILL 4,[•
i, - SLSV, 11t(o"
4
TA-16e-u= to N #
�-IvpkiHs �.
�_. ELEv• �l i�`
F 1Lzv • V t (."
r-+ _ -[�u� �Tlo N #
f'k I H 4T,
4-1
Q2wri
SL5V, 111(p"
ep, F -LEV. 111(oo
t=) 171 Tx."ull
4%e-"
5
140'rkIM.6i 4T•
A
r+�afN
L�
�I
S.LEV• Ill(Q`
�"s.�. u afi'T Id N #
0 i i �imiiiiv-llvl
IIIIIIIHIIII
Lo
t4- aw. Vila AA
Fi. - F-Lg:V- '11(o"
TA-16e- u
l-Io� k l H g 4T.
t-1 • ELzv 111ty"
� • F-LEv• 111(a`
. ELEv• �11L"
TAxse- u
- - - �.+I-rse,-rs,
F • S1.Ev• 111(o"
-e
LEY. 'I tL"
�osz�or—�' � ���T. .�vt� � —� ► �� . -- Tau=_ �1"loN �'
ony-i
t
s (,k for eh
Sf✓� e�Ur� �,1,� Stq>n S'�1,�P1"S —S.r,lYl�� n r.-�soN�l.1t �D�S��i�i�1
<1oJt�
r1 ,
`fir — /►,rw ����, �l,YJ1 �✓v,�v� —,lk�y fir' � '✓Yty���. J '�' �,� h �
pv4
,. if pit
Ovf in
M k')D1lr�t M-✓ w�l,� t,r►� B� — I �D l�s/s� E't _ A�i �tio—i ono l�s/f
fvm
i►lih'J�vi'�6 �I {!rh
�yrP
Ifj
PETITION
We, the undersigned, are tenants of commercial space in the Mill
Street Plaza Building. We have reviewed the drawings for the
proposed addition to Gordon's Restaurant as originally submitted.
We believe the relocated restaurant entry stair will benefit all
of the shop owners in the project and we urge you to approve the
new stair location as shown in the submission dated August 1,
1987.
Date Name of Shop Tenant Signature
1
2
3
4
5,
6
7
8
9
10.
11
12.
13.
14.
15.
JW.18
P-lak"OvS ,
4- -
fz-HimU To f;ITL7I
NEW SING
�1aNb4 'So
im
W(A L 41� a T%ff, L
yy
FIA-SP 9HP95Z F-YKV�
F 6,Hp W. r*Np O�F
NEW MEWL ti Di
mom
WPM
ve
I,
i
S*5-1-al—stMx w�::
14
4 af 4e;;q- -
INt IPF- �.-
ORTH
..................
9)k14oT, "6 r4aTlT'&-'-, Tv UL kEmoYltP
VY Pe.e717 UZ4'I2
I Pi
S r:,NTr-Y e,-XLPW
P SM T 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Mill Street Station Code Violations
DATE: October 5, 1987
I want to bring to your attention a code enforcement matter that
a food locker in the trash and utilities storage area of the Mill
Street Station Building at 205 S. Mill Street appears to be in
violation of the intended use of that space. My understanding is
that the food locker belongs to Gordon's. This problem was
brought up for the information of the Planning and Zoning
Commission at the scoring of the Gordon's expansion plan on
September 22, 1987. However, P&Z did not act on this as it is a
prior violation. Initial research into building permits issued
for the building did not turn up any building permit for the food
locker.
Other code violations are use of employee housing unit for office
space, placement of an elevator in the building, and landscaping
representations not installed. The employee housing unit use
will be returned as part of a special review approval by P&Z for
bonus FAR. Enforcement action for the other violations should
also be considered.
The Resolution allocating commercial GMP quota to Gordon's is
scheduled before City Council for October 12, 1987. I am
preparing this resolution for the Council packet due October 7.
If you have any comments pertinent to the Resolution, please tell
me before October 7.
cc: Bill Drueding, Zoning Official
DOMMUS & weLLs
an association of land planners
September 25, 1987
Mr. Steve Burstein
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Steve:
0 W f~,�
i
SEP 2 5 997
Since I am planning to be out of town from October 6 and won't be
returning until shortly before the Council meeting on the 12th, I
wanted to outline my understanding of Council's obligations
regarding Gordon's Restaurant.
Section 24-11.5(f) states that "Subsequent to the conclusion of
all protest hearings . . . , the city council shall by resolution
and prior to November 1st of each year, allocate development
allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority
established by their rank. Those applicants having received
allotments may proceed to apply for any further development
approvals required by the zoning, building or other regulations
of the city "
Since there will be no protest hearings this year, we expect that
City Council will simply allocate the quota of 1,033 sq. ft.
requested in our submission for Gordon's without a great deal of
discussion, since the award is mandatory.
Following Council's award of our quota request,on the 13th, we
will appear before HPC for their final consideration of our
project under the guidelines for review of proposals in the
Commercial Core Historic District.
I will contact you to make sure I haven't overlooked something
which might come up with Council.
Sincerely,
i'
Joseph Wells
AICP
JW:jlr.19
608 east hyman avenue ❑ aspen, colorado 81611 11 telephone: 303 925-6866
Alk
N
SCALE
I I NCH = 10 FEET
O 5 to 15 2-0 25
oTJ IF�
O
+ rv'c*jr
F--i6
Q�✓Io���'( If=01�
FNO 5 RD a AI,UM 3 J
CAP. "237G NVV
CDR l-OT I li
Z ELe-e— MEYGo-5
IRRIG.
� DITCH
VA
WOoo ���p
rENCE I ie'l
I.., o-I" 13 A
l 6,( �\
y00
0
1 's
I
I s'�
1
I
vy 1
I 1 I
1
IQ3
,�
O
(ARC-
N 39° 35 W
5F oC°'
D
/
\
O
rr 22c 21'
7
2
r LID SP.
-,�,
��•
NE COR LOT 2
2�
. by
N 50°33 W
l
48G8
I
+
�
CoNC. pR1VE
TDM
1002-
5 � � —
i �vi
— �
IZI✓.r.Ap.
