HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19880329
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 1
ANDERSON We're dealing with architecture and employee housing
2 tonight, right?
3 RICHMAN We're going to deal with architecture. We've got some
4 definite problems with both the architecture and employee
5 housing have arrived in our office very, very late and
6 the employee housing did not arrive until this morning.
7 There was a draft that came out yesterday and another
8 draft that came out this morning. We have no comments
9 from the housing authority, and there will be no comments
10 from staff at all. I think the applicant may want to
11 make a presentation to you, but I will have no comments
12 whatsoever and nobody from the housing office will be
] here to discuss the issue with you so actual disposition
14 of the housing issue will not be able to occur until next
15 week because we haven't received the materials in time.
16
17
18
19
20
21 HARVEY
The architecture came into our office at 2 o'clock this
afternoon and again I'm not going to have any comments
for you. I'm seeing it essentially as new as you are
this afternoon. So we will have some discussion but I'm
"--
going to be keeping it very very quick
Well, the employee housing, Jim Adamski was out of town
last week so we had some scheduling problems in getting
it to you, the memo and the board isn't going to meet
until Thursday afternoon. So we want to show you are
response to the architect.
We've got plenty of architecture to go through.
22
23
24
25
2 SARPA
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 2
..employee housing. We'd like to tell you what we're
2 doing but as Alan said, he's not had the opportunity to
3 go through it with Jim Adamski or review it with Jim.
4 Jim has not had a chance to go through his board. The
5 board is meeting on Thursday. What we can do is give you
6 a very clear understanding of what it is we have proposed
7 to them so you're aware of what it is they're considering
8 tonight, and that won't take a lot of time so we can
9 spend the majority of time on the architecture.
10 ANDERSON Want to kick it off
11 SARPA Given the amount of interest that has come on the
12 architecture design side, I'm going to take just a few
1 minutes to walk quickly through how we got to where we
14 are, literally just 2 or 3 minutes, and then we're going
15 to jump right into it so you can see what we've done.
16 We started with last August as you might all recall with
17 a certain design. We took that design. We met with
18 about 3,000 different people in the community in various
19 presentations. It went through some design changes as
20 a result of that. We then worked extensively with city
21 staff, city attorney, with the city architect to make
22 further adjustments to the design. Then we came before
23 you all a few weeks ago and heard your comments as well
24 as some strong comments from the architectural community
25 here. We've had subsequent meetings with an architec-
2 tural group of the community and various other people.
"
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2!';
,a.,.._..-
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988 3
I think what you'll see tonight is a rather extensive and
significant amount of changes that have occurred to the
design even from a week ago. Given all this changes,
it's been a timing problem because of course it takes
time to get all that down on paper and it has taken time
to get it back to Alan but we do think you'll find quite
a bit of responsiveness here tonight. What we're not
going to go through are things we think we have addressed
and we don't need to rehash them again. We think we've
talked about the site planning, the landscaping quite a
bit, we've talked about the area and bulk, the number of
rooms, we've talked about the open space quite a bit so
that will not be the major focus of our presentation
tonight. The things we're going to talk tonight about
how the building looks. What does it look like from all
the various perspectives. There are 4 or 5 areas that
we are particularly focused on, what are basically the
result of your comments and the architectural comments
we've received back. And those are the ones we'll focus
on tonight; roof, balconies, pedestrian impact, the main
corner itself there at Dean and Mill, and then street
setbacks. Those are the major areas that our architects
are going through tonight. I'll mention the thing on
employee housing. We'll come back to that, we think at
the end of the meeting we should have sufficient time to
show you what it is we're proposing. We obviously have
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 4
to come back in next week after you've had a chance to
2 hear what staff has to say about it and get their
3 reactions to it. I'll just end our introduction by
4 talking about the time constraints that we have. They're
5 real, they're obvious. We're ready to meet a lot of
6 deadlines, whether they're construction deadline or PUD
7 process deadlines. As you may well be aware, we have a
8 request into the city right now for an extension to the
9 April 15th deadline. We think that's an important part
10 of what we're doing with you right now. We think we've
11 had a heck of a lot of good interaction with you all.
12 There's additional interaction that's needed and it's
crazy for all of us to feel as though we have some
14 artificial time bomb ticking behind our heads. So we
15 have this extension in. It will corne up on April 11th.
16 We think we've made darn good progress, rather than all
17 of us feeling because we think now there's this undercur-
18 rent of either feeling unduly pressured or ramrodding or
19 a lot of other things going on, it's just not the case.
20 We're just trying to move forward with this project, look
21 at it in all it's aspects and try to get it on time in
22 a way that's best for the city and for us. So anyway,
23 we do have these time constraints and it's important to
24 keep in mind when we do get into an architectural design
25 review. with that I will turn it over to Tim Richardson,
L who's going to say just a few words from the Ritz's
...'"
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 5
perspective and then we'll go right into, and will it go
to you Gene? Okay. Tim.
I just really wanted to mention a few items so that
you'll understand where the Ritz Carlton Hotel Company
is coming from in relation to the comments from the city
and obviously the architectural design that you're about
to see on the hotel is revisions or responses primarily
from the community of Aspen but I just want you to be
aware that all of those responses that you'll see are
tempered somewhat by what we as a Ritz Carlton hotel
company feels is necessary to properly serve the guests
and make sure that our guests has the kind of perception
of the hotel that he would find in other Ritz Carlton
hotels and therefore the architect is being placed sort
of under a double whammy if you will in getting res-
traints from us as well as from the city. I think that
you'll see tonight that he has responded to those
restraints extremely well and that what you're going to
find is an extremely attractive project that still works
well for Ritz Carlton hotel company. We place a lot of
emphasis on how the hotel functions so that when a guest
stays there he is properly served and at the same time
making it a comfortable environment for the local
community. We hope to become an integral part of that
community. We don't feel we've compromised from our
perspective anything that we can't overcome to date in
2
3 TIM
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
'._....
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
;><;
~
March 29, 1988
6
Planning and Zoning
AUBREY
SARPA
AUBREY
what we have as far as architectural design goes but we
hope that we don't have to go any further because we're
real comfortable with what we have and we think it will
serve our needs as well as the needs of the community in
a manner that everybody will appreciate, especially over
the long haul. The second thing and last thing I really
want to mention is the fact that, I mentioned this
before, we don't look for traditional type of architec-
ture. We look for an architecture that is, we refer to
it as timeless. We worked very hard with the architect
so that, again, you won't end up with a building that is
qualified or quantified by when it was built, so we place
a lot of emphasis on the quality of materials, the style
of the architecture, I think all those things have been
accomplished in this scenario that you're about to look
at especially within the context of what is appropriate
for Aspen. And with that, I'll turn it over to Gene and
let him show you what they've corne up with.
As John mentioned it sort of sounded like we started
over, we really didn't do that
Damn near
There is just one thing I'd like to touch base on the
site planning and we'll get right on to the architecture,
and that is in regard to the setbacks, and I just want
to refresh everyone's memory, that we did take the entire
building and move it down 2 feet. We moved this body of
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
;-,._,<
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
7
the building in another 6 feet, we moved this in 6 feet,
we created the pocket park along this corner, that's
adjacent to the main entrance corner, again these are the
2 entrances, again we're set back again off of Dean
street. We've opened up this corner so that you have an
overlook and an actual pedestrian entrance into this
courtyard at this point.
And what in effect we have
created is really like a linear park along this Monarch
street edge, I mean we're 28 feet off of that street now.
We have small nice pedestrian scale fences which I'll
show you in the elevations along these two elevations.
And I just wanted to touch base there on the site plan.
In response to all of the comments that were made in
regarding to your comments, for instance, the mansard
roofs we, the street scale of the building, the shadow
casting, and the breakup of the facade, we spent a lot
of time and we have relooked not at the way the plan
moves back and forth, that is exactly the same as it was,
the setbacks as you go along Mill street and Monarch
street are exactly the same. The real emphasis is on two
things; one is the visual perception of the size of the
building, the quality of the architecture as it relates
to a residential kind of scale and the way the roofs
work. As we mentioned last time, it's very delicate in
this because of the number of rooms we need to get onto
the site and the way the hotel has to work to meet the
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.-
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 8
Ritz Carlton needs. We couldn't design a hotel where the
top rooms were useless. So what we have devised, and
we'll show you some details as I go through this, is a
dormer window system that is the width of the room and
allows the room to have a very nice balcony, a full
French window and two side windows in some cases. The
windows vary as it goes along each facade, and I'll show
you each facade. When it comes to the corner, one of the
sketches we showed last time was quite a tall object, and
what we're showing you today is a revision of the roofs
that allows us to drop this and make this still a very
important pedestrian scale entrance into the building
where the balconies are simple metal balconies that have
an intermediate rail and they would be painted out not
unlike the doors are painted out. What you see on this
elevation is a slate roof. The material in this is
supposed to be a snow scene, but this is stone, this is
stone, the trim is stone, the stone of the tops of the
dormers not unlike you see in the city of Aspen sort of
this western kind of facade that have the stone treat-
ments over the dormers, the stone over the arched
windows, and this is the corner at Dean and Mill street,
or the main pedestrian entrance into the hotel. What I'd
like to do is take you through each elevation beginning
with the Mill street elevation. The breakup of the
facade is exactly the way you saw it last time. What has
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
".....,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.~
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
9
been revised is the entire roof and where you have a
dormer system that really gives us a lot of undulation
on the face of the building, again this is all stone
trim, we have extended the trim past the face of the roof
to accentuate the idea of individual buildings. As you
come down Mill street, you can see the fence that's right
along the edge of the street creating the courtyard
effect against the building. As you corne down, this is
the notch that goes back the first time, again the same
as you saw last time.
Again, except these roofs are
sitting back at a 45 degree angle now. As you come down,
you come into, this is the entrance that goes into the
parking garage, and this area is the pocket park, where
you have windows that open onto that park. This is the
entry defined by this pyramidal shape that goes into the
retail in that area. That is the slice back into the
building again, comes back out and forms that building,
and then as it comes to the corner, it turns on that
angle again, and that's what you see at that corner. Now
again, just relating back to the other elevations that
you saw, this is that 42 foot elevation from the previous
submission overlaid on this elevation. The heights are
exactly the same as you saw on the other elevations.