I
\
e
34
�e�Jlv✓sl.,
L' r7
LLd LL:.n `,LD Z R ® E
i- SPIKI- SURVEY CONTROL.-.
FOUND SURVEY MONUMENT A5 DE5CRI13E17
O SF_T 'S R13 — CAP 237G Val. C ` ON PROI'. LINE
—�- WOOD 1=ENCE
CAL.U.S 1N C ) Aiza RECORD FROM
5U1301V1510N P-AT
5URV1=Y ORIENTED WITH FOUND MONUMENTS
RECORD L.OT oo=5 NOT MATHEMATICAL-L,( GL-05E7,
CAL.I. FOIZ NORTH1:-✓21,'( PROIo. I-.INE S!-Ioui o 131
CHANGED FROM ( N2O°32'E) To N70°32.'I= AS
INDICAT LED OY 5CA1-1NG FROM THt= 5UL301Y1510N
Pl-AT - ADDITIONAL_ I=RI20XZ AD.SU5T60 gl-ONG
WATER5 AVi . E RIVER
(=L EVATIONS ARr (3A5fFQ ON H SPIKI= SfiT )N
WATE2S AVE _ T13M IOU° coNTOuR INTEIQVAZ- S
OF SNOW COVr2r_D PROF"ECRTY AT TIME
or- 5URv;Y.
ALL CORNERS FOUND IN SUNE, 1979
_ _ _ TGOcF oJE��{AwlCr�
2 5TO RY \
WOOD FRAME
O
HOUSE
L cT I Z
GAw .
L-O T 11
9 ° 1 L+ 29. 7.5 ' )
1� \
1\
O � O
5 08 o 19 ' E 1
�I 75.00' j
O
APPROX, "F
LOw
® WATER
G--IANNEL
FEL3, 78 1
I
I oo �r4Q- FL�x�
Px�rJ� DtkY�( �Q Oe� -at
CITY or ah�F�.1 GotA.
�I r►�I►J �o�UT`{ : � ��
THE UNOERSIGNEO DOES HE.REB`( CERTIF`l THAT TH\S SURVEY WAS
MELD SURVE`CED DURING SEPf, l�S'! ON THE GROUND OF TH'F-
PROPERTY
LEG-P.L.L-Y DESC•R\e>ED NEREON, ANO 15 CORRECT gASEb ON THE F\ELD
EVIDENCE SHOWN ON THIS C>LP.T AS FOUND, ANO TH/JT T1-ERE AR- NO
015GRE.P/-\NGIES, CONFL\C,TS, SHOP-TAGES IN ,AREA, LINE
C_ONFLIGTS CNGRO\GHMENTS, OVERLAPPING OF IN)PRCNF-MENTS, EASEMENTS,
OR RIGHTS OF WAY IN FIELD EV\OENGE OR KNOVVNTO ME EXCEPT AS
H1=PEON SHOWN. 0NDE.RGRC3UND UTILITIES WI-T} NOV15l8LE. ABOVE. -
GR(DUNC) VALVE DOXES OR MANHOLES, AND DOCUMENTS OF RECORD
No•T SUPPLIEID Tv T1-�L SURVCYoR iaRE >=.xGEPTED.
SIGNED l %.�.' at -3 - $�I �;:'it�s�r,U�•__
'• 16129 '
T�'AJI I71 14/. McCSFR- G*-- C . tL . L- . 5 I 1 Zn
.�� sl�a�E
0� C01�il�
nF\'o [pm0w1zNl[][ELO=
AN p
STIMAN4 MARGIN REVIEW
OF
LOT 12_ CA►-DERWOOD SU13DIVISION - CITY
OF ,kSPC-N PITKIN CO., COI.0RA00
FOP,
HARLAN LEE
PREPARED T3Y
A"-f---ti1 SURVF_Y F_Nwts., INC.
P. O. pox 2-5000 - ASPEN(, C01.0.
2.3, 1178
p,DDCD TO 612E517E5
UPDATED G/Z6/79
q/3 /$-i
JoD Bozo -A
9 1 0
Iu101W, ce)thlZIDili u�
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Gordon's Staircase
DATE: September 24, 1987
At your September 22, 1987 meeting the Planning and Zoning
Commission approved the requested special review for bonus FAR to
accomodate Gordon's deck enclosure. One of the conditions of
approval was that the exterior staircase leading to the proposed
enclosed area be further studied and presented again to the
Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. The Commis-
sion scheduled further discussion of the staircase for the next
meeting (September 29, 1987).
Attached is a letter by the applicant's architect and eight
options for staircase location. Criteria that the architect has
suggested for evaluation of each option are listed on pages 1 & 2
under "Additional points to consider regarding stair..." On page
2 of the letter, revisions of safety and aesthetics features are
also proposed to address some of P&Z's concerns. The applicant
continues to favor option #8.
Staff believes that option #5 has many advantages in being
internal to the project, reducing projection into open space, and
minimizing impact on streetscape. We believe that the safety and
aesthetics proposals, including (1) containing all drainage
within the stair and channeling it into a single drain, (2)
omitting vestibule, (3) reducing angles and curves, and (4)
reducing projection into open spaces, all improve the project.
The details of the design can be reviewed by HPC in their final
review, provided that the concept meets P&Z's approval.
The applicant will present the attached options for your consi-
deration. Jake Vickery has also offered to show P&Z members the
site if there is interest in arranging this with him prior to
your meeting. We expect that P&Z members have had ample opportun-
ity to visit the site, and are not scheduling a special site
visit.
gordonstairs
H A
R
R
Y
T
E
A
G
U
E
A
R
C
H
1
T
E
C
T
S
M
'I
September 24, 1987
(
�1 SR 2 41987
U
To Pitkin County Planning & Zoning:
---
We appreciate the opportunity to review and revise the
design of Gordon's
stair in consideration for allotment of bonus FAR square footage as prev-
iously presented.