This is the same overlay that you saw on the elevations
giving you an idea that we are still under this large
line or that height. Just leave that one there. Monarch
:....,
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 10
street, starting off at the corner of Mill and Monarch,
this is at a 45 degree angle and it turns into parallel
to Monarch street. Again we have the window penetrations
along the sidewalk and again the various types of dormer
treatments where there's a pyramidal dormer and an arched
dormer where we are able to pull the rooms together, put
the windows together and create that additional form,
creating the variation in that facade. And at this
point, let's just add these in. These are some detailed
elevations, this one just is an enlargement of that
section of the building, and what it shows you is the
roof coming down at your 45 degree angle. This is a
double dormer that takes care of two rooms. This is
stone, this is all stone trim, the iron hand rails of the
balconies, again they're very, very simple and very
straightforward. The only decorative nature is something
that would go in the center of that in the French doors.
The other dormer is the single dormer type, which is at
this location. This happens to be a double one showing
in that location, where you have that shape that has
stone on the top. Again, the roof is coming down. The
roof takes off at this line,.. which is doing this. I'll
just set it over here, just hold that. This is the
dormer, the roof is at 45 degrees, where we were before
is here. The roof was doing that, and it was corning to
this height. So now what we have done in reference to
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 11
the shading quality, especially on Monarch when the sun
2 comes over, we've pretty much taken that much of the
3 volume of the roof of the building and also I think the
4 roof of this particular scheme is a very Aspen look in
5 the roof, in the way the dormers work, in the way the
6 stone works. The ceiling or that door is at about that
7 height in that elevation and then this is a various floor
8 plan with a person being about that big. So what is
9 happening is the roof takes off from the same line, goes
10 to the same height and the 42 foot line is the same
11 height but in the design of the dormers, we're able to
12 compensate and take care of the room design, which makes
all the rooms functional and really makes them quite
14 wonderful because when you're in the room you get a
15 slight bevel in the room so you know you're in a roof
16 space, which is a nice kind of quality, and they all have
17 the little balconies that corne out at each point. So
18 those are the details. Let's leave that up a second and
19 look at, let me just flip this over again to reference
20 that 42 foot elevation. I've about worn these out.
21 Again, that's pretty much where it was last time, and
22 this just shows again that massing because this line is
23 off, but that's exactly the same massing as it was
24 before. Now then, the entrance elevation which is Dean
25 street, this is Dean and Mill street, Dean and Monarch,
again this is the pedestrian entrance, this is the
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 12
vehicular entrance, and these are the archways that allow
2 you to see under and let the light penetrate all the way
3 back to the entrance doors, which you can see here. At
4 the lower elevation we've kept the balconies that carne
5 out and were soon circular along this face because we
6 felt like it gave a lot of undulation and play to the
7 face of the building. It does the same thing here, and
8 it does the same thing here. Those arches go out as well
9 as the arch on the corner of the building. And again,
10 the dormer windows and the break up of that facade. When
11 that dormer comes down, this particular element for
12 instance is out in front of that face by about 18 inches,
so we're picking up the shadow line and an additional
14 break up of that facade. And this is the loading area
15 down in that section. That corner takes off at 45
16 degrees right there. And again, that's the .42 foot
17 height. This spring line of the roof is at the same as
18 it was in the height of the roof is the same as it was.
19 And the massing of the building is still considerably
20 under the original submittal. So that really is what we
21 have done in regard to the architecture of the building.
22 We feel like that we have made the texture of the roof
23 is consistent all the way through the project, yet it is
24 broken in a various number of ways by the vertical
25 elements as you go down the different facades. And the
real intent is to get this building in scale with the
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
13
2
city of Aspen. You know the original building that was
submitted was a rather majestic looking building, and
3
that's one way to put it. The way it has evolved and in
response to you all and your aIls comments, which we feel
have been very good, that's where we are. I think that's
4
5
6
all we have on the architectural part. I'll just kind
7
of leave these up here.
8 HARVEY Can we get some reaction from you guys?
9 ANDERSON Start at this end
10
WHITE
It's better than it was. I just saw it, I mean you know,
11
my first reaction is that it's better than it was. It
12
will take me a little bit more time and I can probably
give you some couple more things.
r4 ANDERSON This is just a, what do you call it, knee jerk reaction
15
PERSON
Cursory feedback
16 ANDERSON cursory feedback. Mari
17
PEYTON
Well, I'm a little skeptical about giving a knee jerk
18
reaction. I'd like to have more time to digest what I've
19
seen. We were placed in that position the first time we
20
looked at the architecture and I myself would like to
21
take some more time to look at it. A few of the things
22
seem to be in response to our concerns about the less
23
grandioseness or whatever the word it.
I'd like more
25
HARVEY
time to digest it.
Mari we have a set of these in the black and white are
24
,-,.",,-,
upstairs in Alan's office, and these you can corne over
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 14
to my office and I'll lock you up in a room alone
PEYTON Is there any possibility that we will see, there are
several things that I would like to see. One is that I
would like to see an overlay showing, for example,
comparing it to another building that we know in Aspen,
maybe the Jerome, maybe the North of Nell, maybe the
Aspen Square, in other words showing how the two compare
in scale as far as the details and so on
Scale relative to their lot size
Well, I would just like to see the facades against each
other, the elevations compared to each other. And is
there a model in existence of
The massing model that we brought before you that was
sitting here, this model we had
Is there a model of the town of Aspen in existence
somewhere that we could use to see these
HARVEY
PEYTON
HARVEY
PEYTON
HARVEY
PEYTON
HARVEY
SARPA
HARVEY
PEYTON
HARVEY
I don't know
I've heard there is one
I've heard that, too.
Obviously this doesn't exist since we've just drawn
these. We're trying to be as responsive as quickly as
we possibly can be in moving the thing forward
We put a want ad in the paper.
If I could track one down, could you do your scale mock
up in context with
If we have the time to do it, sure.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
15
ANDERSON Roger
HUNT
HARVEY
HUNT
HARVEY
HUNT
HARVEY
Well, I didn't really dislike the previous architecture
but I do like this better from what I've seen so far.
It reminds me of this sort of older Swiss architecture.
I've seen it before.
The only comment from the Mill
street elevation, I would like, you sort of cut off the
facade, I would like to see what goes behind it, you know
from the, let's say the perspective in Rubey park, do you
follow what I mean. There's, okay, the facade on Mill
street is about 4 stories high.
Then immediately
following that on each side you start out with a 5 story
section, and I would like to see what that sort of looks
like because you're only showing, in effect, a plain view
.
of the facade
You want to see it more on an angle of looking up Mill
Well, sort of an angle, it's not necessarily. a fair
perspective but if you were sitting or standing at a
position of Wagner park, what does the building look
like. I realize there's going to be a lot in front of
it. It's that type of feeling I want to get out of your
plain Mill street view because there are going to be
things that are apparent behind it, basically one more
story, that you're not showing on the Dean street view.
Okay, on the Dean street view
The Dean street view I'm talking about
What you see of that setback floor that's 30 feet back
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988
from the front facade.
Right. From about the perspective of Durant and Wagner
park.
ANDERSON Ramona?
MARKALUNAS I definitely like the balconies a lot better.
materials of the balconies, has that been chosen?
it be iron?
wrought iron balcony
And the stone trim
HUNT
AUBREY
RAMONA
SARPA
RAMONA
AUBREY
ANDERSON
HERRON
16
The
Will
We haven't chosen the color
Very much like the existing brick and sandstone that you
see here.
and you mentioned slate for the roofs?
That's where we are at the moment. We'd like the roofs
to be textured like you see them in pattern but rather
smooth because of the stone work.
Mickey, questions or first blush response
I liked it before. I like it now. I think the devel-
opers made a real attempt to try to address a lot of the
concerns that were raised, some of which I wasn't so
thrilled with the concerns, and I think it's a sig-
nificant improvement over what is approved and what they
could build. I saw you nodding so I would assume
somewhere I would try and glean from you the architec-
ture, maybe, I know before you didn't like the roofs and
we're looking at the roof presentation
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 17
ANDERSON Jasmine
2 TYGRE As I said at the outset, I've always been very uncomfort-
3 able with having P & Z function as an architectural
4 design review committee because
5 ANDERSON Sometimes we're forced into it
6 TYGRE Well you start getting involved in legislating your own
7 personal taste, which, you know, I like my own personal
8 taste as much as anybody else. I think that this design
9 as it has remained within the parameters of the original-
10 ly approved project is an improvement over the original
11 project and although as a matter of personal choice, I
12 like the origihnal design better than this one. I think
this is fine.
14 ANDERSON I don't know whether it's because it's something new and
15 different but I really think it's shown a remarkable
16 improvement. I'll reserve final judgement until the end.
17 Maybe just because I disliked the other one so much and
18 I think this really is a marked improvement but that
19 maybe just because its new and right off the assembly
20 line. I think it's appropriate right now to take one
21 half hour for public comment, no more than one half hour,
22 and addressing only the issues as we've been doing in
23 this whole process, only issues that are on the table
24 right now and that issue right now is the architectural
25 compatibility of Aspen, compatibility with the neighbor-
hood if there is such a thing, and issues that are
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 18
addressed in the planning office's first review of the
2 original design or the height, the roof angles, basic
3 architectural style, massing. I'll reopen the public
4 hearing. Any public comment on this part of the
5 presentation. Dick? Dick Butera for the public record.
6 BUTERA I, too, agree that the architecture has improved and I
7 think that Alan Richman's call months ago for addressing
8 this issue was well called for and I think the community
9 should and will
10?? Could you speak up please
11 BUTERA will respond very positively because it is beginning to
12 look more like Aspen every time we come in here and I
think everyone's to be commended. The issues that we've
14 been addressing since 1984, I think are still alive and
15 I'd like you all to consider again the same issue and
16 that is size and density. We've been calling since 1984
17 ANDERSON Excuse me. We're talking architecture style. The
18 density is not
19 BUTERA Anyway, it's amazing, but the fact is that we've been
20 calling for the same thing. Architecture and size happen
21 to be very similar things and since we can't get a scale
22 model although the developers does own a scale model, we
23 have evidence of that and I don't know why they don't
24 bring it in, of the whole town where they could put the
25 building and then the average citizens could get a look
at this thing. We can't seem to do that so we did a kind
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988 19
of crude drawing to show the Board and the community just
what the scale is, under the category of architecture.
Mr. Chairman, is this a size and density discussion
This is an architectural discussion
I'm just trying to get clarification on what this is.
Are you afraid to have a
No absolutely not, Dick.
I just wanted to know what it is, that's all
This is the Mill street elevation of the proposed
building before the changes but I believe the roof line
is the same, the length is the same. What I've super-
imposed on here for the public who can't really under-
stand two dimensional drawings unless you're skilled and
14 trained in it is the North of Nell building as it appears
15 from Durant street. So if anybody here wants to
16 understand what this building will look like on Mill
17 street in relationship to something that's in the town
18 as Mari had suggested, this is the North of Nell
19 building. Now here is the Dean street, the black line
20 here, the high line, is the Dean street elevation of the
21 proposed building and this dotted line in this building
22 is again the North of Nell building. So for all of you
23 who love the North of Nell building, this gives you some
24 relationship of what these new densities and elevations
25. are all about. So I hope the Board would consider the
G_ main concern of the community, and that is size and
2
3 SARPA
4 BUTERA
5 SARPA
6 BUTERA
7 HARVEY
8 SARPA
9 BUTERA
10
11
12
~..,
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
J
'.-,,.,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
,""....
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
20
density. I congratulate the developer and the Board for
improving the actual architecture. Thank you.
ANDERSON Thank you Dick.
believe it.
Any other public comment?
I can't
MEANS
Graeme Means. I think there are a lot of people who do
feel that way, that there is a real scale problem and
that might be pointed out by looking at some of these
details, which they do look in scale as you look at them
now but they're not showing the whole building and I
don't think people should be fooled into thinking that
that is the full height of the building. We're seeing
a detail of a portion of the building and not the base
of a building. And when these things get jacked up in
the air, I think they're going to lose their scale so I
think these drawings are a little bit deceptive and I
still think that we've still got three hundred and
something foot long, 4 story high building facade and I
think the architects have done a great deal of good work
on that but I do think they're coming from the position
and have been from a long time ago of trying to make a
building look small and I don't think that that is a very
good point to begin with in the architectural process.
So I think they've had a pretty difficult fight. And
then I'd also like to say to deal with this issue of
scale, a model is something that was done for the other
project, it's a very common kind of a thing done for
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2.~ ..
....'--".~...
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988 21
projects like this, and I think it should be done for
this one.
Thank you Graeme. Richie?
Since we seem to be going over a lot of stuff that was
talked in the past, I'd like to just point out that I
think the job that the architects have done to fit this
into that site considering the fact that a good portion
of this building is masked by other buildings and that
the visual perception at anyone particular point in that
part of town is always obscured either by the Mountain
Chalet, by the existing, the old continental, some of the
other buildings that you have to look over or through to
get any sense of the depth and the size of this. And I
think that covers up an awful lot of that size, and I'd
like to remind some people about what was there before
and the wall of the unit that Cantrup built of what he
called a 36-unit building, which is a hole in the ground,
the Aspen Inn, which sat up on that hill, and really
didn't do much to obscure anything behind it. He had,
I think if you go back and measure it, it was pretty
substantial. So bear that in mind as you look at the
size and density studies. Thank you.
ANDERSON Thank you Richie. Further public comment. Would you
give your name for the record?
Richard Compton. Just on the architectural detail, all
this dressing up on the windows and everything, it looks
ANDERSON
COHEN
COMPTON
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
22
2
to me like all those balconies are just going to be a lot
of icicle factories and I would like to see some kind of
3
analysis of the effect of snow and ice melting off the
4
roof and coming down the sides of the building. What
6
kind of drainage do you have designed into it? How are
you going to deal with snow collecting on the balconies
5
7
and all that kind of stuff. I think that could be a very
8
serious problem to the actual function of the building.
9 ANDERSON Thank you.
10 HARVEY We have a snow consultant, our architect here who's been
11
reviewing this in terms of that exact consideration if
12
you'd like to hear some response. Ian
MCKINLEY I'm Ian McKinley, I'm an architect, I might as well tell
,.........,....
14
you all in advance, I'm an archi tect from Oakland,
15
California. I just gave a lecture at Harvard a month or
16
so ago and one of the young women there said, she
17
tentatively raised her had and she said, what does
18
somebody from Oakland, California know about the snow.
So that's the reason I'm telling you right up front where
19
20
I'm from.
I have written and published a lot on the
21
snow, I'm a licensed architect in Colorado, and it's a
22
subject that I have studied all my professional career.
23
And the snow aspects of this building have been carefully
24
reviewed and in fact I don't think this design would pose
25,.
anything like the problems that many of the buildings
~_.....
that are currently in downtown Aspen do. I don't mean
planning and zoning March 29, 1988 23
to say that there will be absolutely no problems in very
2 heavy snow falls. There might be. But under normal snow
3 conditions in this town, this design is going to solve
4 most of the problems.
5 ANDERSON Further public comment?
6 DOREMUS My name's John Doremus. I'm associated with the project
7 and I also am a 35 year resident, roof freak, roof drip
8 freak, and I can assure you from examination of the old
9 plan which we'll get if this isn't approved compared to
10 this plan, this plan is dripless and the other one is
11 horrible. It dripped all over the place and slid and
12 crashed and ice and snow. It was horrible. Absolutely
horrible and there was nothing in the design to mitigate
it.
I'm .. Fox of SnOWIDass Village and I'm just curious to
know because of the fact that I came from San Fr~ncisco
and I can recall when the Transamerica pyramid went up
everybody who had many outcries abut the fact that it
overshadowed everything else, it wasn't appropriate
architecture, it was too big and so forth. And now all
of a sudden it's one of the landmarks of San Francisco.
I've noticed that every town that has two story buildings
and someone erects a 3 story building or a building a
little bit larger, everybody seems to get quite upset but
it seems that this building seems to be quite appropriate
from what I can see and as attractive and quite frankly,
14
15 FOX
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2.5."
---
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--
14
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
24
I think that after awhile it will sort of blend into the
architecture of the rest of the community. And the fact
that it is larger, well every time somebody builds a new
building it seems to be a little bit larger than the
other ones but that's part of sensible growth in my
opinion and I think if we want to keep competing with the
other resorts in the area and in the country that we've
got to keep providing new and more attractive things for
people to come to. until somebody erects a Ford assembly
plant around here and because we're so dependent upon
tourism that a building like this or a hotel like this
even though it is larger than anything else you see here,
I think it's going to attract people.
basically the main ...
I think that's
15 ANDERSON Thank you. Any more public. Okay.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~"''-
:--
-
PFISTER
Art Pfister. I don't see anything wrong with putting up
a building, should look like a hotel. You can't hide it.
If this is an architectural problem, where was everybody
when they built some of the present buildings around
town. If you're going to control the building, you've
started a little late.
CARNEY I didn't get his name at all.
ANDERSON Art Pfister
ANDERSON Any other public comment? I've got a number of letters,
and I'm not going to read them but they will be given to
the clerk for the public record. One, I'll pullout a
,L""""
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,""""""
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~
planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
25
salient sense out of each one. One is from Scarlet and
Norris Adams, SnOWIDass Village, colorado, "The proposed
project should not be downscaled so as to make it
unprofitable; however"
She's in favor.
James F.
Henning, president of High Altitude Paradise, "I would
like to profess my support for the hotel", a letter from
John Roberts dated March 21st, which we all ready in the
newspaper; a letter from Ross Obley of the Economic
Development council of Naples, Florida, "I understand the
Ritz Carlton is considering a hotel project in your
delightful area.
If so, your community is moist
fortunate." And a letter from Marge Riley bringing up
3 points that she has problems with. She would like to
request that the extension not be granted on April 15th
until the following problems are resolved.
We have
nothing to do with extending the approval on April 15th;
that's the City council. Her 3 areas are concerning the
size, it's too massive, and secondly, I feel the citizens
should be made aware of the geological report which shows
that what was done by the state geologist pertaining to
the area, I think that deals with mud slides, and the
24
third area is employee housing which we're not talking
about tonight, which we're not going to resolve tonight.
I'll close this part of the public hearing and re-open
it when we get onto another topic. How do we want to
proceed.
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988 26
I have a question. One of the things that the Commis-
sioners had asked for (tape)
The worst case scenario, which is this is December 21st
10 a.m. when the sun is at the lowest point of the year,
to show the impact of the shadow study. This is the
original PUD and we've gone through and pretty accurately
cast, looking at sections what would be the roof point,
you know, the roof does slope. We've taken that point,
the sun's approximately 22 degrees and the roof isn't
quite that point, so the top point of the roof will cast
a shadow. So, again, this shows the impact of the
previous PUD, it does go across Monarch street onto the
other properties across the street, and their project the
PUD had a 3 story building, in effect here, so the shadow
goes quite a bit across the intersection of Durant and
Monarch. Hold up above ours which came out a. little
1 ighter , and this is the last planning scheme and it
shows again the roofs because, again, the pitch does
catch the tops of the roofs so it pulls the shadow back
and comes across and does hit parts of the curb line
across Monarch, does come through and shadow all of Dean
street, which is on our property and hits the other
building. The impact is a lot less here. It doesn't
even go across the road
That other building's gone
The other building's gone anyway, you're right and into
RICHMAN
2
3 PERSON
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25.~ HARVEY
CJ'_,,,.,,_ PERSON
~.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 27
the courtyard. We did another study a little bit later
in the day just at noon, again the sun's moved around and
would be directly north and the sun moves up, not much
in the winter, to about 26 degrees, and again this shows
the impact of the PUD, which the previous is off of
Monarch but the primary casting shadow towards Mountain
Chalet across Dean street and up towards the corner of
Durant. And the comparisons are a little less shadow but
basically the same impact. All the shadow lines are off
even the sidewalk here, but again they're all on Dean
street and towards the other side of the building. It's
a little less shadow from the previous. This beam was
taller but the roof did slope back but still the, impact
is, some of the shadows are about 20 feet longer than
what we were showing. I think we did a new scheme here
with the roof being back at a 45
This is a mansard so I think it's going to be even
HARVEY
improved from what you see here.
19 ANDERSON I'll re-open the public hearing to talk about shadows.
20 Re-close it
21 SARPA Housing? If you're ready to go on to that. We'll start
22 with Horst Schultz from Ritz with a few comments about
23
24
i.""'t:f'
how Ritz interacts with their employees and why that's
pertinent to the whole housing discussion, then we'll go
in to Joe Wells will follow up with a brief summary of
what it is we're proposing to take up with the city.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14'
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.",'
:--
-..........
Planning and Zoning
SCHULTZ
March 29, 1988
28
Horst.