Considerations seem to fall into three categories as follows:
1. Location -function
-visibility, blockage of view
-projection into open space
-attachment, appendage
-shop windows
2. Safety -perception of safety, comfort
-sturdiness, single pole
-handrail
-snowmelt, dripping
-handrail, guardrail
maintenance
3. Aesthetics -compatibility
-shape
-color
materials
-overstated
-pleasant approach
Additional points to consider regarding stair are as follows:
1. rewired by code
2. internal to the project
3. serves only one owner, Gordon's, not the
general building
4. minimize impact on existing brick work &
shop windows
5. minimize impact on street scape
6. minimize blockage of view of Aspen Mt
H A
R
R
Y
T
E
A
G
U
E
A
R
C
H
I T
E
C
T
S
Page 2
Cont.
7. courtyard law utilization factor, rental spaces empty.
8. already approved by HPC, client, building owner, other
tenants, building inspector.
Revisions proposed regarding stair are as follows:
1. Location
see attached sketches.
2. Safety -will meet or exceed all safety requirements.
-drainage from stair will be contained within
the stair.
3. Aesthetics -omit vestibule
-reduce angles and curves
-reduce projection into open spaces
(see attached sketches)
�
G.&LLV,'IV.'
r.Lrv•'+
.F-Lrv. $7
Tau. I N
�
14opk M<i 4,r.
r--- --..................... �--- --
r.Lgv• 16'
.dam► -r�-rs
Uo�kIHs
rLEY, 1/W'
6Lrw, 11W
LFY. 1IL"
I71 *4 - �>�al�� T �= 1ot-4
M" *T.4
F-- riirv. 'fib*
44orl4lH* *T-
H. ILW, '/I&*
F-, r6L6v. .11W
w5'. XLEV. 111(."
Y
Am4"
140flk1H*, *T,
r.L v• 'fib'
,t�t7tz:> 17I � t-► -(fol U=. �o N #%�
H. uw, like
Fit. rl.Lrv- 11166
�. LLEV. Vie.,
P"42--r Tx."U!. ION -*
Na- � i I-rre-Te,
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission and Special Reviews
Case #2737-073-38-004
September 16, 1987
LOCATION: Mill Street Station, 205 S. Mill Street, Lots D through
J, Block 81, Aspen Townsite. Gordon's Restaurant is located on
the second floor of the building.
ZONING: Commercial Core/Commercial Core Historic District
APPLICANT: Gordon Naccarato, owner of Gordon's Restaurant, has
prepared the application with authorization of Anthony J. Mazza,
Managing Partner of the Mill Street Station Building. In effect,
the owner of the building is the applicant.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests Commercial GMP
allocation of 1,033 square feet for the enclosure of the second -
level deck and construction of a new exterior entry stair.
Special review approvals for bonus floor area and further
reduction in the trash and utilities access area are also
requested.
QUOTA AVAILABLE: Approximately 9,000 s.f. of the 10,000 s.f. in
the annual CC-C-1 zone district commercial quota has been used up
through GMP Exemptions to Elli's (about 8,500 s. f.) and Ute
Mountaineer (500 s.f.) this year. According to Section 24-
11.3(k), 30 percent of the original number of allotments shall be
available when exemptions reduce the number below that level.
Consequently, 3,000 s.f. is available in the CC/C-1 zone district
for the 1987 competition. Final tabulation of the quota will be
made prior to the City Council meeting dealing with allocations.
The Gordon's proposal is the only application in the 1987
Commercial GMP competition.
PROCESS: The Planning Office will summarize this project at your
meeting of September 22, 1987, review procedures with you, and
provide a suggested assignment of points for the scoring of the
application. The applicant will give a brief presentation of his
proposal. A public hearing will be held to allow interested
citizens to comment. At the close of the hearing, the Commission
members will each be asked to score the applicant's proposal.
The total number of points awarded by all the members, divided by
the number of members voting, will constitute the total points
awarded to the project. A project must score a minimum of 60
percent of the total points available under categories 1,2, and 3
amounting to 25.8 points to be eligible for a GMP allotment. A
project must also score a minimum of 30 percent of the points
available in each category 1 and 2 and provide deed restricted
housing for a minimum of 35% of the employees generated by the
project to be eligible for allocation. The minimum points are as
follows:
Category 1 = 5.4 points;
Category 2 = 3.0 points; and
Category 3 = 8.75 points.
Should an application score below these thresholds it will no
longer be considered for a development allotment and will be
considered denied. Bonus points cannot be used to bring an
application over this minimum threshold.
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGS: The Planning Office has assigned points
to the application as a recommendation for you to consider. The
following is a summary of the ratings. A more complete explana-
tion of the points assignment for each criterion is shown on the
attached score sheets, including rationales for the ratings.
Availability
Quality of Public Employee Bonus Total
of Facilities/ Housing Points Points
Design Services Commitment
10.5 5 15 -- 30.5
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION: According to the Planning
Office's recommended scoring, the Gordon's Application meets the
threshold number of points in each scoring category. Sufficient
quota is available for the project. Positive features of the
project include the placement of planters on Hopkins Street and
the architectural concept of placing the addition in the middle
section of the building. Problems with the level of transparency
on the Hopkins elevation and exacerbating the existing trash
problem may be dealt with through the special reviews for bonus
floor area and trash and utilities area reduction, as discussed
below. The Planning Office recommends that you concur with its
point assignment to approve the project and recommend to Council
the allocation of 1,033 square feet for the construction of
Gordon's addition.
2
430or" IPA MINDMA aDim, F
I. Bonus Floor Area: The applicant is requesting special
review approval to use the unutilized bonus floor area available
to the building via the prior placement of on -site employee
housing. As you know, with .3:1 FAR used for employee housing,
1.7:1 FAR may be used for commercial space in the CC zone
district, arriving at a total FAR of 2:1. According to the
applicant's calculations, 1,033 square feet remain available.
The Building Department will need to verify the existing FAR and
resultant FAR to insure compliance with area and bulk require-
ments prior to issuance of a building permit. The Zoning Official
stated that there is a violation in the use of one of the
employee units for Gordon's office and storage. This violation
was also confirmed in an inspection of the restaurant by an
Environmental Health Officer. Not only does this change Mill
Street Station's employee housing program but it effects the
internal FAR ratio for calculation of bonus FAR. All employee
units must be occupied for employee housing purposes as verified
by the Zoning Official and Housing Authority prior to issuance of
a building permit. Since this is not the first violation
discovered of the occupancy of these units, we recommend that the
leases of all of the employee units in the building should be
reviewed every six months by the Housing Authority to insure
proper occupancy and rental rates.
Section 24-3.5(a) of the Municipal Code states the criteria that
P&Z must consider in granting bonus FAR as follows:
Criteria: (1) "the compatibility of the development with sur-
rounding land uses and zoning, including size, height and bulk,
proposed site design characteristics, including landscaping and
open space and visual impacts such as viewplanes."
Response: On July 27, 1987 HPC reviewed the proposal for historic
compatibility and granted conceptual review approval subject to
the condition that the applicant further address at final HPC
review (1)transparency of the addition and (2) setting back the
addition from the Hopkins Street facade. HPC was concerned with
upsetting the existing low scale of Mill Street Station as viewed
from Hopkins Street and overwhelming the scale of small Victori-
ans on the block. Comments in the 1980 application and in the
P&Z and HPC's reviews and scoring of the architecture focus on
these same aspects of compatibility. The applicant's presenta-
tion has also emphasized the concepts of transparency and setback
from the existing masonry parapet. We suggest that these quali-
ties of design be better realized.
Staff finds the height of the addition and vaulted roof to be
acceptable in terms of minimizing visual impacts. However, the
view of Aspen and Shadow Mountain from Hopkins Street would still
be affected. There was talk at the HPC meeting of using glass
3
bricks on the Hopkins Street elevation to increase transparency.
This concept met with initial enthusiasm by the Committee and
should be further explored. Set backs of approximately 2-3 feet
were also discussed and should be further considered.
The applicant indicates that shifting the addition back on the
deck is limited because of the need to work with the existing
structural system. While no analysis of this factor has been
presented by the applicant, Stan Stevens of the Building Depart-
ment stated on September 16, 1987 that he would anticipate the
need for a new rafter supporting system for the deck to support
the load of a new masonry wall. Consequently, it may be as easy
structurally to set the addition back 2 feet as it would be for
the proposed 8" setback.
Criteria: 11(2) Whether the applicant has documented the availab-
ility and adequacy of water supply, sewage treatment, roads, and
parking facilities to serve the proposed development."
Response: Staff is satisfied that the site has adequate public
services available for the additional floor area.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the
request for special review of bonus FAR subject to the following
conditions:
1. The three studio employee units in the Mill Street Station
shall be properly occupied under the appropriate employee
housing guidelines to be verified by the Zoning Official and
Housing Authority prior to issuance of a building permit.
The leases for all employee units in the building shall
henceforth be subject to review every six months by the
Housing Authority to insure proper occupancy and rental
rates.
2. The addition shall be designed with greater transparency and
set back farther from the Hopkins Street elevation to the
satisfaction of the Historic Preservation Committee, as
determined at final HPC review.
II. Reduction of Trash and Utilities Area: The applicant is
requesting, in connection with the increase of commercial space,
reduction in the trash and utilities area requirement. It is
argued that the existing trash area, noted to be approximately 13
feet by 14 feet (182 s.f.), is adequate for the trash generation
caused by the expansion.
Section 24-3.5(b) states the criteria for this review to include
consideration of the following matters:
Criteria: (1) Adequacy of trash vehicle access.
4
Response: Both the Planning Office and Engineering Department
have noticed congestion in the alley due to parked vehicles and
multiple service delivery vehicles. There may be an enforcement
problem with illegal parking unrelated to this application. We
have notified the Police Department and anticipate increased
ticketing and towing if the situation does not improve. In
general, we agree with the applicant that adequate trash vehicle
access is available and not a constraining factor.
Criteria: (2) Amount of trash likely to be generated.
Response: The Engineering Department states in a memorandum dated
September 16, 1987 that it does not appear reasonable to predict
no increase in trash even if the bar area does not generate more
trash. 20 to 30 additional meal seatings per day (winter) are
estimated by the Engineering Department. Neither the applicant
nor referral agencies have indicated an abundance of room for
additional trash in the present set-up of three dumpsters for the
entire building. The Engineering Department recommends an
additional dumpster or provision of a trash compactor to accommo-
date the anticipated additional trash.
Criteria: (3) Unique measures provided for enclosed trash bins.
making them easily moveable by trash personnel.
Response: No unique measures are provided. Additional pick up
service is not a criteria for reduction in trash area.
Criteria: (4) Provision for trash compaction.
Response: A trash compactor system for the building is one of the
recommended options.
Criteria: (5) Comments of Aspen trash and city engineering
personnel.
Response: Engineering Department comments have been submitted.
Criteria: Utility placement and maintenance.
Response: Access to utility meters appears to be constrained
given the food locker in the trash/utilities area.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends
approval of a reduction of trash and utilities access area
subject to the condition that a fourth dumpster be provided in
the trash area in a configuration acceptable to the Engineering
Department, or that a trash compactor be installed, to be deter-
mined prior to issuance of a building permit.
gordons
5
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET
PROJECT: GORDON'S COMMERCIAL GMP DATE: 9/22/87
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (exclusive of historic features) (maximum 18
points). The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to the quality of its exterior and site design and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building (in terms of size, height, location and
building materials) with existing neighboring developments.