Ladies and Gentlemen if you allow me, since once the
hotel opens up the doors from that day on I will be
responsible what happens in the hotel as far as the hotel
company's concerned.
So I would like to make a few
comments even they don't directly relate but they're
certainly very much connected with your decision right
now, if you allow me. We are a small hotel company. I'm
in the hotel business since I'm 13 years old and I come
from a small town in Germany, so I know the concern of
smaller towns for the integrity of their town.
But as
far as us, a small hotel company, that hotel will be 10
percent of our room inventory in the company. Even any
business man in this room knows if we're not successful
with 10 percent, then we as a company will fail.
So
clearly we are very concerned what the building is, what
the market is, we are very, very concerned about our
hotel. In general, we look at the hotel at 3 specific
entities to consider, guests and market, employees, and
the community. We look at all 3 of them equal. They're
equal in importance to us. The guests, our guests are
worldwide guests. We have a marketing network throughout
the world. We're members of leading hotels of the world,
which has a marketing network throughout the world. In
other words, the morning we would open the doors we would
sell this hotel to the market wherever that may be
_.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.~"""'" 24
....w 2 5
26
---.-.-.--
planning and zoning March 29, 1988 29
because we have people there to sell the hotel and
specificallY they will sell Aspen, the community. That's
of course essential. We have a modern network in this
country. We have in each hotel a sales force, we have
sales offices in New York, Washington, Atlanta, in
Chicago and Los Angeles. So this brings the people in,
in total about 200 sales people. They would bring people
into this community. Those people have to be happy with
that hotel otherwise they will not look at our other
hotels. So that's our market. our employees to us are
very equally, very, very important because they maybe
even more than the building make the guests happy or
unhappy. In order to make the guests happy thrpugh our
employees, we have intensive training programs and for
that reason we would bring people in from the organiza-
tion to train the employees that we hire here. There was
a comment made somewhere that the most best paid
employees will come from the organization. That's not
exactly true. We expect the committee will come from the
organization and they're not necessarily the best paid.
In fact, some doormen, some maids make as much money as
I do in the organization. So it is not, but those
gentlemen or ladies that come as executive committee are
here as teachers to train the employees. They then will
leave. It is very essential for us to have a good work
force, well trained work force, and enough employees.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 30
And I can assure you as a professional who is in this
business since I'm 13, I assure you with all emphasis as
a professional, that's all I know in this business,
that's I know, I don't know how to repair cars, nothing
else in my life I know. I wouldn't put my name on, the
only thing that I do, I won't tell you anything that is
professionally incorrect. 275 employees, ladies and
gentlemen are explained here that are steady, full time
employees and the criteria, are definitely, contrary to
some comment, definitely enough for me to run the hotel.
Very definitely. There will be days when we will have
some more. There will be days we have considerably less.
I assure you that. I put my professional reputation on
the line there. That's easy. Those employees, we have
to have enough to serve the guests and we will serve the
guests right, through on-going training, on-going
promotion from within and maybe, who knows, I don't know,
maybe right now there is somebody in our organization
that is from Aspen. We know, we have a lot of requests
already people say, I want to work in Aspen. We have a
vacation from the community. And if there's somebody
qualified certainly they can be executive committee
members. I would be very happy. That would help us a
lot. That's all for employees. The community, ladies
and gentlemen, sincerely, I give to each general manager
assigned in our company has those 3 main points in their
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
<.
'''.......
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.
14'"
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-.
:--
--
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
31
mind that is given to them, the guests, the market, the
employee, the community.
They're being told that the
community is essential, an important part, a contributor
to the community.
contributor by being involved, by
being part, by caring, by making the community better,
and every community where we are, the community would
verify that to you. We have in every community, I had
in Atlanta we just got a beautification award for our
downtown Ritz and Buckhead, we got similar awards in
Laguna and in Naples. If you go to our hotels there, you
will see our method of operation to make the hotel
outside beautiful outside with flowers and trees and
there is practically no expense spared. It is beautiful.
The hotel is a to the community and the community's where
we are are proud of what we have what we offer them, and
we make it so that we have, in fact our ballrooms blocked
even though that precludes us from selling in sometimes
rooms to assure that important community functions can
be held in the hotel. I personally even though I'm not
in the hotel any more am a member of every organization
you can imagine from Rotary to business associations to
Chamber of Commerce, hotel associations, that's my
business, of course, and because I want to be there. I'm
involved with all the local lodging associations where
I live, so the contributions to the community to us is
essential. And we would like to be very much, as far as
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14-
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 32
we are concerned, to be in Aspen with a hotel that we can
be very proud of to the guests that come there and they
will remember us once they have been in the Ritz Carlton
in Aspen they will want to stay in every other Ritz
because our looks, our feels and the service that are
given there. We want that you, and I tell you that
humbly and sincerely, I'm not just saying that, we want
that you love us as a hotel and we know we will be your
best friends once we're open and be part, a contributing
part of the community. I'll answer some questions. I'm
sitting here and hear some concern, forgive me that I
said but I'm emotional1y sincerely about it. If you have
any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
I need your name
Horst Schulze
When you say 275 employees is that how many positions
there are or
CARNEY
SCHULTZ
PEYTON
SCHULZE
PEYTON
WELLS
SCHULZE
.,.,'
Full time equivalent, but you know because in banquet I
saw this because I think they meant too many, frankly,
so 275 was what was there
They're 275 jobs
275 full time equivalent employees is arrived at by using
the housing office factors of 2080 man hours per
position, so it's 275 ful1 time equivalent employees
times 2080 man hours per year, or person hours.
If you allow me, at times, let's say we have a lot of
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 33
banquets, what will happen, that day I will have more
banquet waiters. Obviously, we'll have more than we
normally would have full time. How often does that
happen? I don't know, one time a week or 3 times a
months, then we will go to colleges, etcetera in fact we
also want to go to the local college and ask if they
wouldn't start a hotel course and use us as a training
ground and so on. We do that in other areas. One of the
things that supports the community and supports the local
lodging industry and the restaurant industry.
Well that's averaged over the whole year
It's the way that the housing looks at it, so if it goes
below in off season
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 PEYTON
12 HARVEY
14 PEYTON
15
16
17 SCHULZE
18
19
20
21
22
23 PEYTON
24
25 SCHULZE
<. PEYTON
--
During the off season you might have very few so then
you'll probably have maybe 500, 600 at some time, people
I'm talking about, not jobs.
No, no. During the off season we may have 200 or less
that's the way our industry works. And during the season
it may be one day of a banquets is more or heavy arrival,
everybody in lodging here knows, if you have a heavy
arrival that day, you need a few more. The next day,
don't have, average day, may be less.
But you will probably have a lot of people working part
time, right?
Yes.
Well, I'm just saying it translates into more than this
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..........
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,
-
Planning and Zoning
SCHULZE
HARVEY
PEYTON
SCHULZE
March 29, 1988
34
many people
It will translate days into less and other days to more.
I didn't come up with this full time equivalent equation.
I've never heard of it before, but that's what we came
up with here
That's ours. We had that here
But I'm saying the days that you don't have all those
people working, that those people are still going to be
in town
In our other hotels, they are people that work in the day
in a shop that want to make a little bit of money on the
side, they look for a job, they work as a waiter or
waitress or whatever they do. They are others that are
maybe housewives that want to work once in awhile that
sign up on an extra list which we keep. This is done,
this is very common in the hotel industry
ANDERSON Are you going to go through a describe
WHITE Can I ask a couple of question
ANDERSON Yes David. You just need to be more forceful
WHITE
HARVEY
SARPA
HARVEY
Can I get an idea about how many restaurant seats you're
going to have
We have a cafe with 120
Joe's going to go through all that
going through the numbers, is that going be your next
question
ANDERSON Well I was asking if we're going to get down to the nitty
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
planning and zoning
March 29, 1988
35
SARPA
RICHMAN
SARPA
RICHMAN
gritty of the whole description of the employee program
and the solution to it.
We're ready
Recognizing that we haven't had a chance to do anything
with it, so, the numbers are great but we have to take
an opportunity to get some input from the housing
authority,
That's correct
Question some of the assumptions and that kind of thing.
We would ask you to withhold any kind of an action
11 ANDERSON We're not going to make any final decision on the
12
'-'-"
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
...."'-,..,.
RICHMAN
SARPA
WELLS
architecture or this employee housing until we have staff
input
Well this case it's the housing authority that made the
decision
Joe
Let me give you a portion of the packets we're giving
the housing authority, which the housing authority
members have.
This is two charts, attachment C and
attachment D.
The first two pages are the numbers
associated with the final approvals for the Aspen
Mountain Lodge.
These were prepared 1/30/1985 by Jim
curtis of Real Estate Affiliates. Who else? The second
two pages are a comparison based on what we're taking
back to the authority on Thursday so that you have apples
and apples comparison and somewhere in the course of this
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 36
I set my notes down. In the booklet, the submission of
2 amendments, we proposed to house a total of 163.8
3 employees for the various projects in phase one. Phase
4 one includes the hotel, the residential units on lot 1
5 as well as residential units at 700 South Galena, and
6 finally the employee replacement component of the
7 employee housing program. In order to arrive at those
8 numbers, we used the same factors that were used
9 previously. The same factors that were used on the first
10 two pages of this hand out, with one exception. In the
11 food and beverage area we felt that the previous factor
12 of 12.8 employees per 1,000 square feet was a relatively
high factor and it was a factor that was developed before
14 an operator was on board so we asked Ritz to take a look
15 at that information and we submitted with our amendments
16 a staffing guide prepared by Ritz Carlton which 'we used
17 as the basis for food and beverage employee generation.
18 The housing authority rejected that approach. They
19 simply said we think you ought to use the same factors
20 as before, use the 12.8 per 1,000 square feet of food and
21 beverage. So we have agreed to do that now. We are
22 going back to the authority on Thursday with a proposal
23 that uses precisely the same factors in each category
24 that was used previously. In the course of doing that,
2~~ we examined the actual square footage of food and
beverage space that occurred in the building. The
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'--"'
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2'>
.
'-"..-
Planning and Zoning
37
March 29, 1988
numbers that were listed in the submission were simply
the gross program square footages in the Ritz Carlton
program. They had absolutely no bearing on our food and
beverage employee proposal.
So there was no real
examination of those numbers in terms of what was in the
actual proposal.
We took a hard look at those square
footages, obviously with a factor of 12.8 per 1,000
square feet and came to some conclusions. The first of
which was to eliminate the largest restaurant.
The
restaurant at the Blue Spruce site was 6900 square feet.
It was simply infeasible for us to do that facility with
a factor of 12.8 employees per 1,000 square feet.
so
,
that restaurant went away. Then we re-examined the other
individual food and beverage facilities based on the
number of seats proposed and compared those to Jim
curtis's analysis which is included in the full packet
that's going to the Authority and there were some
interesting conclusions that we could come to looking at
that. We have 204 dining seats within the restaurants
in this proposal. Our net square footage calculations
amount to 4500 square feet for those restaurant facil-
ities, which calculates at 22.1 square feet per seat.
Jim curtis used the standard of 15.4 square feet per seat
in his previous analysis. We have 240 lounge seats in
the 3 lounge areas in the Ritz. The net square footage
is 3700 square feet or an average of 15.4 square feet per
Planning and Zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"---
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 HARVEY
25 WELLS
..
"-."'
March 29, 1988
38
lounge seat, and this compares to curtis's number of 13.3
square feet per seat. Lastly, our kitchen square footage
is a net of 3400 square feet or 16.7 square feet per
dining seat in the facility. curtis's analysis was 14.8
square feet per dining seat. So our assignment, that
took a disaster drill to be sure we are talking apples
and apples in each case in all 3 components our square
footage assignment per seat is more generous than what
was used previously in the approval. We're suggesting
that we're prepared to commit to those maximum number of
seats, if that's an area of concern to the authority and
if that will address any of their worries.
That's
basically the approach we're taking to the authority on
Thursday. You can check the bottom line on the second
page and the fourth page of this handout which compares
the total for each of the phases and the total employee
housing to be offered. Frankly the reason the number is
lower is simply because the accessory food and beverage
space has been reduced. There was a restaurant facility
in the final approval at the Blue Spruce site and
obviously by eliminating that, we've dropped the food and
beverage square footage. Another handout, which we're
not giving you
It's the one that explains everything
It's a documentation of the housing commitment. Between
the Alpina Haus, Copper Horse and Hunter Longhouse, we
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 39
have employee credits for 158 employees, included in that
2 number is an obligation at 700 South Galena for 8.7
3 employees so that the credits available to the Ritz
4 Carlton among the projects we already have on line is
5 149.3. The, once the phase one obligation is deducted,
6 there's a credit available for phase two of 16.5 and our
7 obligation is 20, so we have a shortfall at the moment
8 of 3.5 employees in our employee housing requirement.
9 ANDERSON Did you have a question, David?
10 WHITE Yes. You're going to have 204 dining seats. That means
11 you're cafeteria is going to be smaller than 120, the
12 grill's going to be smaller than 120, and the special
dining rooms not going to be 14. How's that break out?
14 WELLS The grill has 70 dining seats, 50 of those seats in the
15 grill are bar seats or lounge seats
16 WHITE In addition to the 70?
17 WELLS In addition to the 70
18 WHITE So then 50 of those, in other words, those 50 seats that
19 I thought were somewhere in dining are actually in the
20 lounge
21 WELLS Yes
22 WHITE How many can you seat for a banquet? I mean what kinds
23 of, because here you're not even talking about banquet
24 dining, I mean all you're talking about is regular
25 dining. You didn't even mention banquet dining
WELLS I don't have that figure.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1'4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
""-
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988
SCHULZE We seat one person per 20 square feet.
tighter
In other words, you could do a banquet for 300 people,
400 people?
with a ballroom of 10,000 feet, you could do 500
If you try to do a banquet at Christmas time, you would
not find a single employee that could run your banquet
for you. I have been looking at your figures
Yes, I can find
Sir, I realize you could in maybe Naples, Florida, but
we're talking about Aspen, Colorado. In the busy times
Christmas to New Year's, some other times, there aren't
any employees. You can look in the paper every single
day and look at the restaurants that want employees.
Right now it's about so wide in the paper. There's that
many jobs available, at least 20 of them are restaurant
businesses. Many restaurants do not have the employees
that they need. In looking over some of these things,
having been in the restaurant business for awhile, you
take 200 seats, that the size of the Chart House and the
Mother Lode, let's say. In the Chart House and the
Mother Lode, between the 2 of them, they have over 100
employees, just for those two restaurants. They don't
serve lunch, they don't serve breakfast, they only serve
dinner. I realize that you're employee generation
figures are what you work with but I think that we have
WHITE
HARVEY
WHITE
SCHULZE
WHITE
40
We don't seat
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 41
found maybe, the P & Z has found, our experience that
many of the employee generation figures that our
community is generating does not anywhere near cover the
amount of employees that are actually working and I've
been trying to look at this and trying to figure it our
but it's been changed so much that I can't quite figure
it out, but
Can I comment on that? We need to be treated on the same
basis as any other applicant. The full time equivalent
employment basis which the housing authority uses is what
compensates for some of the things that you're concerned
about. You know, that is the basis by which every
applicant is reviewed
14 WHITE Right. I guess one of my concerns is I would hate to
15 have you build this hotel and not be able to offer the
16 service. I went to a restaurant, I just moved to a
17 restaurant called pinon's which I think many people would
18 consider at the level of the Ritz Carlton, that kind of
19 food and everything like that. We seat 75 people, we
20 have more than 40 employees. So, the level of service
21 when it gets up there, you need more and more and more
22 and more employees to give that kind of service.
23 SCHULZE Prior to knowing about staffing by square footage, which
24 I have never done in my life, I made a staffing guide for
25 out hotel and it's not the first staffing guide I ever
made, I was before food and beverage, I was vice-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 WELLS
9
10
11
12
~....
Planning and Zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 WHITE
12
SCHULZE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
..,.'"
,.'.....-
March 29, 1988
42
president of food and beverage for Hyatt responsible for
70 hotels, 220 restaurants, I staffed them all and I know
how to make a staffing guide and I had less employees
than 275. It's true that in a restaurant you need 100
employees but in a hotel I already have an accounting
system, I don't need any more accounting for that
restaurant, I don't need a general manager, I have him
already.
I don't need a body, I have already for the
hotel, so if you take only my restaurant, all I need is
the waiters and the cooks.
Those are all the figures that I put in here that work
for the Mother Lode and the Chart House
And for a restaurant of 204, I need a waiter for 16
seats, for every two waiters I need a busboy.
That's
what I need.
If people don't .. seat properly, there
won't be any problem.
In fact, it will be easier, in
fact the waiters, because I also want to make sure our
waiters make decent money, so that I leave people an
extra turn so in my where I live I less employees that
formerly I was told to work with, and it was carefully
staffing before I ever knew it was an issue in our
planning.
Just one more
I have done it before
though. What we also believe in doing is cross training
everybody to give our employees the first chance to make
good money so the housekeeper, the maid that works in the
morning, if I have a banquet, she's trained as a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 43
waitress. If she wishes to work in the evening, she can
work in the evening and she will be a highly paid maid
in the area and consequently will enjoy the job and stay
with me. She has opportunities, so now she is an employee
but she will be working for the banquet that is now
larger than our regular banquets employees. That's how
we try to work it.
WHITE Thank you.
ANDERSON
PEYTON
Mari?
Where did the formula of .36 employees per room, where
did that come from?
That was the formula that Jim curtis developed using a
number of other facilities including westin Vail, the
Sheraton at Steamboat and the Registry in Scottsdale.
That was a tedious process arriving at that formula and
it was endorsed
Because I remember the expert from the Registry at
scottsdale was here and he was asked about employees and
said that the ratio was 1 per guest at the Registry.
You have to be talking apples and apples and quite often
in this area you're talking apples and oranges when
you're not converting the full time equivalent employee.
Mari, just to help the guidelines range for employees per
unit for lodge units, ranges from .2 to .4. So this is
near, but not quite at the top, and that is based on some
analysis that they've done of the industry, not neces-
WELLS
PEYTON
WELLS
RICHMAN
Planning and Zoning
2
March 29, 1988
44
sarily of a facility like this one, we don't have a
3 ANDERSON Jasmine?
comparable one here
10
11
12
.,''-v
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
TYGRE
5
6
RICHMAN
7
TYGRE
8
9
One of the thing I was going to ask, I'm sorry the
housing authority isn't here but I would think
I will communitcate your comments
that in some of the physical locations devoted to hotel
and restaurant management, that there are figures that
give that kind of information, and I think it is
essential for us to figure out what is the accurate basis
for measuring the employees needed, whether it's per
person, per room, per restaurant seat or whatever it is,
to try to get some kind of fix on the number of employees
that are needed.
One of the things that we are very
conscious of in this community is that unlike other
places where you do have luxury hotels where your have
a year-round work force and year-round business, this
community is extremely seasonal. The number of employees
that are needed in season as opposed to the number of
employees needed in the off season is pretty dramatically
different and all of us who've have worked in service
industry are familiar with the sort of thing that David
is talking about that you have situations where existing
businesses which have been in town and been in existence
and have been popular for a long time have, particularly
this past winter, experienced enormous difficulty in
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
45
2
hiring employees because they do not have places to live.
And you do need to staff up in the winter, whatever kind
-.-....
3
of business that you have. And I think that one of the
4
things I'm very concerned about is the maximum, the worst
5
case scenario because that's where we're expecting the
6
bulk of the business and the bulk of the problems to
7
occur. If you can't handle the number of employees that
8 you're going to need in the winter season, you're going
9 to have a disaster on your hands, and not just for the
10 hotel but for the community, and this is something that
11 we've been going through this winter and we're all very
12 much aware of it.
ANDERSON Any response?
\.-...
14
HARVEY
Well, I hate to harp back, we, these things are true and
15
it seems to get truer every year.
In the' housing
16
authority guidelines, they talk about the fact that, well
you don't want to plan just for your peak or just for the
17
18
doldrums, but for somewhere in the middle.
I think
19
Ritz's ability to operate and bring business in during
20
off seasons, during shoulder seasons, during those slow
21
times is going to enable them to keep more employees, to
22
reduce that fluctuation that goes on when you close and
23
then you re-open, which is the other extreme. So I think
24
that they'll have a more stable employee base.
The
25
guidelines do not deal with staffing to the maximum.
That's why they have this full time equivalency factor
Planning and Zoning
,-~'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 TYGRE
12
HARVEY
--
14
TYGRE
15
16
17
SCHULZE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
HARVEY
March 29, 1988
46
because that is supposed to account for the time off and
the extra time on. And those are the guidelines that we
have used and that we have worked with and that the
approved plan worked with.