RATING: 1.5
COMMENT:The deck enclosure and new entrance add bulk to the
Hopkins Street elevation, which the applicant states has minimal
visual impact because of transparency and set -back from the
facade. However, brick and tile walls are not transparent, and
an 8" set -back is not enough to maintain the integrity of the
Hopkins Street facade, as viewed by staff and by HPC at Concep-
tual Review. Maintaining a low scale of the building from the
Hopkins Street elevation was one of the key concepts of the
original design - to better relate to the Berko Building and
other small scale structures on other side of Hopkins Street -
highly scored by HPC and P&Z in the 1980 GMP competition. This
is somewhat compromised by the addition. Adding bulk to the
middle part of Mill Street Station is more acceptable than addinq
on to the western side, further overshadowing Berko's.
b. SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed landscaping and open space areas, the extent of
undergrounding of utilities, and the arrangements of
improvements for efficiency of circulation (including access
for service vehicles) and increased safety and privacy.
RATING: 2
1
COMMENT: The addition of 5 planters at street level in the
setback area along Hopkins Street will improve the character of
this open space area. It is not clear who has responsibility to
maintain landscaping in planters. We note this will help
compensate for landscaping not provided but shown in the original
application. No improvements have been proposed for service
vehicle access in the alley, which has been identified by the
Engineering Department as a problem area.
C. ENERGY - Considering the use of insulation, passive solar
orientation, solar energy devices and efficient fireplaces
and heating and cooling devices to maximize conservation of
energy and use of solar energy sources.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: The potential for further enercxv conservation is
limited in this small addition, according to the Roaring Fork
Energy Center. Thermal insulation of walls, roof and ceiling and
air lock door are commendable. They appear to off -set heat loss
of glazing. Higher R-value of glazing was suggested. Stan
Stevens questions how masonry walls will achieve the R-value
represented (R-30) and will review plans at building permit stage
to insure compliance.
d. AMENITIES - Considering the provision of usable open space
and pedestrian and bicycles ways.
RATING: 2
COMMENT:Planters and commitment to install bicvcle rack are
amenities of this project for the existing development. These
amenities are fairly standard and commensurate in scale with the
proposal's size. The bicycle rack relocation and installation
should be determined through CCLC.
e. VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of
buildings to maximize public views of surrounding scenic
areas.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: The relativelv small addition at 28' heiaht will
obstruct a portion of the view of Aspen Mountain from Hopkins
Street but this is not within an identified viewplane. Given the
existing setback from the street and the backdrop of the Wheeler
Opera House, the addition's impact is not great, but would be
minimized by further setback.
f. TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS - Considering the quality and
efficiency of proposed trash and utility access areas.
2
RATING: 1
COMMENT:The applicant states trash generation will be reduced
because of the inclusion of a "gun" system in the full -service
bar, eliminating some glass containers. Engineering Department
accepts that there may be a reduction in bottles, but believes
there will be additional trash from greater winter seating
capacity. A fourth dumpster or trash compaction is needed. The
existing trash and utilities area is noted to be cramped space
for dumpsters due to the placement of a large cooler in that
space.
SUBTOTAL: 10.5
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10
points). The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to its impact upon facilities and services and shall rate
each development by assigning points according to the following
formula:
0 -- Indicates a project which requires the provision of new
services at increased public expense.
1 -- Indicates a project which may be handled by existing level
of service in the area, or any service improvement by the
applicant benefits the project only and not the area in the
general.
2 -- Indicates a project which in and of itself improves the
quality of service in a given area.
(In those cases where points were given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two services [i.e., water supply and fire protec-
tion] the determination of points shall be made by averaging the
scores for each feature.
a. WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the capacity of
the water supply system to provide for the needs of the
proposed development without system extensions and without
treatment plant or other facility upgrading. Also, consi-
dering the ability of the appropriate fire protection
district to provides services according to established
response times without the necessity of upgrading available
facilities.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: Both the Aspen Water Department and Fire Marshal
indicated this expansion may be handled by the existing level of
water and fire protection services in the area.
b. SEWAGE DISPOSAL - Considering the capacity of sanitary
sewers to dispose of the wastes of the proposed development
without system extensions and without treatment plant or
other facility upgrading.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: Heiko Kuhn stated the Aspen Metro Sanitation District
can adequately service the proposed expansion.
C. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS - Considering the ability of the
project to be served by existing City and County bus
routes. Also considering the capacity of major streets to
provide for the needs of the proposed development without
substantially altering existing traffic patterns or over-
loading the existing street system or causing a need to
extend the existing road network.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: The proposed expansion can be adequately served by
existing RFTA bus routes. The small increment of new traffic
generation can be accommodated by existing streets.
d. STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the capacity of the drainage
facilities to adequately dispose of surface runoff of the
proposed development without system extension.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: The proposed expansion should create no change to the
existing drainage facilities. Engineering Department found the
drainage plans acceptable.
e. PARKING - Considering the provision of parking spaces to
meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed
development which are required by Section 24-4.5 of the
Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect
to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and
safety.
RATING: 1
COMMENT: No off-street parking is included in the proposal, nor
required by Section 24-4.5 for commercial development in the CC
zone district. Engineering Department noted problems caused by
the applicants' illegal parking in the alley.
SUBTOTAL: 5
4
3. PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points) - The Commis-
sion shall assign points to each applicant who agrees to provide
low, moderate and middle income housing which complies with the
housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City
of Aspen and with the provisions of Section 24-11.10. Points
shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0 to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 4% housed
41 to 100% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 12% housed
RATING: 15
COMMENT: The applicant has argued that no new employees will be
generated by the proposed expansion. The Housing Authority
concurs; therefore, 100% of all new employees would be housed and
the maximum number of points should be given. Additionally, the
applicant has committed to provide a letter of credit for cash -
in -lieu to house 5.25 low-income employees. The cash payment
would be made up to a maximum of 5.25 employees if the Housing
Authority determines, based on affidavits, that an increase has
occurred in the next two (2) years. The Housing Authority
recommends approval of this program, provided that the applicant
is responsible for housing all employees, even if more than 5.25
employees are generated. The applicant will clarify this aspect
of the program at the P&Z meeting.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 8 points) (Note to exceed 20% of the points
awarded in Sections 1, 2 and 3) - Commission members may, when
any one determines that a project has not only incorporated and
met the substantive criteria of those sections, but has also
exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an
outstanding overall design meriting recognition, award additional
points. Any Commission member awarding bonus points shall
provide a written justification of that award for the public
hearing record.