We are right now using
exactly the same standards that were used in the approved
plan. certainly we're, no one who lives in this town can
be immune to the housing problem. I just moved myself
again last week, so. It's an acute problem. We're going
by the same standards and I don't know what else we would
do in the process to
I understand that. I'm not trying to put the blame on
this applicant. I'm just
I understand.
If the situation becomes so critical that maybe we're not
looking at it from the right approach.
May be this
seasonal equivalent approach is not the correct approach.
Allow me, with 275 employees you can run a full hotel
except when we have a full banquets going on at the same
time. That is nearly peak, 275, that's why, I disagree
I say the number's too high, sincerely, it's too high.
It includes about 20 people working in banquets. Well,
what are they going to do if we have no banquet because
not everyday is a banquet. But 275 people is near peak
operation and the equivalent of one employee per room is
all baloney. I'm sorry
One per guest
"4>'-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'~p
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
"...r
Planning and Zoning
SCHULZE
RICHMAN
"
March 29, 1988
47
One per guest is even more baloney. Let me just explain
to me, allow me, we have in Laguna, for example, we have
over 1.6 employee per room. In Atlanta downtown, we have
less than 1 employee per room. But in Laguna I have 40
gardeners working outside.
I don't need 40 gardeners
here. We have about 30 people working the health club,
here we don't need it. So the hotels are all different
so obviously you cannot compare.
Depending on the
layout, depending on the whole makeup of the hotel, that
has to do with it, not the number of rooms and square
footage has nothing to do with it really. Some professor
came up in some school and he was having to show. But
it's wrong. It has to do with the hotel, the specific
hotel, in this specific hotel, I can go through with you
very detailed how we're going to staff it and I only need
275, 275 if we're really sold out. I can do this.
Jasmine, I can help with this.
I know this full time
equivalency idea is causing people a lot of trouble. I'm
not the originator of it, I'm not well versed in it but
I think I understand what it's meant to deal with and
what it's meant to deal with is the fact that in the
surveys that the housing office has done, it's been
widely demonstrated, I think we all know it to be true,
that a lot of people in this community have more than one
job. If there are two positions being filled by the same
individual, that individual doesn't always need housing,
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
48
2
and the full time equivalency is an attempt to recognize
that people work a certain number of hours in a week or
a month in multiple jobs and over the course of dealing
3
4
with all the applications that we do, the factor works.
The factor deals with the fact that they're talking about
5
6
having somewhat less employees sometimes, somewhat more
7
in others. I think the methodology that's in here, it
8
is an approach that we used back in 1983 to try and get
9
at the employee housing numbers. It's not based on one
employee per room.
It looks at the system very dif-
ferently. It tries to build in pieces so it assigns a
certain number of employees to the lodge component, the
hotel component itself, it assigns other employees to the
.
restaurant component and other employees to other
components of the facility and tries to build from there.
That may not work for this facility, and the 'housing
authority may find that either there are aspects of the
hotel that we're not dealing with at all, the falling
through that need to have employees assigned to them or
that this hotel runs differently than looking at a food
and beverage component and a maid service component and
a managerial component and maybe we have to look at the
whole. until we have a housing authority recommendation
that's going to be difficult. This methodology, I wasn't
party to developing it, it was developed at the concep-
tual level before I was involved.
We have different
10
11
12
Planning and Zoning
2
3
4
TYGRE
March 29, 1988
49
housing directors now as well but it was what the
community accepted at that point in time and we're trying
to build from those numbers.
Thank you that's very nice to know. It just seems that
based on what we've actually experienced that the
methodology that has been developed is in all honesty a
problem
That's what will come back to next week.
I have
5
6
7
8
RICHMAN
questions about a lot of aspects of the methodology
myself. I've transmitted those to Jim and we'll go to
the housing authority on Thursday and we'll see if this
methodology in fact is an accurate representation of the
impacts
14 ANDERSON Any other questions? We'll re-open the public hearing
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-"'.,
.,.""'....
9
ARROW
for discussion from the public on employee housing. Does
anybody have anything to add or any questions. 'DAn?
Dan Arrow.
Just of a word of advise to those who
particulars to 1.43 employee equivalency, remember that
you're talking to not only P & Z and some hotel people
who know what they're talking about, but you're also
talking to people out here who don't know that kind of
thing and what was very, very helpful is when David White
did some translating into well what kind of restaurant
is that, how big is that, some things we know, and also
like Dick Butera showed us the graphic showing you how
big things are. Please try to simplify things for us.
March 29, 1988
50
planning and Zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"....'-
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 BUTERA
23
24
?<;
-.-
And I'm in the restaurant business and I didn't know what
you're talking about. But I do think a little smaller.
The other thing is, I also want you to remember I admire
your thriftiness and it's very commendable that you can
get this job done with less employees but actually I
would feel a lot more comfortable as a restaurant owner
and as a member of the community if you'd estimate higher
and assure us you'll house those kind of people because
I'm very concerned about that.
I don't think you do
understand Aspen and the employee situation. What David
White said was right on and I wrote it down and he said
it, right here, we must have a good connection.
At
Christmas time, whose employees are you going to steal.
,
I understand what you're saying that people will have two
jobs but I think you don't understand that you'll have
people who will be working two jobs for you and then I'm
worried about who are you going to steal from me and the
other restaurants. That's the time of year when people
are working 12, 16 hours a day sometimes. They don't ski
and there's only a certain number of them. Let's see,
what else. (tape)
Maybe I can add some practical numbers as an employer,
maybe we can help shed some light for the board without
all the fancy theories.
We have some practical know-
ledge.
We do employee 400 people in Aspen and have
serious problems. I think the issue here is every time
-.'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
',',-~'
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2.')"
Planning and zoning
51
March 29, 1988
the government creates a new job and doesn't create a new
bed, they exacerbate the problem of employee housing.
We must stop talking about how serious the problem is
then make it worse by every time we add one more job to
this town. Now the facts are as we see them, and we're
certainly not that great at all this, we're certainly not
as good as Ritz Carlton, but we've been in the business
around this town for a pretty long time now, we have 1.85
employees per room at the Hotel Jerome. We have banquets
and we have restaurants and we have hotel rooms. Now you
throw all the theory out the window. We tried everything
possible to get 5 less employees.
1.85 employees. We
called 5 resorts including Pebble Beach and we were the
lowest in resort hotels. Laguna Nigel told us they had
1.9 employees per hotel room. The fact is we have 1.85.
Translating that to 292 hotel rooms, that's 540 employ-
ees. At the Aspen Club Lodge, which is a low service,
not anywhere near what the Jerome is or the Ritz will be,
we have 1.25 employees per hotel room.
That's simple
English.
That translated to 292 rooms would be 365
employees.
Now the employee housing problem is the
problem of the employer. My employee housing problems
are not the problems of taxpayers who are retired in the
West End.
They are my problems.
We just spent
$1,000,000, we close next week, to buy the North star
-,
lodge because we have a critical housing problem. We are
March 29, 1988
52
Planning and Zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
HARVEY
12
BUTERA
14
15
16
17
18 HARVEY
19 BUTERA
20
21
22
23
24
:>'>
"'""'..'-.-......
-~
turning the whole property without any government force
or rules over to our employees. The problem is that we
are creating jobs and we are not creating beds.
The
larger this hotel gets, the greater the employee housing
problem gets. Let's stop kidding ourselves with fancy
formulas. If the hotel is sized down, which most of the
community wants, the employee housing problem will be
reduced. it's that simple. Formulas are a lot of bull.
It's going to be at least 1.5 employees or this hotel
will not be what it's told
Dick are those full time equivalency?
You see the problem is, that's all theory. You serve 3
meals a day, 7 days a week, so you have to have 2 shifts
to serve 3 meals and everybody doesn't work 7 days a
week. So it's not just 2 waitresses for those 16 tables,
there's other 2 days a week. There's a whole lot~ of part
time employees but they happen to be human beings
Are you saying
Excuse me, who need to put their heads down at night,
whether they're part time or not. And then we're told
that they're going to bring in all this convention
business and all this banquet business, well that's
really the problem. You can't lay all these people off
because you need to train them and you need to keep them
so you don't take them from me so when I do get an order
for a banquet I have my work force. It's not as simple
Planning and Zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
March 29, 1988
53
as all this formula stuff you're talking about. You
might as well throw it out and just go around the town
and ask everybody how many employees per room or per
restaurant as David was pointing out, because we don't
need theory here. We have fact, and we need to provide
a bed for every head that this government creates a job
for or we're going to have more toothpaste into the tubes
and even a more serious problem. Thank you.
9 ANDERSON I think, Dick, the worst was the formula didn't make any
10
11
12
_.-
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
SCHULZE
BUTERA
SCHULZE
sense to him either
I agree. I said I didn't throw out a formula, I threw
out a staffing guide, and I have to correct you, Laguna
doesn't have 1. 9, it has 1. 6 and I explained that.
There's a problem with my accent maybe I don't make it
clear.
I explained I have 40 gardeners and I have an
immense group of health club people working. Al that,
I can't take 100 employees out like that
We have snow shovelers and van drivers to the airport and
a whole lot of other ski
and if you have 1.9 you can hire me as a consultant
for a day and I will correct it for you.
22 ANDERSON More public comment?
23
24
25
",,".h
.-
I'm Dick ... and I think when I first came to town I had
a choice between hiring a great management company, one
to stand in line, one to stand in the communities who
have a viciou~ system and I hired the Ritz Carlton and
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
",",""',,",
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
54
if you can help me, I should have hired Dick Butera.
What would you do if you were me?
ANDERSON Go somewhere else where the Ritz works.
More public
COHEN
comment on employee housing. Richie?
A couple of years ago when we first stated dealing with
the concept of a large hotel, employee housing was as big
or bigger problem then as it is now. Going back to 1963,
employee housing was a big problem.
I just read an
appraisal of a property downtown and that was a real
major concern, and it seems to go back all the way to the
turn of the century. When the employee housing projects
were first being put together for the Aspen Mountain
Lodge project, nobody wanted employee housing in their
neighborhood. There was a proposal on 7-1/2 acres over
by the Gant. That was shot down because the neighborhood
said no we don't want employees here we want them
someplace else. We now have 17 very expensive residen-
tial units over there. We all came from some place else
and granted we did come here to find things better or
change our way of life, change of lifestyle. We live in
a very finite little valley. People still want to come
here. There's a lot of people who are not happy living
and working in this particular little square part of the
Roaring Fork Valley. We have employees working for our
real estate management company that are choosing to live
in Basalt. They don't see anything wrong with making a
10
11
12
-
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning and zoning
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
COMPTON
March 29, 1988
55
trip of 30 minutes to get some land and a place to keep
a horse and a place where their kids can go. We've got
a school system that says we'll take your kids up here
no matter where you live in the valley. I don't see why
we are trying to put all this toothpaste back in this
tube. There are a lot of people who would like some
options and maybe what we're doing is exacerbating our
problem simply by trying to cram everybody in our little
corner here, and why not allow the option of going a
little further, a little beyond where we are. Granted
nobody wants a four-lane but we need it, and we needed
it 5 years ago. Let's say, let's redevelop a bus system
for these people. They're solutions there but we're not
letting ourselves deal with them simply because we made
some rules a few years ago. I urge you to think about
that as you're looking at these limiting factors.
Richard Compton. I'd like to say a little bit about the
rules we made up a few years ago having to do with the
growth management pIan and that in the growth management
guidelines which the Ritz is following very nicely, the
168 or whatever employee units that they have credits
for, they aren't building a God damn thing. They are
using buildings that are already in existence, that are
already housing employees and what they're going to do
is take those units, maybe not those exact units, but
they're going to move in 300 or so employees and they're
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.--....
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2<;
Planning and Zoning
PAVISHA
March 29, 1988
56
getting credit for spaces which are already filled with
employees of other businesses that are now in existence.
The whole thing is a lot of crap, when it comes right
down to it. It has nothing to do with ... it's a way of
shoving numbers around. And that's all there is to it.
So when you're bringing in 300 new employees with no
place to live
I'm Jim Pavisha.
I think we should all look at that
slightly differently and I think the way you need to look
at that is that we provided that housing, deed restricted
it and gave it in advance of this hotel and this
community's enjoying those deed restricted properties
because of what John Roberts did previously and now what
Mr. Hadid is doing.
And because we did it early, we
shouldn't be penalized for it. The Alpina Haus was a
regular operation for transient guests as was the" Copper
Horse. The Hunter Longhouse was going to go on the free
market and we worked on that.
So look at it from a
positive standpoint. We put that stuff on the market in
advance of this hotel coming. We shouldn't have to be
providing the housing for solving all the problems as
someone up there pointed out. We're doing our part to
help solve it but it's a community effort and just as
long as I'm up, I think the real way to solve the
problem, I don't think GMP solves housing problems, and
obviously I have a vested interest in saying that but you
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-
14
15
Planning and Zoning
COMPTON
PAVISHA
COMPTON
March 29, 1988
57
know it almost stops it and you don't see much getting
built. The way to do it, as Richie pointed out, is to
try to get the public sector and the private sector
working together and develop something that will work.
... that I highly agree on that you shouldn't;t legislate
housing solutions. I think we can get some solutions.
That doesn't help us with our problems tonight. But just
remember we have put that housing available for employees
2, 3, 4 years in advance of our hotel coming on line.
69 units at Hunter Longhouse including $250,000 that's
about $3,000 per employee. Anybody can do
Nobody else did. It was going to go on the free market
and could have been sold out to people out of town. Keep
it in mind. It didn't happen. We stepped up and did it.
16 ANDERSON wait. This is not a forum for public debate of~public
I grant you that
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
HARVEY
PERSON
25 HARVEY
-,.""
~
between themselves. Perry do you want to respond?
I just wanted to clarify that the, to Jim Pavisha, that
what he says is exactly true in terms of the Hunter
Longhouse units.
Those were going off on the free
market. The Alpina Haus was short-term this winter, so
it's going to be as I outlined under construction
scheduling for construction housing.
Louder please
The Alpine Haus was short-termed this winter. The other
projects have been available and I concur entirely that
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
58
2
3 ANDERSON
4 COHEN
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
to penalize someone because they made housing available
prior to the deadline is pretty ridiculous
Any further public comment on employee housing.
I just feel obliged to answer this comment about GMP and
replacement. We, the people of this city, made the GMP
and made those rules and we have created a monster and
we have allowed certain rules and certain elements to
fight against what you're trying to do. This project on
ute Avenue, which is now a luxury resort area which is
beautiful and well done, was going to house 150 employees
very, very nicely and we shot it down. We went out and,
I worked on that employee housing stuff, and it took
months to get them to even consider a proposal for stuff
at the Airport Business Center. That became free market,
reasonably expensive housing. Now for us as a community
or elements of a community to say this is wrong, that we
allow replacement, that's our fault and I think maybe we
ought to accept some of that responsibility and do
something positive to make this a solvable problem.
20 ANDERSON Wait a minute. As I remember, Richie, it was the public
21
22
23
24
COHEN
hearing process that shot that employee housing down
because nobody from the public wanted it to be built
there.
Right. Only the neighbors, that's true
2~ ANDERSON Well that was the public
L.~
-""-"
COHEN
Well here we are talking about it all. I've got people
Planning and zoning
March 29, 1988
59
2
working for us who want to be in Basalt and we don't
allow them the same controls of price down there that we
3
force on here.
4 ANDERSON Dick, did you have something to add?
5 BUTERA Yes, just one more thing if I may, maybe help to put it
6
in perspective when you think oof voting so everyone
7
understands what is going on here.
This is a PUD
8
amendment that the developer has requested be extended
9
and changed. Now, the PUD allows a developer, in this
particular case, to exceed the height limitations, to
exceed the density limitations, to exceed, to try to
10
11
12
change the parking regulations, but basically to exceed
all the basic fundamentals of the zoning code.
If we
.-.
built this hotel on that site according to zoning our
14
15
book that we all hold so sacred, it would be about half
as big. Because of the magical word PUD allows all these
rules to be changed and density to be shifted from the
16
17
18
hillside, now my point is you're allowing it and if you
19
all vote yes to approve this, think of your respon-
sibility. You're using the word PUD to make the building
20
21
bigger, higher, more dense, etcetera. Now carry out your
22
responsibility and forget these formulas on employee
23
housing that are in the book and do the same thing you're
24
doing with PUD, get practical and be realistic when you
25
>#'"
put the regulations for employee housing on that PUD
L...
-",.
because they don't tie together very well. If this hotel
2
3
March 29, 1988
60
planning and Zoning
HARVEY
BUTERA
HARVEY
were built according to the zoning of that site without
the magical words PUD, they already own enough employee
housing units and we could all go home now. Thank you.
4 ANDERSON Thank you Dick. Perry
20
21
22
23
24
"),~
,
..,-....
Well just to respond to that because I agree with Dick
that when you allow variances from elements of the Code,
it's incumbent to vary other elements. The Hotel Jerome,
and I worked on that PUD, supplied housing for 19 people.
Now if Dick's right and he's at 1.85 for his 60-odd room
increase, he's got somewhere around 115 new employees,
so he housed a little over 10 percent of them.
The
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
Little Nell hotel that just went through SPA housed 35
percent of their new employees. This project before you
is housing 60 percent of it's new employees.
I think
that that speaks exactly to what Dick said we have far
exceeded
None of us are living up to
far exceeded the requirements of growth management, which
is 35 percent.
ANDERSON Any further public comment on employee housing.
RICHMAN
I'll
close this part of the the public hearing. We're not
going to come to any decisions on employee housing
tonight or on architecture because we haven't had the
benefit of staff's input or the housing authority board's
input. So
The question for you is, are you ready to see a rescoring
1.-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
Planning and Zoning
March 29, 1988
61
and to do a rescoring of the project at this point. As
you know, the lodge GMP deals with all of the issues that
we've been talking about individually over the past
couple of weeks. It deals with architecture, it deals
with design, it deals with services, it deals with
parking, it deals with housing.
If the commission is
ready to take that step of going into lodge GMP, the
responsibility that I'll have over the next 2 days is to
find out all the commitments that have been put on the
record over the last month. We've had a lot of changes
to the program.
I don't have an application or docu-
ments, drawings that allow me to analyze the project to
give you that information we need to do the rescoring.
.
Hopefully within the next couple of days I can get to
that point if you're ready.
16 ANDERSON Does anybody think we're not ready? Roger.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ZTJ
HUNT
HARVEY
For example, under
Yes, I think we're not ready yet.
this new architecture regime, I just picked up, 1'm going
to be in the architecture, site design, parking, where
I'm going from here. These are my problem areas that we
haven't dealt with sufficiently. specifically, with this
change of architecture, what has that done to the service
area. Is that exactly
Absolutely no change.
The building above the ground
floor has been cut back and it has been that way all
along but on the ground floor, it's squared of.
l'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
]?
14
15
16
17
18
'."~....
26
March 29, 1988
62
Planning and Zoning
HUNT
RICHMAN
HARVEY
RICHMAN
19
20
21
22
23
24
Okay. That's answered that. We do have to go back to
the parking
I've got on my list that I don't have a current parking
layout scheme at all, all I have is the original
submission.
Well, I'm a little confused about this because apparently
Thursday night at city council, the Mayor who didn't want
to be a participant in this, instructed I believe Alan,
the Mayor and council instructed Alan to tell P & Z to
forget about initiating or trying to initiate a Code
change for the valet tandem parking scheme or for day use
of the parking by skiers.
No, no, Perry, you misrepresented the direction that the
council gave me.
If you recall last Tuesday, you had
discussions about parking, had questions asked about two
aspects of the parking which did not, accordinq to the
direction I gave you, did not meet the current code,
those being the idea of tandem or stack parking which is
only allowed for single family houses not for lodge
development, and the idea of day skier parking, a
commercial parking facility in this hotel.
You had
suggested to me that you were interested in having those
code amendments considered as part of the overall code
rewrite. We had a meeting with council last Thursday
night to discuss the overall code rewrite. At that point
I did not bring those up because of the conversation I
Planning and Zoning
~.~
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
---
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 HARVEY
25
. RICHMAN
~'"
March 29, 1988
63
had with Paul Taddune where we both recognized that both
of those code amendments had not been properly adver-
tised, had not been properly initiated, and could not
simply be added to the code rewrite so I had made a
decision not to even bring it up to city Council. The
city Council brought the matter up to me. They heard
about the Commission's interest in those code amendments
and by majority vote on both items said that they did not
want to include those in the overall code rewrite. They
did not in any way say that it was not the Commission's
prerogative to initiate those applications and have the
applicant file the appropriate development applications.