BONUS POINTS: 0
COMMENT: The Planning Office has no recommendations for bonus points.
5
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1:
Points in Category 2:
Points in Category 3:
SUBTOTAL: Points in Cate-
gories 1, 2, 3
Points in Category 4
TOTAL POINTS:
10.5 (minimum of 5.4 points needed
to remain eligible)
5 (minimum of 3 points needed
to remain eligible)
15 (minimum of 8.75 points
to remain eligible)
30.5 (minimum of 25.8 points needed
to be eligible)
30.5
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Planning Office
GORDONS.COMM
A
MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department C�.
Date: September 16, 1987
Re: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made
a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following
comments:
1. It appears that the submission might be procedurally incor-
rect. The submission might need to be submitted as an amendment
to the 1980 Mill Street Station Commercial GMP submission. The
City Attorney will have to address this. If the application is
not an amendment, we need to know if we can consider existing
conditions versus promises made in 1980.
2. There were a number representations made in the 1980 upon
which the project scoring was based, which representations were
not provided as indicated. Although these discrepancies need not
affect the scoring of the current application, they should at
least be considered in case they affect the acceptability.
a. An elevator was included in the 1980 submission but was
not constructed. The Engineering Department has seen no
indication that pedestrian use of the building has been
adversely affected by this omission, although their scoring
at that time was based on the idea of the elevator. The
exception might be accessibility for handicapped persons.
b. Landscaping was indicated in 1980 which has not been
provided. Again, this was an item which figured into the
scoring, but again, it might not be significant enough to
detract from the current application.
3. Storm drainage - The project will not change existing condi-
tions.
4. Trash - The existing utility area would have been large
enough, but there is a cold storage locker which has been
installed in it. There are currently three dumpsters located in
the utility area. The Wheeler Opera House reported that tenants
of the Mill Street Plaza Building have used the Wheeler dumps -ter
when the Plaza dumpster is full.
The discussion of trash generation in the submission was not well
quantified. It appears that there may be 20 to 30 additional
meal seatings per day, and it does not appear reasonable to
predict no increase in trash, even if the bar area does not
generate more trash. Given this information in conjunction with
the insufficient existing conditions, it appears that the site
should have an additional dumpster or provide a trash compactor.
5. Right-of-way improvements - The Engineering Department does
not have indications that an additional bicycle rack is needed.
The proposed planters would be an improvement to the streetscape,
however it should be noted that streetscape improvements,
including bicycle racks, are subject to CCLC review and street-
scape guidelines.
cc: City Attorney
Director of Public Services
CR/cr/caseload.14
r
r
CITY...-*kSPEN
130 th galena street
aspA, colorado 81611
303-925 -2020
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 1, 1987
TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM: City Attorney
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
� F_ WPW
SEP 11987
We recommend that this application be scrutinized with respect to
the original approvals for the Mill Street Plaza, which, we
believe, established permissible FAR/build out with respect to
the project. Also, as we have repeatedly emphasized in the past,
the application should be signed by the applicant.
PJT/mc
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT D))
'r1
MEMORANDUM rl� I AUG L 1
TO: STEVE BURSTEIN, PLANNING
FROM: JIM MARKALUNAS
SUBJECT: GORDON'S GMP CO MERCIAL SU M SSION
DATE: AUGUST 21, 1987
The applicant states hat there is adequate capacity at the main
to serve the existing an expanded needs of this project without
system extensions and upgrading. We concur that the Water
Department can service this facility condition and predicated
upon the applicant paying the required assessment fees as
required by ordinance.
We wish to advise the Planning Department that the current
demand capacity of this restaurant is in excess of the demand
paid for under the original water permit *122, issued October 22,
1982. We believe it is in the best interest of the City to
require that the applicant resolve these problems prior to
receiving
JM: ab
any approval for additional commercial space.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Director
Aspen Water Department
Environmental Health
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Parks Department
Fire Marshall
Roaring Fork Transit
Zoning Official
Roaring Fork Energy Center
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
DATE: August 14, 1987
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Joe Wells on behalf of his client, Gordon Naccarato requesting
Commercial GMP approval in order to enclose the outdoor patio on
the second level of the Mill Street Plaza Building and construct
a new enclosed exterior restaurant entry stair for Gordon's
Restaurant.
Please review this material and send your comments to this office
no later than September 2, 1987 in order for this office to have
adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z.
Thank you.
f4 F ^ S 9P F H- C J s-- s "- / n /4 � A #--, r /1 r � .3 A--- i'.). t s i /z I < c: /! 0--
S,,hv,L_ 7ij,c prd!'Otep ANYN,ji3�
� 7
�rstn-rc-f
ROARING FORK ENERGY CENTER • 242 MAIN STREET • CARBON DALE,CO 81623 • (303)963-0311
August 26, 1987 ' (�
Steve Burstein, Planning Office �irc,ial
Steve StandifordReview Comments for Gordon's Co GMP Submission
Energy Comments
Due to the nature of the proposed work, we agree that the applicant
is very limited in the energy conservation measures that can be
implemented. For example, the large amount of required north glazing
will greatly increase the heat loss of the addition. Having glazing
of at least R2 will help decrease this loss. There are glazing options
available with higher R values that should be explored to help minimize
this heat loss.
There are several positive energy features that are commendable,
including: the high insulation levels for the roof, walls and floor;
the attention to air infiltration; insulating the hot water lines;
the new double door air lock entry; and, the water saving fixtures.
Once again, it would help to define the water saving features (eg.,
two gallon/flush toilets). This is, however, a minor point for this
project.
The appendix indicates that roof -mounted solar panels were considered
in the past. We wonder if any further consideration was given to
this idea.
2 R z I
ROARING FORK TRANSIT AGENCY
ASPEN, COLORADO
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 2, 1987
TO: Steve Burstein
City/County Planning Department
FROM: Bruce A. Abel
General Manager
RE: Gordons Commercial GMP Submission
c� 107, 0w
SEP 81987
We have no comments to make regarding the above -referenced sub-
mission as the applicants statements (p.14) adequately represent
the situation as it relates to transit.
pak
0
ASPEN♦PITKIN
ENVIF___ JMENTAL HEALTH 0EPAR .._.ENT
MEMORANDUM
SEP 3
TO: Steve Burstein, Planner
FROM: Rick Bossingham, Environmental Health Officee95?;�
DATE: September 2, 1987
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has the
following comments on the above referenced submission.
Sewage Disposal:
Service to this project by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District sewage collection system conforms with policies of this
office.
Water Su
Service to this project by the City of Aspen Water Department
conforms with policies of this office.
Air Quality:
There are no wood burning devices indicated in the proposal and
no significant air quality impacts are anticipated with this
project.
Food Service;
The increased seating capacity of the restaurant will require the
addition of one (1) water closet and one (1) urinal for males and
one (1) water closet for females to the existing restroom
facilities. Plans for the new bar must be submitted to this
office for approval and shall comply with the Rules and Regula-
tions Governing the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in
the State of Colorado.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/925-2020
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: STEVE BURSTEIN, PLANNING OFFICE
FROM: ANN BOWMAN, PROPERTY MANAGER
DATE: AUGUST 26, 1987
RE: GORDON'S COMMERCIAL GMP SUBMISSION
SEP 1 51987
ISSUE: Are the employee generation calculations appropriate and
is the affidavit acceptable to the Housing Authority?
OVERVIEW: The applicant (Joe Wells) on behalf of his client,
Gordon Naccarato, is requesting Commercial GMP approval in order
to enclose the outdoor patio on the second level of the Mill
Street Plaza Building and construct a new enclosed exterior
restaurant entry stair for Gordon's Restaurant.
The deck is currently used by the restaurant for outdoor dining
during the summer season. When the deck is enclosed it will
become a bar seating area and entry for the restaurant as well as
a coatroom and 2 new restrooms. The excising entry stair will be
covered with a new slab and enclosure will be built at the base
of the stair.
The applicant represents that the summer season is the peak
season of employment for Gordon's. The restaurant presently
serves lunch and dinner during summer; during the winter, only
dinner is served. In addition, during the summer, the restaurant
uses the deck for outdoor dining. During the winter, the
restaurant has a peak seating capacity of 101 seats for dinner
only; during the summer, maximum seating is 133 for lunch and 101
for dinner.
Attached is a list of full time employees based on 2080 hours.
For 1986, full-time equivalent employment was 26.1 employees and
thus far for 1987 the figure is 28.4 employees. The figure for
1987 will be higher following conclusion of the summer season.
The restaurant is closed 4 months of the year.
The standards for the code for employees per thousand sq. ft. of
commercial space is 5.25 maximum employees for 1,000 sq ft.
(including the outdoor dining area presently used only a portion
of the year the anticipated employee generation would be 24.3
employees. As the calculations of actual full-time equivalent
employees indicate, this figure is already being exceeded in both
winter and summer. The applicant represents that as a result of
the proposal, full-time equivalent employment at Gordon's will
decline. This will be the case because of two key factors first,
food preparation and service is a significantly larger component
1
of the employee generation figures than is bar service; secondly,
the number of seats available for dining will decline following
construction. While the peak seating capacity in the main dining
room will increase slightly to 113 the 32 seats for outdoor
dining in summer are eliminated, so that peak dining remains the
same year-round.
In order to provide the City with adequate information to verify
that there has, in fact, been non increase in employees at the
restaurant following construction, the applicant proposes to
provide the Housing Authority with and affidavit regarding the
level of employment over the course of the past year (proposed to
use the period of September 1, 1986 through August 31, 1987) and
to repeat the procedure again in September, 1988.
In the event that following the second accounting there proves
to have been an increase in full-time equivalent employment over
the course of the year, the applicant proposes to make contribu-
tions for the cash -in -lieu program for that incremental increase
up to a maximum commitment of 5.25 employees. To assure payment,
the applicant will provide a Letter of Credit to the Housing
Authority upon final approval of the project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because the level of service is high at
Gordon's the present employee count is over the requirement for
the code, and staff is willing to go along with the affidavit.
The bar should not generate as many employees year-round as the
open deck restaurant seating. Therefore, staff approves the
applicants proposal without the stipulation of a maximum commit-
ment of 5.25 employees. If more employees are generated than
5.25 then the applicant should be responsible for their housing.
HOUSING AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION: Approved staff recommendation.
2
ASPEN*PITKIN REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT
0U. ,
1
SEP 181987
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Steve Burstein - Planning Department
FROM: Bill Drueding - Zoning Enforcement Officer
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
DATE: September 17, 1987
On September 11, 1987, I met with Jake Vickery, Architect,
who represents the applicant. In lieu of detailed building plans
I expressed the following concerns:
- The new stairway be included in F.A.R. calculations.
- The new stairway intruded into or reduced required
open space.
Mr. Vickery said that these concerns were being dealt with
at this stage.
I have been having a recurring enforcement problem.
Gordon's has been using the adjacent designated employee unit as
an office for the restaurant in violation of City codes. I have
received a letter form Gordon's stating they will discontinue
this illegal use. I would like any approval contingent upon
further assurance of code compliance.
WD:lo
sbecgmp.bd
offices:
517 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
303/925-5973
mail address:
506 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 811311
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Director
Aspen Water Department
Environmental Health
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Parks Department
Fire Marshall
Roaring Fork Transit
Zoning Official
Roaring Fork Energy Center
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
DATE: August 14, 1987
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Joe Wells on behalf of his client, Gordon Naccarato requesting
Commercial GMP approval in order to enclose the outdoor patio on
the second level of the Mill Street Plaza Building and construct
a new enclosed exterior restaurant entry stair for Gordon's
Restaurant.
Please review this material and send your comments to this office
no later than September 2, 1987 in order for this office to have
adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z.