They simply are not interested, nor would it be legally
appropriate at this point to simply drop them into the
code when there's been no public notice at the P & Z
level about those code amendments, and of course, the
Municipal Code does require that type of public notice.
So the situation is if P & Z is interested in those
options on parking, we have to initiate code amendments
and that would be appropriate tonight or at a subsequent
meeting. The applicant will have to file applications,
we'll have to do notice in the paper, and then we can
hear them.
Is . that Planning and Zoning and Council for code
amendments
That's correct. It's an ordinance adoption procedure
;;;u
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
''Z''t5
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 64
ANDERSON You should know that procedure.
HARVEY I just had to make it clear
ANDERSON Joe.
WELLS I don't understand why there's a lot of confusion about
the parking layout. We have a level of commitment on
parking, I think the number's 241 plus or minus a few
numbers
240 pIus 9 above
240 subgrade. We're either going to provide that in a
standard parking layout as we've shown in our submission,
or if we are successful in instigating a code amendment,
we will do the tandem solution, but the parking scheme
is going to be one or the other, both of which we have
drawings available to indicate the layouts.
They may be available but we have not submitted those.
In other words, for the P & z to score a project, they
don't need either ors. Either ors aren't what you
evaluate. They need to know, we're committed to doing
tandem parking, fine, the commission members can evaluate
HARVEY
WELLS
RICHMAN
HARVEY
WELLS
tandem parking.
I guess what we're saying is we're committed to do tandem
parking assuming the code amendment is successful. If
it isn't, then we will do the regular standard parking
scheme, supplying the same number of spaces. Does that
satisfy the requirements?
Obviously, we can't be rescored on a future code
planning and zoning March 29, 1988 65
amendment basis. We have to be scored on the basis of
a standard parking solution and that's what we will
assume you'll be scoring us on, is a standard parking
solution.
I mean, is that the
That's a reasonable way to handle it.
I think so too. Any other problems Roger?
No, that's basically it. where do we go from here
though?
I think Alan was saying that next week if you can pull
together all the information in time, next week we'll do
the GMP scoring
Yes, I'll need to get some things from the applicant that
will help me in scoring. We've done a lot of the work
in advance in anticipation that we'd get to this point
this week but I'll need site plans, I'll need entry level
plans that have all changed as a result of the changes
that have occurred in the last couple weeks and I can
work with the applicant on that. I would expect that if
I get that material quickly, if the housing authority
gets through it's work on Thursday, then we can have a
scoring issue as we normallY would on Friday and we could
score next Tuesday. We've got a couple of other items
of businesS on Tuesday that I would Suggest go first and
we would do that at about 5:30. I think we'd be ready
to start the scoring at 5:30 if members of the public
'J....
2
3
4
5
6
7
HARVEY
RICHMAN
ANDERSON
HUNT
8
9
10
11
12
3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ANDERSON
RICHMAN
25
26
--.
-",,"-",
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'3
.._"
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-~ 26
66
Planning and zoning
are interested.
March 29, 1988
ANDERSON Has the public hearing for the GMP been noticed?
RICHMAN It's been noticed and you've been continuing it as you're
continuing the other public hearings. It was originallY
noticed for March 8th.
PEYTON
Are we also going to hear the staff analysis of architec-
ture and housing next week?
RICHMAN
There are two scoring areas and so our analysis would be
embedded in the scoring. If there'S a need to embellish
that a little bit, we'll embellish it.
What we'll
provide you will be comparisons to prior scores, we'll
provide you with an analysis of the compliance with
provisions of section 24-11.7(b)
PEYTON So PUD, GMP is all going to be wrapped into one package,
RICHMAN We will provide you with
HARVEY If I can just say one other thing on thi~ employee
housing, and it doesn't reallY effect this except that
ANDERSON perry?
the amount of property owned and the commitment Hadid and
the owners to the community and the projects that are
coming up involves a long term commitment on our part to
work with the community for this housing. We tried one
avenue last night before council to do some housing in
excess of our requirements in cooperation on the Koch
lumber property and council said no that's open space.
So we're going to be exploring other avenues. We had
Planning and znning March 29, 1988 6.
decided that we can do something on Koch because it was
going to be a break even situation. It's incrediblY
difficult, as you guys are aware, to find property that
you can outright buy and construct new housing on that
isn't just an incredible cash drain to operate under the
guidelines but we tried one last night and we're
committed to continuing to try other solutions and I just
wanted to say that. We're not trying to pull a fast one
on anyone here because I wouldn't work for them and
there'S too many things that we have to do that I want
to see done, the MeadowS redevelopment and other projects
that are going to require housing and so, it's seemed
with some of the comments that, oh those guys are going
to rape us and just come in and hire everybody away and
then they're going to leave. That's just not'the case.
Thank you.
Thank you perry. Mickey?
Can we consider meeting earlier next week since we have
other items on the agenda
we're already meeting half an hour earlier
This has become normal noW
If we meet at 4:30 and are done with our other business
by 5:30, I think that's very realistic. We can score the
full 2 hours. We have gone over each of the individual
issues. When parking comes up, yoU will be familiar with
the issues. I'm sure my presentation will be brief.
ANDERSON
HERRON
PEYTON
HARVEY
RICHMAN
r'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
J~~
-~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2l
22
23
24
~6
Planning and Zoning March 29, 1988 68
ANDERSON I think, due to the familiarity we have with the project,
this needn't be a lengthy scoring session.
RICHMAN The nice thing about doing it this way, a 10t of people
show it seems about 5 or 5:30 getting off of work and
this will provide the public an opportunity to be there
at the beginning of the scoring, and I'll try and have
some materials. We don't usually have a lot of display
materials, but I'll try and do the scoring in some sort
of graphic way so the public knows what's going on as
welL
David?
ANDERSON
WHITE
ANDERSON
PEYTON
."-
I would just like to make one statement on the housing
situation. The housing situation from 2 to 3 years ago
has changed drastically. Many of us on P & Z have been
arguing with the housing authority because we do not
agree with the numbers that they say we need to house,
so I'm just putting that out there for those of you in
the public to know that some of us on P & Z do not agree
with the housing authority. We've been disagreeing with
the housing authority and we're trying to get some actual
housing units built, produced, so that there's actually
pillows for employees to sleep on.
Mari
I'm just looking at these numbers and I think it's
important for the public to understand also. When they
talk about housing 60 percent of their employees, they're
,
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
]
-
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Planning and Zoning
HARVEY
PEYTON
HARVEY
PEYTON
RICHMAN
WELLS
PEYTON
March 29, 1988
69
not talking about 60 percent of their total employees;
they talking about
It's the net new
60 percent after they subtract all the rooms that have
been demolished in the past and then the units which are
considered new units, some of these units are not being
replaced one bedroom to one bedroom, like maybe one small
room was demolished in the Aspen Inn. Another unit which
is being constructed to replace it might be a 3 bedroom
apartment
Absolutely not. It's bedrooms to bedrooms
unit to unit. For example, you're talking about 260
rooms to be built, 113 will be subtracted from that to
arrive at 178 new rooms and 60 percent of the employees
to be housed are only from these rooms which are
considered to be new rooms.
Although, therS will
actually be 260 more rooms than there are right now. I
just think it's important to
We brought that to the housing authority's attention
There's no employee housing requirement for replacement
units.
That's according to the code but the PUD does things
differently from the code
24 ANDERSON Jasmine
25 TYGRE I would like to make a comment in relation to what David
2.
was saying in regard to our code revisions and the whole
Planning and zoning March 29, 1988 70
question of employee housing and who has to bear the
2 burden of the employees and the problems of GMP and this
3 is not just in relation to this applicant because the
4 applicant is going under the rules that are currently in
5 existence, but others members of the commission have
6 questioned the rules that are in existence in terms of,
7 have you decided what percentage of the new employees
8 generated by any business are the responsibility of that
9 business as opposed to the responsibility of the
10 government. And the policy, as previously expressed in
11 GMP has to do with the fact that the government was
12 theoretically prepared to assume a portion of this
1 burden, GMP scoring reflected this so that you got a
14'-' certain amount of credit, the developer got a certain
15 amount of credit for providing housing for a certain
16 number of employees provided they reached a certain
17 minimum threshold and a lot of us on the Commission
18 questioned whether that number to reach minimum threshold
19 was the right number. And the decision that has been in
20 place for such a long time, we're still not sure that
21 it's correct but what we have to go by is the rules that
22 are in existence and we know that somehow they're not
23 quite right. And our concern in providing employee
24 housing is to make sure that we do really account for the
25 real number of new employees generated because we really
L can't change any of the other rules, and I think that's
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
-i4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,'~."'.."
26
--
planning and zoning March 29, 1988 71
why so many of us are so concerned with this particular
number and that we come at it in a way that's realistic.
Mickey?
Notwithstanding our concern about the numbers, and I
recognize that there is a lot of concern, the rules are
the rules and I don't think it's fair to ask the
applicant or I don't think it's legal to ask the
applicant, I just looked over at our counsel over there,
than doing anything other than what the rules say.
That's exactly my point. Since we can't change the rules
under which we operate, I think we should at least make
sure we're working with the right number
But I don't think we should penalize, eXCuse me Mari, I
didn't mean to interrupt you, I don't think we should
penalize the applicant if he's conforming to what the
regulations are, whether we agree with the regulations
are not, he's here based upon those regulations, based
upon the approved PUD. He'S as far as I'm concerned,
reduced the size of the building and reduced the size of
the project from what was approved, and I don't think we
should come in now and become an impediment to this
approach because we don't think that the numbers that
they're dealing with that are on the books are not the
appropriate numbers. A~l due process, under law, is the
way I would interpret it.
ANDERSON Marl.
ANDERSON
HERRON
TYGRE
HERRON
Planning and Zoning
#1"'.-...-.,
PEYTON
"-~-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 HARVEY
12
] ,"'............ ANDERSON
,.
~..........
-'--,,,,,
March 29, 1988
72
My point is that when you have a PUD you do change the
rules. The rules for the height have been changed, the
rules for setbacks and all kinds of rules have been
changed, and I think that it is our responsibility to see
that if some of the rules are changes, the other rules
should be changed to accommodate the rules that we've
already changed, and if conditions have changed in the
communi ty. And I don't think anybody would disagree that
our employee crisis is more severe than it was 4 years
ago. I think we should take that into account.
Well, I think that's why the 60 percent factor is in
there rather than the 35 percent minimum.
Barring any objection, meeting's adjourned.