Thank you.
PRE —APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
7-2q--v
PROJECT:
6 ov/Dh
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE:
OWNERS NAME:
SUMMARY
1. Type of Application:
2. Describe action/type of development being requested:
r�'PRt( ap�ro�1M(p� IbDa t.l, f�LnraYen %S' CWVW►y� [��(� {mnW QX1511AA StpIrW�Y Aa/het�s rGl✓w0y
3. Areas in which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of
reports requested:
Policy Area/
Referral Agent
r4"i+I.
�,aP.,^�alJntdrhn�Lt�
comments
c �- 2�—�� .
r,j't' fo Ous„,.II 5trvafUrt1N Hbrkios.
li/pl;c��tw�il Avliut +nIt �lr{ht�r Pr{)1ti+tis�� I{✓el�e��lo�tres an� fhty /
CYedia ��( 61y1{rh?'/Only'r 0f]�� NI)In;A;It41f5(/1'd"r)hitIOvDIIh�fjl .""VO
1 !1 I (�
no n•u. e,rply.w ��Ii A�iiq�{7 >bf�is Pos,tiiun � if ntw� l
a-�,(s�J � I� •� a��lir,►.f►� p�wt{. IDa �o �,ous;n' ,,,�"i�-hir>u���?l
- �h ,�� �a P�. �v,�t�r tit (�*rr�t`! �x pe►Is1o�, on ►'e)ttw�tnf Jber
4. Review is: (P&Z Only) (CC/BOCC Only) (P&Zthen to CC/BOCC)
5. Public Hearing: (YES) (NO)
6. Did you tell applicant to submit list of ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNERS? (YES) (NO) Disclosure of Ownership: (YES) ) :(NO)
7. What fee was applicant requested to submit:
8. Anticipated date of submission:
9. COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS:
111
fe1At', w� < votl;+a-k)(Try�
fR(r�-e s�;.:�.• ,, �' • � ? : , �' prwr r;Ml�e ��1 cd.�fyRyl
r)Y ?I IitvIAl�Ihy ii. rlv,�!{/�I�PI
%r�is�, �Utiti�.+iPt /traq — e>ln��h� COe�i•%ro�s s%Iwl� �. ��""" .'_' ' �DM�i1•`�orsr,,r� ,►�,lr}��
�% pLr�(,.�y — St, IV eI)v c 1rl�IaI IJ11 } �h� PYup011 k,1W4Ur + plen;iY j Ih.CMW,-rA ,yl- ht "-3Z.--4
)✓
e lr1, f 1iP/1� — k t.� �ow�, k4v
f 1 1: J-(a Lam, LAI ►,
to
r A Ow In c
ICIA i
V.,"j + '�- q$ 4 f. � 6 M►� � UNi �a � �✓�Gtr, , AP9' c.r��
_ _ _ te,
rari.+ s f� ''� f`."t e tr • + vy p a► I.S�, , s d� r
TI
41DIy NO C_z I Y
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
,Housing Director
- Aspen Water Department
'Environmental Health
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
[Parks Department
Fire Marshall
Roaring Fork Transit
Zoning Official
rRoaring Fork Energy Center
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Gordon's Commercial GMP Submission
DATE: August 14, 1987
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Joe Wells on behalf of his client, Gordon Naccarato requesting
Commercial GMP approval in order to enclose the outdoor patio on
the second level of the Mill Street Plaza Building and construct
a new enclosed exterior restaurant entry stair for Gordon's
Restaurant.
Please review this material and send your comments to this office
no later than September 2, 1987 in order for this office to have
adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z.
Thank you.
ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 925-2020
Date. &//`//�%
RE:
Dea r
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that your application IS NOT complete.
Additional items required include:
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
Adjacent Property Owners List/Envelopes/Postage (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
Authorization by owner for representative to submit applica-
tion
Response to list of items (attached/below) demonstrating
compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
A check in the
amount of $
A.. Your application is complete and
e
we have sch duled
9aa
it for
We will
review by the
/0 Z
on
call you if we
need any additional
information prior
to that
date. Several
days prior to your
hearing, we will call and
make available
a copy of the memorandum.. Please note
that it
IS NOT your
responsibility to
post your property
with a
sign, which we
can provide you for a
$3.00 fee-
B. Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials we have
requested, we will place you on the
next available agenda.
If you have any questions, please call
the planner assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: GORDON'S RESTAURANT COMMERCIAL GMP SUBMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, September 22, 1987, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 P.M.
before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, in the City
Council Chambers on the first floor of City Hall at 130 S. Galena
Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application submitted by
Gordon Naccarato requesting Commercial GMP approval in order to
enclose the outdoor patio on the second level of the Mill Street
Plaza Building outside of Gordon's Restaurant and to construct a
new enclosed exterior restaurant entry stair adding approximate-
ly 1,030 square feet. The property is located at 205 S. Mill
Street.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2020
ext. 223.
s/C. Welton Anderson
Chairman, Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on September 3, 1987.
City of Aspen Account.
9
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: .7 8 _
DATE COMPLETE:
PROJECT NAME:
Project Address:
APPLICANT: ( ( (T (/�
Applicant Address;
REPRESENTATIVE:
Representative
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
/Phone:
• i • •
n&&XIM WN
PAID: ES vo NO AMOUNT: �
1 ST P Ap-PLICATION:
CP—&
Z MEETING DATE:
DATE REFERRED: ell,
2 STEP APPLICATION:
CC MEETING DATE:
DATE REFERRED:
REFERRALS:
City Attorney
City Engineer
✓ Housing Dir.
y Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir. Hlth.
V Aspen Consol.
S.D.
Mtn. Bell
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
1/ Fire Marshall
Fire Chief
v Roaring Fork
Transit
1 � In 1 S A"I
PUBLIC HEARINGQ YES NO
INITIALS: AW
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
INITIALS:
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
V B1dg:Zon/Inspect
Roaring Fork
Energy Center
Other
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:
City Atty City Engineer Bldg. Dept.
Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: