HomeMy WebLinkAboutHIGHLAND MEADOWS FILING 2 LOT 26 LEGAL.pdf(
10:
AI.ID:
lhe LOI4IIr Of VaU-
Buildfurg Departrnerrt
73 South Frontage Road
Vai1, Colonado 81657
Robin and Lori Roberts
P.0. Box 3222
Vail, Colorado 81658
Tn.
b6\
,}o
RE:Building Envelope: llighland Meadows Subdivision
Peter Jamar
Buifding Deparbnent
We the under:signed lnve reviewed the enclosed site plan for^ I-ot 26
Highland Meadows, Filing 2. We realize that the Robents will be
buildirg out of the prnposed building envelope. We r.nderstand the
prrrblems and give or:r permission to alter" the building envelope to
acccrnodate the proposed building.
I Lo{
To:
And:
Re:
Tn'
The Tcivm of Vail
Building Depax'bnent
73 South Frrcntage Road Vail, Colorado 8165?
Robin arrd Loni Roberrs
P.O. Prtx 3222 Vail, CoJ-onado 81658
Buildiry Ervelope:
Peten Jarnar
Buildi:1g Departrnent
lfighland Meadows Subdivision
Wg the r:rrdersigned have neviewed the encl osed sife ntan fnr., r_ot 26 ttighland Meadois, ri:.ine 2. il;.ti;;-;il;;J'i"tJil"-ii.:1 r"builging out of the proposed buildirg envelope. we r-rrdenstand the pnrblems and give orrn pernr-ission to alter the buiJdirlg enveJ-ope to acconv:date the proposed buildings.
3Bn-u uz
,*#"toN REouEsr
DATE
,\,
l; ..!
.) l
. TOWN OF VAIL
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:TUES. WED -I THUR FRI '' ,!--
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
O ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
O FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER - PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL/ H. TUB
O SHEETROCK NAIL
ELE
trT
trF
trC
tr
tr HEATING
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
D FINAL O FINAL
F APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPHOVED N REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR DATE
o o z (n
{F c o {o z
T m F
={
----
d
@
m
T]F]F] I q
LlLl Ll t_ |D .Ltt
=trP IJ ii q
rTr l'l: I; o a ?6= ld 5 ;EiY 19 q 1 io6li i e.Y= ltr P o -'-' li q I l=E
=flftFr ;
=;J
IT 6 €Y'- I o->= d I g(! 6 g >= an o
=6 SE
ni;
l m
{
z
3 m o _T.
z
o
r
v!z.r -lc 3<
-1 2 9c)
o otr 4i
;:
-lo o>
Z.a
-.t m 7z >m
i>or
T
-t m o -
€z
m
lfl
z
=IT
u,
m
rrl
-2 =
=
---t -5=
..:
=-oJ<--
a=3i#o>'r-
TT r-Y
--l zl "l N)-F
rol
FI Eo l|-FT PI o-l DI EI
r' I tl rl
{m -m
d €2
'n
t>F
CI
z
n
=
H
l€
lz o
ll
-
m I
lz
{
m T
F
tr
-.1
=z
l
F
m
P z
I
3
Tr-l
=
=tr F -
m T
I'rl
F
F
Jf'|ciF {F zl
.11.F ;E Fr rt fn R 't-t, rFl
=F .)P
l-r
{-)
I ll
I
I
I
I
-t
m T
rn
F
F F \)
t-t t.rl lo l;l{ 13 zl
- rFt ltE I=7 ' !-{t !r1 lEo P'r zI^y(D 7 lv1 IJff
()Pfl t.i
F
I
I 3
t-
m
tr
=
3
t-
x
(D
J
(D -
-
5 (,
E
F D
p
D
Y N)\l
O
a,/1
t'l=loJ
lo-
lv,
l5 t]l.-
z
m
D
T1
f-
J
F
t
q
q,z 10 ; -.1 m Ir t5 l--- o lro IYT
l@- <
lq' o |'n
!m I
=-l
i o
m x
m !{
o z (-o
@ L -{m
O
c:,l\)O
G)
(^)
oo-
E3d op-d 6*g 8:r f=-
'<R{{E6-
1*s'
-Oat a+-
i i+
:-5 E aor o
e'3 a
o=o.
o6=
E *@ sds E otE
a, -^'_f +ii
6 9.6'., 1-r
1-'=o
-=Bo
=99 Jo -.qrdf
=< =JF=5 ".f jB1.
o-:sn9 ?
=.
I jaP.I o;'
V a'3
ERA a::sro=.
0r
€I
!l
=
o'
o
o
!)
o
e
(o
o
-t
{
at;
N
\5'
o
s.o {
0r
o t
=o
1
=
5.
@
o o
o
g)
J
o
T
o .=
o)
o o q a
o
-{g 't
!r
=o
o--
f o
o
>(t ZA vz
-.{ >
mc
:lm io
m-n
€z
m
z -{
o i
'r't
-o m t-'n
a.>
19 Y
lo lz t>t;
=-g l€Vz VA I --tF.u l\ J* =s
F r'.
F<=R-lll lt>ttr
I
I
lfio<
l="*
1,,_t9tF l>lo t" I 9b<I"l. r t-r l= l=
lq
l=-t>lr-t6
L L
+=I
l--
I
t2l t@l tcl trl t{l
tol 1zl tl tl
l-,1 t<l t'ttl l'l 'll
lil trl .t6l txl tzl lSl f@l +J
l+l t<l t>l t-l lt-
I'
I
tr€OB IF
-z ZC\
.z f u,
ll"tl
z>9R nU d:
>0 ol m=' (t, o r--j \-->
=U)
l-l ll
z
m {
--t m
z
z
m
-l
m
E
o
't!
t-
j o z
ONv Om^,
=6 H=4-"o-Pto c- > 'n J.;
=a -u,
r? \J 39 ;a,:t : P P
^Z u, - _'l >:o 6 o fD-n z z t
(Dn
-I
=.l-rr -
c+l-'N OO =l-l? p m =l(, <,r I -15o llE<llT =I tJ.tt=tt=I l=.
Ito
I
,
tr
z
F
@
r_
z
z oz -t m o
rt 5
o
c+
qJ
o .5
\'o
-l
|-
iAl
ts E
='Tl
m m u,
g,
m
x
t-m
z
m
{
m
9.
z F m
:<m {
o
m
m
z
-n
m m
=m
z
|-
-c 3 I z
m t-m o
6
t-
t-
z o
m
7
=
=!m
=
T m 7 3
='Tl
m m U'
VALUATION
1'm 7
=-{
z o
l-
=m
z o >t-
t-
3
@ 2
m
m
-{
|.
o
F
z 6
lnH$
m li l"lr:Ir,l
I El -lr l-E j.
l\-F-ln: l'.)t(J) ctr '-\ tr ro 0o ll('|l-rr ll
't w
Jn
b
><x ><
+
x
\)\)H !r\)rF)
tb )to
(,
.\J
Pb c.K+ 33clB !'AL .((xtles
o o z
@ {F c o
=o z
!rn n 3 +
-*E
o
m I4 :-o .;E l-{ ;+ o t<: f t't Y I lm: d l9r 7 lri 9.
l3d s l=E 5
f:
o<
6E ;!L -aO
>t
=q m.t
.rl .t
m
{
dP
z=o@ 2=o-'z
o
Z/\
c
;
;
m o I
z
o
t-
o Q.o z. t---{ c 3=
1Z
om
-1m -r /\at \,1 >=
-lo o>
2n
vz >m
-t>or-=m
--{
€z
m z
3 m
t-t t-
m rrl uiA o>'t-
t-
i
(D t-
-n
t-z m t-
m
ld
l€z
o
ll t>
la
m
le,z
l
4 d €z
o I
F
m
d
€z
o I
7
$
z
'n
=
d €z
o I
7
m o
z
l-r lo
l€lz lo
l'Tl
l<
l=lr
lm
lo
I 3
m
U'
I
=
o q
_9
F F
F
t
d
E.
=FF -r \,1 ;142 =^^e>"'r
!Ttr
NTLI
z o I m
I
o n
'Tl
m
=-1
-l o
m x m l,-{
z
C-o
ID a -
m
I
m
fro<>-nlt o
_i
z
t
m u
=a
z
m
m
m
l<-
lz
ti
t>l-
--{
!m
-.1 I o x z
m
t
t-t-q n
oN-z 91 rnxi 4-ln P io
=2.1 aQo o-z vcr(4 !nxF
^? c:z9 ':
'ftzz
€
x
Ests$;3699 E O^ X -.EasIi <-;-J
o :.< o 5 tasEi r = + qi ,ii =:.- =|;
:(,o=f
Hblo-
iSiss d*i3i
oii j oQ
[*a3=36p.=(r,'o-Oi(s)
?leln Ed.3;3
I ;ra !.3 3{of-r : r-o o *
aw'5i=
g seil s,:i5i
il1'6'-= =< l
dIr'fi=r R5 0,6
f; ='o: ='p.0. d. R o"
ii :r 6 =.J F3 i 8*
a$u a';
[.3q8 eu9R=.
z'ol
+l
0t
-l
I
I
I
I
I
ol
--rl ml
!m F
.
z o
l(--L o 1 4
(-p
=-rc
for
-1
o
o o
3
3 tr
;
cL
@
o
o !
o
-an
rrF r r .-fr
I;E tm!
log"-lrrt lm-!l;#l'-:ttl ,E +
rrlo
><{o
-hi;
*u)z o >arr FO m'!l
'-!._nl J
{
<m@
i=e
YF ]-
3P
z<o(D I=6c,z
,<xx x >< ><I
i
.l
!
trEE
f-'ln|!l L,J t_J Ul'
-r}t :*
ol
-1
=J
A'
=o
i
R<
=B rjr oz s!
o o
=o Af,{:o o I
or mm @A o>'t-
a*o
z
r-
oO qr.€
z >T d.v
c)
?
-l m o
-l
o o za -{m 4Z >m OE i>Qr
o om
=f;nq >--o=d9 tr.-
o Orr 2;:{C *3 5cp g6
l5
l!
lF !m o
z
l{to
t€
li
F l!
l$2 o
ff$
-t
I l-
=
s.
z
o
.I
lO-
rtJ(D
'=o
16'<I CI O',..()l=x.
-D' O 13€
'E-o .o o
gg
!-
oro
oP
6'=
=(,,5st
-!
=;''J-o' I D=. I
-o I l-r I
i=- |iq- I :,.^ I !'o ;r9 |,- I !: I i= I i.E I :=f 6f,
=[if sl ;l
{l!!.r :l .tr
--l
iE o :QO
r(D5
ro=ro P 'o *
33
Y- or .'< o '-c)'=. c
J9(
+(D o:a rg:d9'
=or (
".o!- -r
-(D:o
=d ?E*
t -.;==:!-O - Jo,-o =) -,o )o-
lj.=:go
, O-' O
dr
qro (,_
-r5
Tq
Pg :6'anJ
()-t
93 o:,ge
! :ilo
1.<e rgt(D
leo -o a3
:d s.
o-'3.
3o
o-r
v atr
or =!39t Or.(
=;:: -(cE:
;P1
ef-
l=o ::5 ici o-,:-r
rgR :.< =i s.9
=-cri
=<. ,:.
.€ o.
^ a,t Yl qjj
=\J(D
!lo'
O, .r ?d'O.rJ q'd!
9I,o _(
oq)s.€(Dgt {;
atf {')e
oa 5c'oc,
cd
=fi Oalrl
:an(
lI'c:cO;
f,vD (oor:
\J () :R9!6-S:
o)5-f(o!
o\o -
( le-s-r/-r -Yo o
rs 3 ;\(/,, r )l.r!iP<
, f;'t ]6 =,: ='eJ a€
<o
oJ(
8E:e3t
o.o-:
ristC 6'a !5e'
o
s.(D
€
(D
-a
=o
5i
o';cl
(oi
R!o-c qri x-
o\o
xlo
o/-r
x x
><x x x X
><x
><x
><x
m o
z
|-
m
i
z
fn m
C)t-m
7
m !
q
m {
x z
!tn
I
z
an o x
th o
6
.-
=
2 o
-('
ri
Y\
,t
m
z
trl
€o
o
z
2.
F
a-
z o z o {m
at,
>6
il mc
a. f,
53 Itt 'tl I fol
EI
9l
o o z -{
o
-l o I
n o ,
m
=-i n m m
a/,
E vt n |-'tt
z I'm
fi€It^
tl
il-l>t5 l.n II t>l lil l6l
:l
I >l otl otl
-r ll oll
>tl
6g c)m
itr ZA i=:.r >;o
ll IP
i
-t
;
z
l-.D
m
s
g)
z m m
m
l<.'
tn
o
z
t-tz
t>
z o
f_
-t
z
o
rl
:{
€
ai 3
o
-l
-t z !v;O-r c)<o!c.r|3g 2a e9 aG
-!".1 : e:d;i ox z>
''l
=
x o m z m a
o m
,o
=
'r1
€o D x
I
R
ti
I
h.
li
I
t-{o -{
t-
JN
=J fl m
u)
VALUAI ION
r\\
I
0
C
INSPECTION REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
TOWN OF VAIL
JOB NAME
CALLER
INSPECTION:MON TUES WED THUR FRI PM AM READY FOR
LOCATION:t'
BUILDING:
D FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
O UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER D FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION D POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL o
tr tr
tr FINAL E FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. PO
MECHANICAL:
WER O HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
D CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
D tr
D FINAL tr FINAL
Q APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
D DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
<:
: / /:' t'
o
INSPECTION
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL
- ..!
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
t-.
JOB NAME
MON
CALLER
TUES R FRI_)1 HU AM PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS
tr FOUNDATI
tr FRAMING
/ STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W,V.
! ROUGH / WATER
ON / STEEL
- ROOF & SHEEB ' PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION D POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
n tr
B FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
D FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
E,APPROVED
CoRRecttotrts:
E DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
t'
DATE INSPECTOR
hm0m
PersonslMemofrom.,.
Tom Braun
<-\*( sv"-4//
/1
7-o'"' ,
4 -t *.".Jt B^{ '^"{''t n1"-'[ \'
eino { -L '^\- -t^ *'*4
,^-\*_ 9.o-*+ Px^r '^r '{--'-s-.
--t ,r\-.,.^..!u tr* 0-'^4"'^t- . tI*"-
+4, N,\-tu'r, d--n 1^s' 1-'-1" 's
t- I\1 .
}c c'-' ''--<--
L6
ryA,ffit$1Ol #rldff#$Edff".
rl u\
I
,l
,li
tt-
,t ,
,\. .\- r. ,'-\' l . i:. \ \ '\
-E) *-.r5 S\-.\*g
t t--
L:sJ.\ \3"
\_lr, - =Ll 1q
@ t{o. l3l
IMPORTANT MESSAGE
TE LE PHO N ED r PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO AEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO BEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
IMPORTANT MESSAGE
Operator
wHrrt Y
TELE PHON E D PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
RETURNED YOUR CALL
=Er.-r-\
el / /' '\
=lli - \_rv.',1
\=y
c)o z
@ -{n
c)I o z
I
@ m Io LO
l{iio t<: f l.Ir >J t lm: 6 l9s 1 Ioi g ItrP o li: 3 l-{ Q .7 r!
;J
o.<
dF -o 36
>t zd
m ..r
'n
!m
=-{
trDE
o.
lfr ;o
R<zx i:j
rr- D 6Z i^Y>
9p -{c 3=
1Z Qc)4
C)om 4;;c >=o=ic)o>)o .-
zO
--.{ m ,2.>m
J>o'-=m
--'
{z m
(D z
It
c !
11
\)
1,r
\
-
RI aO c)>'a-
I
t ri.
I
P
'Tl
!z
.I
m t-m
{
:z
o "tl
r
m
{o :z
l
7
m
z
I
3 n
\
-.1
+!
I v
N
H
l;'
lF ltt
lfl
le
I ft
t
!
L-r
\.{
L"
tJ F til
-(-
m -m
t
*J I
(>
l-{lo
t€
lz to
|1l
l<l>
lF l!lm
lF)
I
\{-
(:
'1
| !t F rn
:\i,)
A,
t
|J
)
\-
lr lo
t:
II t>
lr
6
lz
le
H
lh)
l'.
I
=
5 t I
w -.
l'.-
l.
4.1
':t ..,)
a
*
f*
I l'.
N u
+'
t-
m a
:
l*
F\
I'n
D-
F5 tn,
t
I
I
I
--\'-
t--
F
.{,l
\,\
Do
=e >F
=F >|t"
oli r nr
mp
.\ l.-?t.;F
wp
YI 5h t[n
t:i
TT
F
I
<m(D
=t-t-
>-;-ta2
=oc)!, >
t-
Dntr
Tr -o
z<0@ >=
z
-u
m n 3
-{
z
-{
m
o
'Tt
m _tt
r
--{
ID
m x m
-t
z
(..o
@ o
--t
m
o
--l m
O c)ts O
( -,,5
o-orr 39 qo
og ft<
=x 0ro 3L cO aO-D.^66
:af o0,
!-
oro
.^ qt
ot d=*6'
=E 0t It ;a ;-
fl
a=
=(D sl o-
6'o
o-<?^=tl--o=oo o-.
o:€:
-i x=.*o
6'=
RA
ds.96
!t (o
o
f
!.
J
=o
o
5
0t
=.
J
q,
f
o-'
Ot
.J
o
f
=1.
g
-{o t
='
o o vt
(tt
0l {I
o,
o
=
f
q
c
o
o
3'
(D
I
{:l qi
.N
o
s.o {
gt
o
o t
=
3
(!
5
='(o
o
0)f,
o
(D
s
I o z
J c
o
o €z m
'n o
=a m a-.tl
z
-{'r
m
{z
m
<tt
q
2.
l
o I
(D
9.(o
f
o
o\{*q,E
B
;
o
{
0
rn t-m o
x
I m
m :-{o=x "F;
z
U)c t-
-i
o z
z-oo0 9H 3*;*=;PE Pze 3 Xltc Ht-z tJt2=e 4-'ll|qr trlNt co@>=.233 3 Hfig H e<A ? ! -E 12 z 6Z .d
z m t
-t
z
J
z
t-
m
$
o
I
r c
-l
z
'tt m
c
t
1
T
I
*ii
$
$
$
F
ON (\g o i g3 c5 te ie
$:: e e
E! r ";
o'x
\:i=
El Se:pl x)\
q
I
N
L^
\\(l
h";i
h \\
._\
\\t \
-t -
^2
qr
R
\o a
(J
1 \t-
m
*g
Fr o
B
T
c4 I
ar o t
h
I t i o L
b Y
lvrl
FI
ol z z o
F
E q
E z
z
;
9)
l)
IP
IF r
I
I
ld
I
IG lr;
I'
r
B
L
Ni lif i
l-s
lF I or )llr ;
l{!-t\I l\r,
rP
li
;l
il
:l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
1l
I
I
I
l
I
{o J
t-
m
._tl
m
(t
c (t
m I
x
o
m
z
!
rn
2 -{
m I
z
tn s m {
m o
m
z
m m
I
m
I
z
:
2
m
I'l
--{
o
f-
z o I
-
c
z
an
i
m n
=-{'Tl
m m
9e,
VALUATION
m u
=
=z o
3 m o
z o
t-
=
=
m
m c)-.{
o
t-
z
lr
a iJ
P
:
6J
3
::l
-t
\
Uq
\
\
p
&
-/J
l"
o
o
Q
'.\
\J
o c
$...s
v
s\
1
I
l.r
\
\
a
.te
N
c\
al.-\J
h \
\,
\
$
{
A)
3
s
r)o z (n
{n c o
=o z
!m n
={
€
-!=t
6
(D
m 3g
LO l-..h E l<x f IHE 3 l9s 3 l;x s lmP o l^r h o t=il
=t-rcJ i5 6€1o-6P sg ct >l 1d hif I
!m
-l
<trq
1nz = ,-\ ,^
YF r
t lflfi
.n 1l
z=
2Z
z
trtrtr
o
z.i
-.1 c T=
A=
om zl -t^
;-r
-{c)o>
9."-lm vz >m
-r>
_r
-m
€z m
@ z
r
:.
:..
a'd o>'r-
r
-{
t-
'n
=z m r m
l-n t<l>IF lr
lF
I ld €z
o
:
2
l-
m
z
I
€z
o 'n
r-
!
m o
z o
I
3
i !
n
{o €z
-n
t-
m
i
I l{
t€
lz
ll t>
m o
z
Q -t
l
=
-
z
m l-
m
I
e.
z
{
m
I
.I
o 'n
m t)
{
I o
@
m x m 'o -{
z (-o
TD a
-.1 m
--l
m
;";E5d t .":ao
eSdPq
:;g ii
-o :.< e {
s: i 5.^s a; + di;
= q, o =f
Hb=c-
EFi.gg .i--iioro "P;r-c)ii =
oR oo^,U)x
PiaB=:,o p- = r'o*o;( o
^O*43 + *9 r,_g qd-3;a
9:{*6F sx;1.5
=
r-o o *
a"'li=cxsil8
w, a x'^
S,: =l: E*
il*'d=
sst$;
.3?oi='
iP-E: aR o"
in'9
=E
j
',F3asi
+3u a j
*":iqE o:xU,o=.,^ar-o
>a)z^
-{>
mC
Y trl
20 m'n
€z m ft
o
{
m r m
-m
-l
m RIP i=8 ';v
5
z (t)c r
z
z-ooo 9H 9*fi *=fioE P2 3 F nrF
=th2=
lrlr trtf l co@>3?83
fiqg;s 5-E i: e 3>
=(,
z m €
t---l m
o z
=z
m
i
m
-t
I
z
Oru-
222 m).4;n:lr;F io nlr :za)irQo 'o -< z ,n 2 2 ,I o 6 4 o< Sh ztt - i o6 o lrzz
€
x
t<
N
5
I
m
--l -o x z m
t-c
m
:,
(_l
:
z
z
F
q
T
2
z
m (t
rj
:.
l_l
i1'
rah
z'2l c)l
st z
vr, I
>l
tl
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ol -t
ml.
I
I
I
I
-
f
o
rl
il
il
il
I
I
I
i
I
:r'
$
I
I
I
I
I
-.{o {
t-
m n
=-11
m m
aJ't
c g)
m {
x
o
m
z
m
I
m 2
z
m
m €
m
m
--l
z
'Tl
m m
m
I
z 2 o
m t-m o i
A
z o
m
x
7
z
c)
!m
=
=
m n 3
=1l m m
u7
VALUATION
=m o
z
o
t-
=g z
m r
aT!o
=
@
r
z
| --.,
!m F
=z 9
lr
r^._i
'1t
i,,
o o z o {F c
C){
6 z T m n
={
d
@ m Is LO .LE lr: 3 IHE 3 l9n 3
l!= S lih T'tah o l<{f l-m=r-= 2 3:.o.<4e d8 nt c!>l 2^E
ii;
+m
{
TI 'I'Or-
z=
22 oo z
D&E ---
!DE
;flP oxF ti>
FE"r
z o
-l m
I
o o !
o .Tl
l,m !
-{{-o
@ m x m T -{
o z
C-o
@ o
-l m
0
-t m
I
\l
I
t\)
c c P H
Ft 'O
o
z,o
o 2:{c
8E d6 n
m t-m o -{u
C)
r
o
zC)-{m uz >m o:o --i >Or-n
o €z m
t_
@ z
=!T
lJ1
5
an
(D
@
o 5
UI
--t -
I
=F,--a
-z a
.r
f=
li
IF
lt-
lg
ti
lFo
{ t-.r mlo rl=
lo
II t>
lF
lm
16,)lz lo
t'
I
I
I
I
I
E l€
lz lo
l'n t<t>
lF
lr0 tm
lP lz
l-.{to
l€
lz to
l-rl t<t>
lF It tm
lF,lz
l-t to It
lz lo
l1r
t;
lF
lm p
I
=
U)
=T
IJ'
(D
@
-o
l-{lo l€
lz lo ll t>
lF II I|r|
le,lz
;
-0r o -3H3a
iiEi sEiS
=<R{o{Eit
;i*s
C') o:aJ
E' ='e
e oRE-
5ied
cFis
3aB=(o9+(',
ae4€*t o 1t d5=il
g; 31 (/,3l=
A)
o
o
-l-
=o
,J
(p c
o
(o
o o
o
o
o.
o
o
4
o
o t-
€
o
m
tn
9
x
m
m
:-{t-qre
t-
z.a
t-
o z.
2too0 363+F *i;P.PzB e 31E s ut2;
lt) -'
I I I Fl co@>3988
MegF I= A e-' 2_ll|
2 m €
|-
m
4
o z
o
=o z
t-
7 m
{
!m
!
o
l|
t-
=z
",l crj ci tl'o
(D
1 (o
'|';(o
(D
|'.
!m
z
I
I o z
-l
(b-{c *
N
2 o
TD
m -
Y ,<:g
tz
:
i
N
N r^{
}--
m z ln
t-
m
c)
=
=o z o 'n
€
v 7
C)o
In cf -
ct
5
o
-il
CL c
l(D
l-l€ti'ts
I
I (,a,d cf
o
c!
I]
m
O Or \)
-{I 6 x z m
F o
(,^,o
o
m
_+rl
-l ol
=l ol ol
utl (-tl
ol .tl
ol
=l o,l c)l (.rl .J.l <l
I
--to 1'2 az (Do
-to
8E t-tt0 tuz
@a 9r2 <o
Xrri
tn ::r o c
o-
q
(D
-o
c+
.D o
c+(D a
lg|N
l;ls"N
l*Nf
l{*lsPl 'lpi
-{q
l-T m n '?
n m m (t
c (tt
m
x
o t-m
z
a T
m !
g
-{
m L
z
m
m
o
u
!m ,m
=z 'n m ttl
m
z
t-
t
3
E z
m t-m o -{
o
t-
z
m
x
@
-o 2
!m
=t
'o
m u
=
=-n
m m
U)
VALUATION
!m 7
=-t
2 o
=m
z o
t-
|-
3
z
m t-m o -{7 o
t-
t!
=ffl
/=l ml !l
ol {ol ol zl {l ,l >l N
ege
\=99 l:tE -./odr =s.=
JE,=
=;il Iat-.o-f 'eq*
N)
O o o
N)
o o o
!o c
D c c +
+
(Jl o o
o o
N)o o
o o
o o
o o
Or o \J
O)('|
l\)
o
o
(o \
o o
s or
Or
(tl
o
.^t ,
'n
.f -o m r 1t
ll-!_t
PE.
_.-o U'=
xo
=.o ds.gd 'o
0)
o o tt
DT
o
D
o CA IqASO g-\a - bz
;
INSPECTION
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL PERMIT NUMBER OF FROJECT
DATE NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
CALLER
TUES
-.'--'
WED I THUR
-.-i--
,; l1c-)._) AM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
\$\.r\Ujry
-, PLUMBING:
D FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
,_ ROOF & SHEER - PLYWOOD NAILING O GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
tr
tr}.FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr FINAL D FINAL
,N.APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR'DATE
I
INSPECTION
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL .'lp LZrt,r 4-*JOB NAME
,'.'7 r"Kli;t*7 |DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
INSPECTIoN: rr/|or.r @eE)t67-- s z6
BUILDING:
ffroorrrucs / srEEL
PLUMBING:
O FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr_
GAS PIPING
NAIL POOL / H. TUB
tr FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANIGAL:
tr HEATING
C] ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr
a rffiat tr FINAL
PROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR
L--
,r#"toN REeuEsr
TOWN OF VAIL
ti DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
JOB NAME
INSPECTION:MON WED THUR (TI,;
CALLER
TUES ahM PM
t.' )
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr
tr
B
tr
tr
tr
ROUGH / WATER
GAS PIPING
POOL / H. TUB
FINAL
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
-I1
APPROVED (: '-'/' CORRECTIONS:
E DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
I ,,DATE.' JOBNAME
CALLER
INSPECTION: MON TUES WED THUR FRI READY FOR
LOCATION:
AM PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
T] ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH /WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr
tr
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING O GAS PIPING
O INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
n
O FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH D EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT D SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
O DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
NAME
INSPECTION:MON WED THUR FRI
CALLER
TUES //'t'7 ^M'@
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS
9(FOUNDATI
tr FRAMING
/ STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
oN/srEEL 4r:-/" s.di'',t t/.
o
D
tr
INSULATION tr GAS PIPING
SHEETROCK NAIL tr POOL / H. TUB
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
,.{,y,(FINAL
5veo
CORRECTIONS:
O DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIBED
oor= /2' 7-z .€'Z- rNsPEcroR
') t ? = a=
? + ii; ,
E- a = a a
= ai:= 2
"ic i ! i
.:-ia='
I2,= t =-. ='P 1z -r!;,a -
! I == :
=:: ts!;
=:iaa:
'J
= -. = =-!5j:1 :-?lX
t\
o'l
<t (\I
.o
=t-
(u
lJ-
c\l
|J-
=!
rd (u
E
G'
.?
ro (\l
+t
(1,
L o
ro
=o V,
@ r\
g
c U
(f)
cf)
<u
oa
C\I
2F
b5 c-
.EE
1=
.z al
(?)
I
G'
+,
(u E
tn o d,
c
U
f
x
(lJ
f
-:z !-
=I
E
z
^
.!-\rxa
::\-<>x
-27_r{s<
5lz
z"v )za
#,,:D isz
u-X r- Ll',] v -<..
H.Z zu^q *, -'i
l!<=
a< q4 ca 5=o or z Ir.t F- i-!\
*9=)-<-F<Y
vo,t<F!--,a--r- lL ><Z,-=S;:
?Er.r_q <:--F\J PF-Q { ,,. ' LrJ
iltc>
) r/t lJ A>ilz i r Yv Htt<_<x<x
lr-rre(X
FZU:ff;<E U:XH
-FYl +*g+i- i'l -\ F
F |--t f.P ,F :t rl{fr tt
-a+
C.
FR
EN
F rF
aQ-a rt ..-
H
-H
Ff
ffJ d F
rFr
€v
i.:Fr F
-?11 le
F\aa H FI :
et
*F F L.L.
sv
fH E
a.rFl a l-l .P rF.
fP tlt h e.
€
Iil.6r-
VICINITY MAP
SEOUOIA
x 8r'lo,g|l
NATIONAL
LOT ?5
^. --ll: :g.ll.
tat $.to rt_.". -- :"', i..,'..'.,,,.,
\._{_
rorto'?.'€ , 2135'
aFnnllcl rolo wEsl . YAIL.
-U,L"4kAeA----Crl.t .na |.<-.t*
"l 6:;;i;---------
A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 26, HIGHLAND MEADOWS F]LING NO. 2
EAGLE COUNTY ,
FLA*l rs cortrl5Et(x cEirlFl'2qr'
COLORADO
'.;';:jx.:'L'":;5jI'.:T;:'-:::i3-l'::,:" l':':;i:1"::'"::' -
thf ! rr^'l rf 'r' ao^^^-!. c- qr.Ja4'-\
a";J=;-;;;;;;;;';;:;'i::;;; " ----
c6u^rY o"'e t 'r C'lo/'d'
(5o'I
199 !t
a4haYtna!t caaltFtc^la
t' $1..1 J. l,.h^.., do h...by <..irty th.! t .. | ..!lrt'.ra L.^.t
3e.y.r- ll.-.,a !.ar thr l.{ oa rh. ar.tr.f cold.do, th.t thl.
,l.t l. . t?!.. cdr.ct .^r, .-rt.t.7l.t oa -a l..vlalvlrl4 ol lot
?a, Nllhl.^d n..ddrr Ftllnt N!. 2'. .r l.rd eir tl.tt.d, d.alc.t.d
..1 .hd n...t6. th.! .e€h al.t irr ..4. l.c. .^ .ccs..t. .v.v.Y. cl
..la tt.rrrt lt.. .^a !^df, .y .or..vt.t6 ..a ar...tlY the. th.
la.tl6..d al..nrl6t cl th. lot.. ....{^t..na.1...t..1 r.ld
.elalvlrl6.. tn...-.....t.rra ec6 ih. C.d^d t^ €o.plt.^<. -lth
.trlla.tl. r'lll.rl6. C.v..ntnO th. .vhdtvt.t6 oa l.nd.
l^ rrt^..1 ti""a I h.Yr ..t
---kr4?aba - - - - - - - - - -, ^.
D.,
--RN-sJ^
Fo..d ot cd^tt coi'l r.l6t.'
cow.ry or E.Cl.r Colo..do
ccattFlcrttoi oa D€orc^tlora arD q^4i9rlf
X^oi.ll ..n !y th.r. o"i.^ri tn.t 6r.... F.d...l 5.Yl.tt,.d lo.^
ar.drrtl6 ol o.nv.. h.l6o tol. r'. ln r- rl.tlt oa .!l thrt...l
rrop..tY rlt!.t.d In t.cl' co^rt' c6le.do. d..c'lt'd
Lot 2., hlonl.^t &.aF.t tlll^! tso. ?' '..ant^0 ...ed-a l^ rh. r.el, cd/^tr . colF.aot clF\ ..d
A.crd*r .6t.rnr.C O.a9Ot ..'.r,
l. th. $d...ron.r, !o h...iY !.ttlrY In.,\ th..ni,r-
ne. .ha t.y.!l r
etd.lt r....l.d'r..r!.t.4 tnli tl.(
..' "r --|----r--1111'
-..'#+?r*x'W_
CLGR( .ro kEco.ro€i't .. rtrr.^r, 3sotniS
lhl. tl.t t.r .lr'!L rd .r J:lI .'.14r t-'r'ltagb.^d l. .!rr r.<e
\)d5.soL9L
i\tl / {sl
.y h.nd .^a ...1 !l th. C@^tY or €
9r: a.d...r G.vlnC...4 Lo.{
l.rut.^.. Cdrt.t I d' "
-?'8:--i.s-l9zlf-9---
DRIVE
FOR E ST LAND
LOT ]O
I
;
Fu..v.nt t. ih. C.9t. Cou^tY L.^a U.. R.gul.tl06.r th' Dtt'<td.o' ..
C.ol. c@^lv co..u^ltv o.vtlDt.r^t h..'bt .PPlov.i thr. lrn'r al't lh'
-12*, t.v ot -DEXFITBE-e--------. r.0., rt.t-.
f."".,,.,- *"r,,.' i:L:il---.|.lln... .t h.6a .^(, ...1.
arart c cd-o6aoo,
c€irlalcalc oF rerEl t4lD
i"lii: ::;n::l ol'1ll'jiu,*,^,-, .,*, o.
LOT 26 0ElN6 N a6''9'!5 w'
: :,';i#1'$';:i, .^iollo'llJ,l3i^ o"'"'
' ?"*,'t"*#,::::;'"iTl]loi
rs :tPpeox rkat I
rt(t
at.r.'t litl. G!.,..ty C$p.nt a..r h.r.!y...tlty tn.t lt h.. .i.-l^t(t th. lltl. to.tl l.adr .ho{ u''r th!. ?t.t ... tn.r lltl. t. ru.tr l.^ar r. "!t.a In ,.r. .^a .1..r .r .ll ll.n.. t.'.r.nd..<!.!z.Err'.r..rl .. Iol IF.:.r-J-Lt!-r.ul-r.ir-4r:!_Jr:i---.tr-f.r:!-J,-:-----,-.-!.:.--
.1--.i-A:i-J-f ----'- -','t-'Lar^-L-S,i'--,Lljl|j--':----!-;:,t\-!-:--ii-:'-----aLr{t-ra---.2--;):i..irj!.&lr-.rri!:..--r:{-,{r--J--'.;:.t-lo'--t-1-:-Lai.-r1'tri--t--J--r!!-t-t-
It.-..t lltl. or,...ntr Co...^t
.rt _-_--::-i'.:i----l, brr...4 rtta
,,0!
,rrt'9l}]PARCEL C
td
\-'
(- / LOT 26
\ r'
o "o'^c
Taz.otioo'I outleq€ a vrrlrrr crttlt{t
- !--\ \ --'-'1 _--) \\ \ i '.[ \!:---'-. i i\--^.' *'t.r PABCEL a
1 L..i o.ort)
^c.I I \ '---.-- I ,..'.t,- i \ eanceu e\ -- i I o or.! ^c. A V--tt-----2'
.r^r. * \fi*hu,r*6n-,
"o^,, o' 1lg16i-----1"'
ri! rs.eolng tn;(.u-6t -.. ..rn6'l.6e,d b.tr. .' \ft'
-f:>:2.e-L -*:!J\--- -' ^'o', 116l, bY r'ntt 'c'eur' " 'J{.r J-t,6;;.i a,vr^o. .^. L.r^ lnri/.^<. co.p*.tldt ,r x'
al]... a.<t...1 E.vt^e! rhd L..^ A..4i.tl6 or odw*'
i
lr
f iliiiiiii;:li:ill,:'=,,iiiiin'*:il'lf ii'iiilfr
..r.(rl..tlo. .hd h't'd' I I
I
cotoh^Do sro !r I
-
-l
I
a
..t
l
I
I
.J
l
't
J
l
l
l
.I
l
l
l
l
J
l
l
Inter-lf ountrla En ginecring ua.
BOX r.ro. C-lm
A\ON, CO 81620
949-97 2 DE|.I\/€R 89$'l 53 |
SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
FOR
PROPOSED DUPLEX
LOT 26, HIGHLAND NEADOWS FILING NO.
vAIL, C0L0RAD0
PREPARED FOR:
ROBIII ROBERTS
PROJECT NUI,IBER V-2036G
1420 VANCE SMEET
tAKEIIDOD, @8@15
Phone: 232{158
Yt"'r'f I L'
i
JULY 1982
I
J
1
l
J
l
I I
l
l
l
l
I
l
l
l
l
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONCLUS IONS
SCOPE 1
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1
SITE INVESTIGATION 2
SUBSURFACE AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS 2
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 3
FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 3
SLAB. CONSTRUCTION 4
REINFORCING 5
BACKFILL AND SURFACE DRAINAGE
LAl^lN IRRIGATION
MISCELLANEOUS
TEST PIT LOCATION
SUI4MARY OF TEST PIT
St,lELL.CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
PERIPHERAL DRAIN SYSTEM DETAILS
5
7
7
Drawi ng No. 1
F'igures No. I & 2
Figure No. 3
Figure No. 4
l,
l
l
I
1
l
I
I
l
l
l
-'
I )
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
"1
I
l
I
CONCLUS I ONS
1. Subsoil conditions are fairly uniform over the site with I to 2 feet of topsoil
underlain by soft to firm sandy clay.
2. The proposed duplex should be founded
on conventi onal spread footi ngs desi gned for a maximum soil bearing pressure of
1500 psf.
3. The resul ts of our i nvesti gati on i ndi cate no major soi I s-rel ated hazards wi I I prevent devel opment of thi s s i te.
SCOPE
This report presents the results of a Soils and Foundation
.Investigation for the proposed duplex located in Highland
Meadows Filing No. 2, Vail n Colorado. The investigation was
prepared by means of test pits and 'laboratory testing of
samp'l es obtained from these test pits.
This investigation prisents a description of surface
and subsurface condjtions encountered at the site, recommended
foundation systems, allowable design pressures, and groundwater
conditions as wel I as desi gn and construction cri teria influenced
by the subsoi I s.
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site is Iocated south of Sequoia Drive on Lot 26,
Highland Meadows Fi'ling No. 2, Vail, Colorado.
The site slopes at approximately 28|l to the north, and
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
'-t
-ll
-lr
ll
l
l
l
SITE L0CATI0N AND DESCRIPTI0N - continued
is covered by aspen trees and native underbrush.
SITE INVESTIGATION
The field investigation performed on June 17, 1982, con-
sisted of excavating, logging, and sampling two test pits.
The locations of the test pits are shown on Drawing No. 1.
Summaries of the test pit logs are detai'ted on Figures No. I
and 2. A summary of the test results is shown on Figure No. 3.
The test pits were excavated with a conventional backhoe.
Laboratory samples were obtained by driving a standard thin-
wal I ed sampl er i nto undi sturbed soi I s .
SUBSURFACE AND GROUNDt^lATER CONDITIONS
Refer to the summary of test pits, F'igures No. l and 2.
Subsurface conditions are fairly uniform over the si,te. 0ne
to two feet of topsoi'l is underlaid by sandy clay mixed with
various amounts of gravel and cobbles. Bedrock is this area
is believed to be as much as 100 feet below the existing ground __
surface.
. llo groundwater was encountered in -any of the test pits
at the time of excdvation.
Based on a visual inspection of the site, the soils should
not provide any slope stability problem.
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
l
I
l
I
I
I
tl
I
l
l
-t
_lI
I
l
il
-ll
l
l
PROPOSEt) CONSTRUCTION
di
be
of
inc
and
l.le understand that the proposed duplex
ilizing wood-frame
wi I'l cons i st of
type of constructj
ere will not be a basement area If the proposed project
ffers significantly from this understandjrg, d revJew shouJd
made after the plans are more complete.
Various foundation types have been considered for support
the proposed structure. The foundation types considered
luded conventional spread and continuous wa'l 'l footings'
dr.il'led p'iers (caissons).
on
FOU NDATION RECOMI'lT NDATI ONS
very low to non-consotidating sandy clay wi 1l be encountered
in the excavation. The proposed duplex should be founded
on conventional type spread footings designed for a maximum
."
soil bearing pressure of 1500 psf (dead load plus one-half
live load). At this pressure' foundation settlements will
be tolerable. It would be advisab'le to proportion footings
so as to minimize differential sett'l ements. The bottom of
the footing should be placed a minimum of 48 inches below
final grade for frost protection. A drain system should be
i ns tal I ed around the foundati on as detai I ed on Fi gure No. 4.
l|lhen free moisture and/or water is encountered, the footing
concrete shou'l d be
, -*-i-._.
d ri ch ml x and have a 'low sl
|--:-- --'
...---.-1
,-TLi The concen-
the si te tration of water soluble sulphates in the soils at
l
l
l
I
I
'l
J
1
I
l
l
l
l
l
l
-1,I
l
l
l
l
l
{-t .l
l
,]
I il
FOUNDATI0N REC0MMENDATI0NS - continued
is relatively low. Therefore, it is recommended that Type 1
cement may be utilized for all concrete exposed to the soils.'
l^lhen allowed to dry, some of the foundation soils exhibit
a moderate consolidating potential. It is therefore recommended
that the foundation excavations not be allowed to remain open
for long periods of time to allow drying of the soils below
their in-situ moisture contents.
An i nspecti on of the excavation, pri or to pl aci ng concrete,
should be made by a representative of Inter-Mountain Engineering,
Ltd., ts-+epify-.tha-t the soi'l conditions encountered in the
test pits are uniform throughout the site
SLAB CONSTRUCTION
The upper natura'l soils will provide adequate support
for slab-on-grade construction. A ccmpacted pad of granular,
non-expansive soils wlll a'l so provide adequate support for
slab-on-grade construction. If clean, granular soi'l s are
imported to be used as select fill no problem wjth capillary
rjse of moisture yJlJl occur. However, if the select fill
contains some clays or fine materials there is always the
possibility of capillary rise of moisture.
l.le suggest that the plans and specifications be prepared
with a specified minimum of 4 inches of clean, washed gravel
Jmmediately under the floor slabs. The purpose of this clean,
i
_l
l
I
I
l
1
rJ
I J.
I
".1 't
I ,1
1-
,t
J,,
ti t;
I rl.-,-
.:t
I
,_l
:-l
i:l
t'-l ril
l:l
,.:l
i :'-l il
'1"
tr'rl
SLAB C0NSTRUCTI0N - continued
washed materia'l is to break capil'l ary rise of moisture to
avoid prob'lems with bonding of asphalt tj'les to floor slabs
and other problems associated with minor amounts of moisture.
l,le suggest densifying the surface of fill or natural
soils with a vjbratory type compactor imnediately prior to
pl acement of floor s'l abs. Sl abs shoul d be constructed i n accor-
dance with ACI recommendations to minimize the risk of shrinkage
problems. Slabs should be scored into maxjmum 200 square
foot areas to localize and control any cracking.
REINFORCING
Foundati on wa lls and grade beams shoul d be wel I -rei nforced
to as to mininize the effects of diffenential movements
Refer to foundation designs for reinforcing detai ls.
Foundation walls should be des'i gned to resist a lateral
earth pressure of 45 pcf equivalent fluid pressure.
BACKFILL AND SURFACE DRAINAGE
The potentially conso'l idating foundation soils encountered
in portions of the site shoulC be prevented from being wetted
after construction, General ly, this can be accomplished by
i nsuri ng that the backfi I I p'laced around the foundati on wal I s
will not settle after completion of construction and that the
'6
BACKFILL AND SURFACE DRAINAGE .- continued
backfill material is relatively impervious. During the back-
filling operations, the addition of water to the backfill soils
should be only enough so as to increase the moisture content
to optimum levels to aid in obtaining proper compact'ion.
Backfi'll should be compacted to at leastffi.$a
Proctor Density as determined by ASTM Standard Test D-698.
In lieu of compaction, a berm may be added around foundation
to al low for settl ement of the backfi I I soi I s.
The on-site soils are acceptab'le as backfil I materials.
Proctor density as determined by ASTM D-698 is I14.1 pcf at
13.6 percent moisture content.
Surface water running toward the structure from upslope
areas should be diverted around and away from the building
by means of drai nage swa'l es or other 's imi I ar measures.
The final grade should have a positive slope away from
the foundation wal'ls on al'l sides. A minimum of l2 inches
in the first ten feet is recommended. Downspouts and sill
cocks should discharge into splash blocks that extend b"{.gti{
the limits of the backfill. Splash b'locks should slope from
the foundation walls. The use of long downspout extensions
in place of splash blocks is advisable.
-i
t
LAWN I RRI GATION
Do not install sprinkler systems
porches or patio slabs. If sprinkler
the sprinkler heads should be placed
next to foundation wal
systems are installed,
so that the spray from
1s'
the heads, under fu I I pressure, does not f{f__.!v'ljl!l__Ljiyc
feet of foundation wa'lls, porches or patio slabs Lawn i rri -
i
I
r.-i
I
_l
'l
_l
1
I
_t
'l
_t
I .-t
r-l
"_t
'-t
I
_t
I _-l
--l
I -_l
'1
._t
.:l
.:l
I
::l
.:l
-l
-l
-l
I
l -l
I
I -l
I
I I J
If the future ovtners desire to plant next to foundation
walls, porches or patio slabs, and are willing to assume the
risk of structural damage, etc., then it is advisable to plant
only flowers and shrubbery (no lawn) of varieties that require
very'l ittle moisture. These flowers and shrubs should be
hand-watered only.
MISCELLANEOUS
Some of the soils at the site are potentially consolidating
and the future owners should be cautioned that there is some
risk of future damage. The future owners are directed to
those items covered under BACKFILL AND SURFACE DRAIIIAGE and
LAtrN IRRIGATI0N. 0ur experience has shown that damage due
to swelling or consolidating soils usually resu'l ts from satu-
rat{on of the foundation soi'l s caused by improper dralnage,
excessive irrigation, and poorly consolidated backfills.
The elimination of the potential sources of excessive water
will greatly minimize the risks of construction of this site.
gation must be
8
MISCELLANE0US - conti nued
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of
Robin Roberts for the specific app'lication to the proposed
duplex located on Lot 26, Highland Meadows Filing No. 2, Vail,
Col orado
The fi ndi ngs
been obtained in
practices in the
Mechanics. There
impl ied.
and recommendations of thi s report, have
accordance with accepted professional engineeri ng
field of Foundatfon Engineering and Soi I
is no other warranty, either express or
Si ncerely,
INTER-MOUNTAIN ENGINEERING, LTD.
t-
I
-- - a/t ' /^-t{) tt I f t A I /a/l ( 11 t'Lrz4'g*-,
i ewe
G.
Fi
Thoma s
el d Engi
Allen
neer
ed By:
, P.
Engi
2-
E.
neer
ffi;,iil"s
ffiil-1$
Reine
Soils
I
Tos/ Pi* Loaa*)on
Proroo-sed Due/ax Ldl 2G 2':",Zrr1 8#se? /ins /'b'
Jq: Eabin Eatu4e
PRoJECT No. V.AO3B-o
Dnrwr Bi, Lm.h. I Scalg, t",4O' I oare, ?- ?-d?DRAWING No. I
t-.
l:
t-i'
I
l.
t-
I"
t.
I"
t
I
t..
I.
I
t
1..
TEST PIT N0.
DATE OR I LLED:
E LE VATION:
OEPIH
IN FE ET :r,(""f,' .""-.t/DESCRIFTION MATCRIAL REMAFRS
0
*Liquid Limit 20;Plastic Limit 18
SUMI'IAP.Y OF TEST PIT
PRC'POSED DUPLTX
LOT 26, HIGHLAND MEADOWS FILING NO. 2
VAIL, COLORADO
FOR ROBIN ROBERTS fRoJEst No.; V-2036G
FlGunE tao.: 1
. DATE DR ILLED;
TEST PIT IIO. 2
E LE VATION:
,**r'M, ",*^,,"t,otroFMArERIAL 6
SUI.IMARY OF TEST .PIT
PROPOSED DUPLEX
HIGHLAND MEADO}JS FILING
VAIL, C0L0RAD0
FOR ROBIN ROBERTS
N0.26,LOT
PRorEct No-: V-2036ti
FfGUFE NO.: 2
t
J J
UJ
=.D
z o
F
o f o u,z o (J
o.l
SAMPLE OF ClaY'
(xsFl r0 r00
NAT. MOISTURE CONTENT i5.6 T
NAT. DRY DENSITY I04.2
s
)J u,3 (t)
I
z o
t-
I
J o u)z o (J
BORING NO.
DEPTH
0.r
SAMPLE OF
LOAD (KSF) lO
NAT, MOISTURE CONTENT
100
NAT. DRY DENSITY -.Fef
SIryELL _ CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
PROPOSED DUPLEX
HIGHLAND HEADOWS FILING
VAIL, COLORADO
FOR ROBIN ROBERTS
LoT 26,N0.
FFojtcl ro v-2036G
F rGuR E i{O 3
Foundation Wall
:/
'..PoI yethe l ene llcisture -Barri e
,glued to foundatlon wall __-
Backf i ll nroistened
and well compacted
#15 Felt
Paper
Mln lmum of 6rr of
l/4 Inch gravel
er Perforated Pi pe
Sloped a minimun ot O.?51 to sewer lateral subd ra i n,
sump pump. or dayllghted
l.:
f-
:
I o
- ttt
DETA I LS OF PER IPHERAL DRA II'I SYSTEI,I
FOR FOOTING TYPE FOUNDATION
FIGURE 4
FOX & ASSiOCTATES OF COLORADO. tNC.
CONSULTING ENOINEERS AND GEOI-OGISTS
I DENVEFI OFFICE 4765 INDEPENDENCE STREET
' u5":1'rll39'? "LoRADo
8oo33
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
PHASE I GEOTTCHNICAL STUDY
LOTS 3 ANO 26
HIGHLAND MEAOO!.IS FILING NO. 2
l.lEST VAIL, COLORADO
Prepared For
Mr. Richard Bullwinkle, Jr.
I
I
A Fox coMPANY
Job No. 1-1101-6086
July 16, 1984
l.'
I
I
I
FOX & ASSOCIA"ES OF COLOFADO, rNC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
DENVER OFFICE 4765 INDEPENDENCE STREET
WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80033
(303) 424-5578
I
t Subject; Phase I Geotechnical Study, Lots 3
No. 2, West Vai1, Colorado
l'1r. Richard 8ul lwinkle Jr.
3484 Interfirst One
Dal.l as, Texas 75202
FOx & ASSOCIATES 0F C0L0RAD0, INC.
July 16, 1984
Job No. 1-I101-6086
and 26, Highland Meadows Filing
Rev
t Reference: Fox and Associates of Colorado, Inc., t.lork 0rder Confirmation r and Letter Contract for Job No. i-1101-'0086, Dateo Apri l 18, 1984
Dear Mr. Bullwinkle:
Fox and Associates of colorado, lnc. has completed the phase I study of Lots 3 ano 26 in Highland Meadows Filing No. 2, tJest vai1, colorado. Ttris stuoy was undertaken at the request of Mr. Ray Petros of Kirkland and Ellis on two
essential 1y complete duplex structures. The purpose was to perform a pre-'l iminary evaluation of the two lots with regard to geotechnical factors, in particular the requirements of Town of Vail 0rOinance 29.
In addjtion to the preliminary evaluation, a proposed scope of services for a Phase IJ .st.uoy was developed. The purpose of the second inase is to supple-
rynt t!-e injtjal phase with field and laboratory test data Lo satisfy 0roihince 29. If the field and laboratory results confirm the assumptions o1 the pre-liminary ass_essment, it is anticipated that a certjfjcate of occupancy can oe obtained. There is, however, no guarantee that the addit'i onal data-w.i ll be favorable.
Briefly, the results of this_ study inclicate: (1) the structures are performing
adequately with respect to foundations and retaining structures" and no strucl tural distress has been observed; (2) proper drainage of retaining structures has been employed in the design drawings; (3) ninoi surface dra.iiage details shouJd be corrected before complet.ion of construct ion; (4) reg.i oinal slope stabjlity can-only be addressed on a preliminary basis at this time,- however, we believe Lot 26 has a good to excellent chance of be'i ng safe, and Lot 3 his a
I..il tg- -good chance;. and (5) the scope of a phase II sludy has been developed that will permit individual study of either or both lots it a reasonable cost.
}{e are avai'lable to discuss the results of Phase I and plan the Phase II study at your convenience. Please call when ere may be of further service.
e/--Ronald F. Holcombe,
Senior Geotechnical
RFH/ds
P.E.
Engi neer
Donald R.
Pr i nc ipal
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
t
Q^,u?,az*/^
Nlff%
4;*mK A FOX COMPANY
Geotechni cal Engi neer
1,,
I
I
t
t
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
INTRODUCTI ON
SITE INSPECTIONS
Lot 3
Lot 26
GEOLOGY
Bedrock Geology
Surf icial Deposits and Geomorphology
Hydro I ogy
Geologic Hazards
REGIONAL SLOPE STABILITY
LOCAL SLOPE STABILITY
FOUNDATIONS
RETAINING I.IALLS
Lot 3
Lot 26
UNDERDRAINS
FLOOR SLABS
IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES
ADDITIONAL STUDY
Scope of Services
Cooperation with 0ther Property Owners
L IMI TATIONS
P age ii
I
2
I
3
4
4
5
1
7
9
Lt
12
13
13
13
13
L4
L4
14
15
15
l5
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
iNTRODUCTION
This study was performed for two essentially complete duplex units in
the Highland Meadows Filing 2 subdivision in tiest Vail, Colorado. The units
are'f ocated on Lots 3 and 26. Lot 3 is located to the north of Vermont Road
in the northwest portion of the filing. Lot 26 is located to the south of
Sequoja Drive near the cul-de-sac.
Although building permits had been issued for these properties (August
of 1982), the Town of Vail has declined to issure certificates of occupancy
untj I a detai led geotechni cal study, as requi red by 0rdi nance 29, has been
submitted. Previous studies by Inter-Mountain Engineering, prepared prior
to passage of the ordinance did not contain sufficient detail.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the properties by: (1)
using experience ga'ined during previous studies in Highland Meadows by Fox
and Associates of Colorado, lnc. and other consultants; (2) making a sjte-
specific geologic reconnaissance and literature review; (3) reviewing per-
tinent legal documents and construction p1 ans; (4) performing preliminary
slope stabi lity analyses us'i ng assumed parameters; (5) develop preliminary
conclusions and recommendations concerning the suitability of the development,
0rdinance 29 requirements and additional studjes as indicated.
This study is considered a Phase I investigation and is based on)y on the
ex'i sting data available. A Phase lI study, if initiated, would include test
borings and Iaboratory testing of recovered samp'l es. The conbination of the two
studjes would satisfy the Ordinance 29 requirement for a detailed geotechnica'l
study. Should the Phase II study indicate the need for special or costly
measures to mitigate potential geologic/geotechnical hazards, a Phase III study
would be initiated to provide design criteria for these measures.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
T
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
SITE INSPECTIONS
Site inspections were conclucted on both lots by a geotechnical
and an eng'ineering geologist to obesrve the site conditions of the
lots, roads, surrounding terrain, and the existing structures. Thjs
to help in assessing the performance of the existing foundations,
walls and pavements/roadways and to search for visual evidence of
geologic or geotechnical hazards.
Lot 3
engi neer
specif ic
was done
retaining
potent i a1
The structure on Lot 3 is a two story building with a fjnished basement.
Due to the slope of the.lot, it has daylight windows facing north. The south
wall and portions of the east and west walls of the basement act as foundation
or retaining walls. The building is stepped down to the north to conform to
the terrain, Consequently, it has only a partial basement. The maximum cut
into the slope is about five feet. Another retaining wall is present adjacent
to Vermont Road and is about six feet h'igh.
Vegetation is non-existent on the southern half of the lot, presumably
due t0 construction of the structure, Vermont Road and related utilities.
The northern half has severai relatively straight evergreens with minor bends
and curves in some suggesting past movement of surficial soils. The presence of
the evergreens, whose root systems are typical ly deep, indicates in a very
general sense that the slope has been re'l atively stable for some time.
Inspection of the interior of the structure revea'led no distress exceot
for small cracks in the drywall where the timber roof beams join the side
walls. Inspection of the beams indicates they are twisted, and the cracks appear
to be a direct result. No other cracks were observed in the drywalI or other
trim or structural members. Typically, drywall will reflect cracks from
-2-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
relatively minor, even acceptable foundation movements.
cracks suggests the foundation system is performing we1l.
Some locations on the outsjde of the building were noted that may pond
water following rain or snowmelt, in particular, the driveway, entrance and
garage areas to the south of the building. These areas should be identified
duri ng final detajling and corrected.
Lot 26
The building on Lot 26 is a three level duplex. The first, or lowest
level, is partial 1y underground and is present under only the northwest corner
of the building. The foundation is stepped down to the north to conform to
the terrain. A partially completed timber cri b wal'l is located to the south
and east. It appears most of the timbers are in place, but backfi1Iing is not
complete. It js not known'i f the gravel drain is in p1ace.
The only distress to this struture that was observed was heaving and
cracking of portions of the garage floor slab. Garage doors viere not in place
during the winter so it is concluded that the distress is a resu.lt of frost
heave. The siltier portions of the colluvjal subsojls have a high frost heave
potent i a1 .
Significant problems with the roadway cut slopes (south side of Sequoia
[)rive) v'lere observed. A major slope failure was noted on the roadway cut slope
on Lot 30 to the east. A smaller, but simi lar slope failure was noted in the
cul-de-sac slope to the west of the building near the common property line with
Lot 25.
A tension crack rvas observed in the asphalt in Sequoia Drive. The crack
is roughly paral 1e1 to Sequoia Drive and is located about 1/3 of the way in from
the northern edge of the asphalt. The cracks seems to coincide with sanitary
sewer or water main trenches. It may suggest initial movement of the roadway
The absence of such
-3-
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
fill slope (to the north), however, there is no other visual evidence of sljd-
ing. The ground surface to the north is steeper than the surrounding terrain
and the trees in this area are highly distorted, suggesting previous movements.
GEOLOGY
Geologic Setting
The geologic setting of the subject area is complex, with many different
geologic processes controlling the present site conditions. These processes
include: mari ne and non-marine deposition, uplift, faulting, folding, glaci a-
tion, glacial deposition, mass wasting, and erosion processes.
The geologic 'i nvestigation included research of published Iiterature,
field reconnaisance of the area surrounding the subject lots, our previous
experience in this and similar areas, and an on-site geologic inspection.
Bedrock Geology
Outcrops of bedrock were not observed within the boundaries of the lots.
The bedrock unjt immediately underlying the study area is the Minturn Formation,
composed of grit' sandstone, conglornerate and shale with mjnor dolomite/lime-
stone beds.
The estimated thickness of the Minturn Formation beneath the site'i s
approximately 3000 feet. underlying the Minturn in the study area is the
Pennsylvanian Belden Formatjon of similar composition, and a sequence of early
Paleozo'i c sedimentary rocks overlying Precambrian crystalline rocks composed
of granites, gneisses, and schists.
The subject parcel overlies clastic Units D and E of the Minturn, approx-
imately in the middle of the formation. These bedrock units are composed
of interbedded and interlensed coarse, poorly sorted micaceous quartzose arkosic
sandstones and conglomerates with micaceous siltstones and shales. The sand-
-4-
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
!
stones and conglomerates are friable to firmly cemented (carbonate) and weather
to light brown or gray.
The Minturn Formation dips at approximately 15 degrees to the north north-
east in the vicinity of Highland Meadows. The site is located on the western
flank of the VaiI Syncline. The Vai1 Syncline js a relatively shallow north
trending syncline, which plunges toward the center from its northern and south-
ern axial extent. The structure is exposed along the sides of the Gore Creek
Va1 ley as jt transects the val1ey at Vail. The western flank of the syncline
is the homoclinal eastern flank of the Sawatch Anticline of the Sawatch mountain
range.
No bedrock faults have been mapped beneath the site by the U.S. Geologic
Survey, although, at least two east-west trendi ng normal fau'lts have been
mapped by Tweto jn the bedrock units to the west of Highland Meadows, Filing 2.
Tweto suggest that these faults originated in Precambrian time and were last
active in Laramide time; the last mountain building tectonic period that formed
the present Rocky Mountains.
Fracturing within the bedrock mass appears to be both paral 1e1 to and
at high angles to the bedding. The bedding plane fractures are probably caused
by overburden pressure release from glacial and erosional processes and possibly
structural extension associated with local faulting. High angle fractures
withjn the sandstone are rough and open, and within the shale are smooth and
often filled with carbonate cement. The high angle fractures are probably
caused by structural release associated with 1oca1 faulting.
Surf icial Deposits and Geomorphology
Surficial deposition on-site can be l inked to a seri es of geomorphic
processes including glaciation, slope failure, alluvial ancl gravity sheet-
wash colluvial processes and the ongoing weathering and erosional processes.
-5-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
t
t
I
At least two glacial stades affected the area during the Pleistocene Epoch; the
first, known as the Pre-Bu.l .l Lake age and the second, the Bull Lake glacial age.
The blankets of glacial debris high on the Gore Creek Valley walls, above Bul.l
Lake deposits, suggest the Pre-Bull Lake glaciation was more extensjve than the
recent glacial period. This glacial stade probably eroded a large',U,'shaped
val1ey at Vail. The first stade of the Bull Lake glacial age deposited a latera.l
moraine at the present site. Lot 3 of Highland Meadows Filing 2 is situated on
that moraine. samples recovered from exploration holes suggest that mor-
ainal deposition was as high as 200 feet above the present val1ey floor. Bull
Lake glacial till is a mixture of large igneous, metamorphic and sedimen-
tary boulders within a matrix of clayey sands and gravels. Deposits are poor'ly
sorted, medium dense to dense and moist to wet. 0ngoing erosion from subse-
quent less significant glacial stacles have removed much of this lateral moraine
within the val ley.
After the Bull Lake age glacial erosion and deposition, ev'i dence suggests
that a.l andslide occurred wjthin the overburden above the site due to glacial
oversteepening of the valley. This slide deposited materiai on the present site
and probably northward into the Gore Creek va1 ley. The subject site'is entirely
underlain by this landsl jde complex as mapped by Tweto (1917). This sl ide
deposit includes very sandy, silty clays and clayey sands with scattered gravels
and a few cobbles and boulders. Deposits of clean to slightly silty and clayey
sands and gravels with cobbles suggest that Gore creek or a tributary may
have crossed the subiect parcel. As Gore Creek meandered across the valley,
it downcut through the slide mass to its present location. This downcutting
preserved a portion of the glacial deposit and the overlying slide mass which
js the Highland Meadows, Filing l terrance observed today. Lot 3 of Filing
-6-
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
t
2 lies on the east edge of the steep
deposition appears to have added little
Hydrology
terrace. Recent col luvi al and all uvi al
to the present terrace.
No surface seeps were noted duri ng the site inspection on either of the
subject lots, nor are any mapped on Lot 26 by previous investigators. The
possible seep noted on the northwest corner of Lot 3 by Lincoln-Devore in
their 1982 report was not observed.
Geologic Hazards
Bedrock dips gently to the northeast and the ground slope is to the north-
east. There are relatively weak shale beds within the rock with many fractures
parallel and perpendicular to the bedding planes. These conditions tend to
weaken the overall rock mass although the reduction in strength is not con-
sidered significant enough to allow for massive slope failure within the bedrock
units. Solution cavities, karst topography and re.l ated surface subsiclence are
often associated with carbonate rocks similar to those within the M'i nturn Forma-
tion. No evidence of these features was found during ouli nvestigation, although
the potential for their existence is possible based on our experience in the
are a.
Subsoils on the lots consist of three basic aroups: Glacial tilI, com-
posed of boulders and cobbles in a matrix of gravel, sand and clay (unified
soil classification GP/Ghl/Gc); Slide mass, comprised of sand-clay w.i th gravels
(cL/sc); and Alluvium, comprised of sand and gravel with cobbles and some clay
(sM/l'lL). The glacial tiI1 generally occurs at a depth below the surface of
greather than Z0 feet.
Present hydrologic conditions across much of the site present important
contraints to development. These conditions include seasonal'ly high ground
tvater.
-7-
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
There were no active faults identified on oli n close proximity to the
sjte. The site lies w'ithin the northern Rjo Grande Rift subprovince which
suggests a maximum credible earthquake magnitude of 6 to 7 on the Modified
Merca'l li Scale; this correlates to a seismic acceleration of approximately
0.07 times the acceleration of gravity (0.07S).
The most obvious geologic hazard associated with the Highland Meadows
Terrace js the stability of the steeper slopes. The strength of the surficial
deposits avaiIable for resisting failure is relatively sma1l, part'icu1ar1y
when saturatecl . The shear strength of the underlying glacial til1 is signifi-
cantly more than the surficial deposits although the possibi lity of failure
still exists. The strength and orientation of the bedrock units appear to
present only a very minor hazard.
Solifluction is the slow downward movement of fine grained surficial
soils due to the loss of shear strength resulting from excess pore water pres-
sure cluring seasonal freeze and thaw. No evidence of solifluction was observed
during our field investigation on the lots although it has been proposed by
others in previous investigations that the potential for solifluction exists on
site. Solifluction is not considered a significant hazard once proper surface
and subsurface drajnage is implemented. There is a potential hazard for
developecl properties adjacent to uncleveloped properties which are not proper'ly
dr ai ned .
Although an economic mineral evaluation was outside the scope of this
investigation, no economic mineral deposits were observed on site nor are
any anticipated at depth. No evidence of previous mining was observed on
the site ancl consequently, no subsidence hazard due to underground mine workings
is thought to exist.
-8-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
REGIONAL SLOPE STABILITY
It is our opinion that regional slope stability is the primary concern
for safe construction in the west Vail area. This is based on several factors:
(1) ttre catastrophic nature of a failure, should one occur; (2) regional slope
problems are not readily mitigated even at great expense; (3) problems would not
necessarily be confined to an individual lot; and (4) the relative safety of
regional slopes is very difficult to predict. Our previous studies in this area
concluded that the combination of steepness of slope, subsurface stratigraphy,
particulariy the depth to bedrock and the shear strength of the colluvium are
the most significant factors determining the relative safety of the slope.
Slope topography and subsurface stratigraphy can be determined reasonably
accurately; however, subsoil shear strength is very difficult to cletermine
accurately ancl may vary consideraly over the study area. The presence in
the colluvial deposits of rock fragments makes sanpling and laboratory testing
almost impossible. As a result, successful sampling and testing is typical ly
performed on the lower strength soils whjch contain the least rock. Analyses
based on such data would tend to be conservative.
One approach to solving this dilemma is to assume a range of shear strength
parameters that could reasonably be expected and compute the safety of the
slope, which is termed: Factor of Safety. Then, based on geologic interpreta-
tion and experience, an assessment is made as to the likel'i hood of the average
shear strength being sufficjent for the slope to be considered',safe', (see the
cliscussion on RISK in the appendix).
The first part af this type of analytical approach has been performed
and the results are summarized in Table 1. The range of shear strength para-
meters used was based on the lowest previously reported values (cohesion = 750
psf, internal friction = 0 degrees) up to values that would give a factor
-9-
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
750
1000
1250
0
200
200
of safety of at least 2.0. The final design shear strengths should be based
on additional field and/or laboratory testing, and engineering judgement.
The minimimum factor of safety considered to give a',safe" slope condition
should then be selected based on the amount and consistency of test data, taking
into account subjective factors such as property value, risk to human life, etc.
Typical 1y, minimum facators of safety wi1l range from 1.5 for slopes with re-
latively consistent subsoil shear strength and adequate data, to 2.0 for slopes
with highly variable subsoil shear strength and/or insufficient data.
Inspection of Table 1 indicates that for Lot 3, a reasonably safe slope
condition would exist for all the tabulated shear strengths except for the mini-
mum. For Lot 26, Table I indicates an even more favorable condition. Based on
the results in Table 1 and our experience with other projects in lllest Vai1, we
estimate the chances further investigation will indicate safe slopes are fair to
good for Lot 3 and good to excellent for Lot 26. The possibility does exist,
however, that further investigation may indicate worse conditions than we
anticipate at this time.
TABLE 1 - COMPUTED FACTORS OF SAFETY FOR REGIONAL SLOPE ANALYSES
Lot 3
Assumed Shear Strength Parameters
Cohes'ion, psf Internal Frictjon, degrees
Computed Factor
of Safety
I .32
L.7 5
2.L9
1.59
1.92
2.04
I
I
I
0
36
34
36
-10-
I
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
t
I
I
I
0
0
36
34
36
Lot 26
Assumed Shear Strength Parameters
Cohesion, psf Internal , Friction, dsgrees
Computed Factor
of Safety
1 .59
2.t2
2.32
2.87
3 .05
undrained shear strength; 2)
groundwater table within the
750
1000
U
200
200
Note: Computed factors of safety are based
Modified Bishop method of computation; and,
col I uvi um.
LOCAL SLOPE STABILITY
on
3)
1)
n0
Local slope stability involves locally oversteepened slopes due primari ly
to construction of roads and on-site grading. 0n Lots 3 and 26, retaining walls
have been usecl to create level building pads and to provide clriveway access at a
reasonable slope. Providing these retaining walls are properly designed and
constructed, they will not increase the hazard of local slope instabiity. Refer
to the section RETAINING I.IALLS.
0versteepened slopes due to roadway cuts are present in front of both lots.
The cut on the south side of Vermont Drive (in front of Lot 3) is smal1 and in
our op'in'ion does not possess any hazardous potential for the structure.
The cut on the south side of Sequoia (in front of Lot 26) varies from
approximatety 12 feet to 22 feet in height. The averge slope is about 1.5 hori-
zontal: 1.0 vertical . Recent failures to this slope have occurred both to the
east and west of the property. It appears the failure to the west encroaches
somewhat into Lot 26. In our opinion, the lack of proper surface and/or subsur-
face drainage and the presence of granular zones in the colluvium are respon-
-11-
,l
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
\
I.
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
sible for the failure of these cuts. At the steep slope to which they were con-
structed, excel'lent drainage is required. THe cut slope directly in front of
the existing structure on Lot 26 has not failed and appears to be better drained.
It is imperative that proper surface drainage and retaining wal 1 backfill drain-
age be maintained to minimjze the possjbility of a local slope failure.
. The presence of the existing failed slopes increases the potential for a
progressive failure that could eventually affect the existing structure. l.le
recommend that this be brought to the attention of responsible parties so that
repairs can be expedited.
The tension crack noted in the asphalt of Sequoia 0rive in front of Lot 26
suggests some movement down slope of a portion of the road embankment. This
crack was noted in the Claycomb Report (Reference 2) so it is at least two years
old. It may be reasonably stable under present slope conditions, but construc-
tion on Lots 23 or 24 could initiate a failure. l{e recommend that the Town of
Vail be advised of the situation so they can evaluate any permits for construc-
tlon on Lots 23 or 24 tn light of this potential problem. Although a slope
failure at the existing crack location nay not affect the structure on Lot 26,
it may initiate a progressive failure sequence that could affect the structure.
FOUNDAT IONS
Eased on our review of the soils reports by Inter-Mountain Engineering the
construction plans, and performance of the structures to date, we conclude that
the foundations for both buildings will adequately support the structural loads
with respect to soil bearing capacity and settlement. This conclusion should be
verified during a Phase II study.
The adequacy of the foundation system does not insure, however, that the
structure is safe relative to a regional slope failure. Segional Slope Stability
is addressed jn a previous section,
-L2-
. .l
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
T
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
RETAINING IIALLS
Lot 3
Retaining walls have been built on Lot 3 in two locations: adiacent to the
southern property line and north of the driveway'i ncluding the southern lower
level wall. Both walls are complete and have been designed with underdrains
according to Reference 7. Our site observations indicate these walls are per-
formi ng sati sf actori 1y.
During final investigation of the site, recommended lateral earth pressures
should be developed and the structural adequacy of the walI shou'l d be checked.
The northern wall should be designed for at-rest earth pressure conditions; the
southern walI may be designed for active pressures providing it is permitted to
rotate sufficiently to develop the active state.
Lot 26
The retaining walls on Lot 26 consist of a timber crib wall to the south
and east of the structure and the southern foundation wall. The crib wall has
been built but not backfilled; the foundation wall is complete. Both walls were
designed with underdrains.
During final invest'i gation of the site, recommendecl lateral earth pressures
should be developed and the structural adequacy of the wall shou.l d be checked.
The crib wa11, due to its flexibility may be designed for act'ive pressures. The
foundation wall should be designed to resist at-rest lateral earth pressures.
Further, v{e recommend the crib walI backfill be completed as soon as possible to
minimize water infiltration into the backfill. The upper 18 inches of the back-
fill should be impervious and should be sloped to prevent surface runoff from
overloadi ng the underdrain.
UNDERDRAI NS
At this time there is no indication that regional underdrains will be
-13-
l
I
T
l
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
t
T
T
t
I
I
t
I
T
)r
required for either lot. Underdrains may be required to stabilize the roadway
cut slopes adjacent to Lot 26. l'le recommend that those responsible for the de-
sign and/or repair of these slopes consider underdrains as a potential solution.
Groundwater conditions should be investigated during a Phase II study to deter-
mine the need for underdrains.
FLOOR SLABS
Our s'ite observatjons indicate that concrete slabs-on-grade are performing
satisfactorily and we assume they were constructed in accordance with the recom-
menclations by lnt,er-Mountain Engineering, Ltd., References 4 and 5. The only
except'i on is the garage slab on Lot 26, which has experi enced frost heave. Thjs
slab should be repaired and the garage closed up for the winter. Final surface
grading should provide positive drainage away from the structure to minimize
future frost heave problems.
IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES
Based on our preliminary study of the two sites, we do not see any poten-
tia'l hazards to other lots or to the infrastructure as a result of the con-
struction. l,le have assumed, in arriving at this opinion, that the existing
retaining walls are properly designed and constructed. This subject should be
given further consideration duri ng final investigation when the subsurface con-
ditions have been better defined.
ADDITIONAL STUDY
This report has been organized with the intent of supplementing it with a
Phase II study that together would satisfy the requirements of Town of Vail
ordinance 29. Additional studies would be requ'ired for both Lots 3 and 26. The
proposed scope of services, and potential cooperation with other lot owners are
discussed below.
-1,4-
.I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
r{
I
t
T
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
I
I
l
I
I
Scope of Services
For Lot 3, we recommend three test borings be drjlled. One of these should
be extended to bedrock; the other two should adequately define the colluvium.
Laboratory shear strength testing will be performed to develop soil parameters
for use in the stability analyses. Fina'l analysis of s1ope, retaining wall
and foundation condjtions will then be performed. Our conclusions and recom-
mendations wjll be presented in an engineering report as a supplement to this
study.
For Lot 26, a simi'l ar scope of serv'i ces is proposed with the exception
that only two test borings are planned.
Cooperatjon l.Jith 0ther Property 0wners
Because of the nature of the topography, geologic conditions and lay-
out of )ots adjacent to Lot 26, we believe Lot 26 should be studied'i ndivi-
dual ly.
Lot 3, however, has simi lar topographic and geologic features to Lots
1, 2, and 4, Also, due to their proximity, Lots 7,8 and 9 could also be
included in a common study. If desired, Lot 3 could be studied indivi<tualty.
L IMI TATI ONS
The opinions, conclusions ancl recommenclations contained'i n this study
are based on the references l'isteO in the appendix, our on-site observations
and our experience with sjmilar projects in West Vail. No field or laboratory
testing was performed in preparation of thjs report, therefore, all our assump-
tions and recommendations should be verifjed by a Phase II study which should
include field and laboratory testing.
Should any of the assumptions which formed the basis for our conclusions
not be correct, we should be advised so our conclusjons and recommendatjons
-15-
j .l
I
I
t
I
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
l
t
I
T
I
I
can be evaluated on the basis of
issued, if warranted.
FOX & ASSOCIATES OF COLORADO, INC.
J
2
Jr.
I
I
t
Q,",,rl? 44*,,/*
Ronal d
Seni or
RFH/ds
Copies;
F. Holcombe, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
- Mr. Richard
- Kirkland and
Mr. Ray
Bullwinkle,
Ellis
Petros
the revised data and nev{ recommendations
-16-
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPEND IX
t
I
I
T
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
T
: . : ,l
I
t
I
t
t
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
t
t
t
l
l
I
I
I
I
RISK
General
The notion of risk is an important aspect of any geotechnical investiga-
tion. The primary reason for this is that the jnvestigative and analytical
methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact
science. The analytical tools which are used are generally emperical and must
be tempered by enginering judgement and experjence. Therefore, the solutions or
recommendations presented in any geotechnical study shou'l d not be cons'idered
risk-free and more importantly, are not a guarantee that the proposed structure
will perform satisfactorily. lJhat the engineering recommendations do constitute,
is the geotechnical engineerrs best estimate of those measures that are nec-
essary to make the structure perform satisfactorily based on lirnited subsurface
information. The purpose of the following paragraphs is to discuss the concept
of risk so the owner, who must ultimately decide what is an acceptable risk, can
better apply the findings of this study.
Factor of Safety
As discussed above, the most critical geotechnical consequence of this
study is considered to be reg'i onal slope stability. The stability of a portion
of this slope is expressed as a factor of safety. It is important to note
that the concept of factor of safety is a derived value and not an instrjnsic
property of the slope. The accuracy with which the factor of safety for a given
slope can be determjned, is based on a number of factors, the most significant
of which are listed below:
1. vari abi I i ty of surface condi ti ons
2. vari ability and type of subsurface conditions
3. validity of the analytical method
4. validity of simplifying assumptjons
T
1
T
A-1
"I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
T
t
I
T
I
l
t
t
t
I
T
I
I
l
I
I
t
T
l
I
5. intensity of study
6. certainty of the design loading condition occurring
Depending on how well the above factors can be assessed determines what
minimum factor of safety would be required to have a reasonable degree of con-
fidence that a failure will not occur. It is the geotechical engineer's respon-
sibility to assess these conditions and advise the owner as to a minimum accept-
able factor of safety.
Probab'i I ity of Fai I ure
Theoretical1y, a factor of safety of 1.0 indicates that a slope is on the
verge of failing. Therefore, any lower factors of safety shou'l d result in
failure and any higher factor of safety should theoretical ly represent a safe
slope. However, due to the uncertainty of the factors djscussed in the preceed-
ing paragraph, a'l 1 slopes, even those with factors of safety greater than 1.0,
have some potential for failure. The higher the computed factor of safety is
for a given slope, the lower its probability of failure will be. In recent
years, approaches have been developed to relate computed factor of safety to
probability of failure. This approach is called a'probabilistic analysis' and
can be performed at a relatively great expense. Although such an analys'i s was
beyond the scope of this study, it is believed that the concept of a probabilis-
tic analysis of failure is very important. An example of the relationship be-
tween computed factor of safety and probability of failure is presented on
Figure A-1., Idealized Probabilistic Distribution. This figure indicates two
curves representing the results of probabilistic analyses for two different
slopes. 0n this example, a factor of safety of 2.5 was used to show the differ-
ence betwen Curve A and Curve B. For the site represented by Curve A, a factor
of safety of 2.5 would result in a probability of failure of about I in 8. How-
I
I
A-2
'e,, .l
I
I
T
T
t
t
t
T
t
;
I
1
I
I
t
T
I
t
F
rtl
tr.
q,
g.
o
tr o F (J
Il
o
UJ F
A
E
q)
CURVE
CUBVE
10'1
PROBABILITY OF
to'2 ro-3
FAILURE (LOG SCALE)
2
I
IDEALIZED PROBABLISTIC DISTRIBUTTON Job No' 1-1101-6086
Consulting Engineers and Geologists
Date: 7 /t9/84
Figure A'1
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
t
I
T
t
I
I
T
I
l
t
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
l
t
I
T
I
t
l
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
ever, for the site represented by Curve B, a factor of safety of 2.5 would
result in a probability failure of about I in 2000. This illustrates graphically
that the value of factor of safety cannot be cons'idered jn absolute terms. For
the slope represented by Curve A, a much higher minimum factor of safety would
be required to provide a reasonable degree of safety than for the site repre-
sented by Curve B. It should be emphasized that the data in Figure A-!, is for
illustration purposes only and was not based on data pertaining to this study.
A-3
a., "t
l
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
t
J.
4.
I
I
t
I
I
6.
7.
8.
o
10.
12.
13.
t
t
I
t
t
t
t
I
T
REFERENCES
1. "Geotechnical Study for Highland Meadows Filing No. 1, anO Highland Park,Vai1, Colorado" by Fox ancl Associates of Colorado, Inc., dated November 4, 1983, Job Number 1-Il0i-59i6.
2. "Drainage and Slope Stability Analysis, Highland Meaclows and Vail Village
IJest Subdivisions" by Claycomb Engineering Associates, Inc., dated August
L7,1982, Job Number 1845.001.
"Preliminary Plan Submittal for Highland Meadows Filing 2,,by KKBNA, Inc.,
dated June 30, 1978.
"Soj ls and Foundation Investigation for Lot 3, High'l and Meadows Filing No. 2, Vail, Colorado", by Inter-Mountain Engineering, Ltd., dated May
1982, Project Number V-2035G.
5. "Soils and Foundation Investigation for Proposed Duplex, Lot 26, HighlanO
Meadows F iling !o. 2, Vail, Colorado", by Inter-Mounta'i n Engineering,Ltd., dated July J.982, Project Number V-2036G.
Town of Vail Construction Permits for Lots 3 and 26, Dated August 24, 1982
and August 17, 1982 respectively.
"Exterior Retaining l,,lal I Plan" by Boyle Engineering, Inc., datecl September 10, 1982 for Tri-Mark Duplexes Lot 3.
Oetails for "crib tlall Lot #26, Highland Meadows Filing #2, vai1, colorado",
by Boyle Engineering, Inc., datect September 10, 1982.
Letter to Mr. Robin Roberts from Boyle Engineering, Inc., dated September 7, Lggz.
Letter to Mr. Steve Patterson, Building 0fficial , Town of VaiI from Inter-
Mountajn Engineering, Ltd., dated July 7,1982,
11. Letter to Mr. Robin Roberts from Lincoln Devare, dated september 9, 1982.
Construction Drawings for "Tri-Mark Duplex, Lot 3, Highland Meadows Fil.i ng
No. 2, Vail, Colorado", by Clarkitecture, dated June 21, 1982.
Construction Drawings for "Tri-Mark Duplex, Lot 26, Highland Meadows, Filing
No. 2, Vail, Colorado", by C'l arkitecture, not dated.
t
-A-4-
'a .,',1
l
t
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
,,,\!,-
a
r"((
PLAI.IN ING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
April 26,'1982
PRESENT
l.lill Trout
Duane Piper
Dan 0orcoran
,lim Viel e
Diana Donovan
' aBSENT
Jim Morgan
Scott Edwards
Dan Corcorann chairman' cal'led the meeting to order,
9TAFT PRESENT
Peter Patten
Betsy Rosolack
Peter P, reviewed the memo and explained that the staff could find no rea'l re1 ationship
between the slope of a site and the ratio of floor areas between units, Therefore,
since the design of the proposed units were not "mirror irager" the staff recorrnended
approval of the requested variances as'l ong as the design of the second unit
upon each lot wou'ld remain substantia'lly different in design from that of the first unit upon each lot.
l,li'll Trout moved and Jim V seconded to approve the request with the design contingency
descrjbed by the memo and by Peter. The vote was 4-0 in favor with Dan abstaining.
I, Approval_of migules of_Apri'l '12 meeting.
Dan mentioned that he did not second to adiourn the meeting of 4/12, No one
else could remember iust who did. Duane moved and Jim V seconded to approve
the minutes, The vote was 5.0 in favor
est. for 2 variances of the hazard 'lations to build a lex with
ues.t .for two revisions to an a roved conditona'l use rmit in a Publ ic
Peter Patten described the memo and Steve Patterson answered questions of the
corrnission and audience. The concerns were sufficjent drainage, and retaining
the teen center. Diana asked if any other sites had been considered for the
teen centerrzand Steve answered that temporarily, the teen center would be housed
in the o]d town shops. He added that knock-out panels which could change into
additjonal windowsn and stubbed plumbing wou'ld be included in the teen center
area of the library to make it easier and'less expensive to convert this to employee
housing when the teen center is relocated.
Pat Kenneyn representing the l2 familjes in the Lionshead Lodge, expressed the
concern over having the-teen center on the west side, the noise generated by
them;'the nunber of teens using the center, and the fact that he hadn't seen
o ot 't loor area on ea
or the- proDosed. Town
v
t t '.
( c
PEc 4/26/82
4. Public hearing and.consideration of revisions to the view corridors and
Peter Patten read the proposed new wording. Dan fe'lt that there was a direct
contradiction in paragraph 3. After discussion of the new wording,.it was fe'lt
that the staff had answered the concerns of the PEC, but that the PEC wanted
one of the town attorneys to work on the wording,r6n6 then bring the revisions
.back to the PEC.
llill moved and Duane seconded to table the item until the staff cou'ld get written directions from the attorney. The vote was 5o0 in favor.
llore discussion followed concerning when it should be tab'led ton. and it was
decided to have a meeting on Monday, May 3 at 3:00 p,m.
5. Qe\uest fer condominium conversion on 1ot Al^zYail Villaqe West Filinq #1 rem
Dan sajd that a'letter had been received from the applicant requesting postponement unti'l the May lOth meeting, Wi]l moved and Diana seconded to iab]e unti] the
meeting of May 10. The vote in favor was 5s0.
Duane moved and hli'l'l seconded to adjourn the meeting,
t b.' t .
;
Cr, 4126182 -z-
any information relating to a teen center published prior to the bond election.
He felt that perhaps the Town should explore moving the center to another site.
ltill was concerned about the noise on the west side, Duane questioned the cost
to the Town to first make the space into a teen centern and then change back
into employee housing, Steve said the Town hadn't figured the cost. Duane
asked if any space outside were to be used by the teens, and Steve answered that
there would be sunmer use on a patio about 60 square feet larger.and Pam Hopkins,
architect;zstated that the patio was also designed for counseling ,
Duane asked if soundproofing would be added, and Steve replied it wou'ld be, Duane
asked if perhaps there could be an entrance for the teens through the north side to help reduce the noise on the west side. It was exp'lained that this had been
considered.;but the mechanical room was in the wayo and to have the entrance
through the library would mean that the teen center would have to close when
the library closed,
$lill pointed out that there have been some very good experiences with teen centers
and libraries working together,.but that this did not apply to the outside spaces.
He added that 3 surfaces were being created which made it difficu'lt to curb the
noise and felt that the teens should enter on the north and not be al]owed on
the west side. He referred to opposition to the teen center in a letter from
Frank Cicero dated April 21,.1982 to the town,
Peter Patten read from the information prin.ted in the Vail Trail before the election
in which the teen center i: ment'ioned.
Duane fe'lt that the teen center and library could be a positive mix, but wished
that the teens didn't have to enter on the west side. Jim V. echoed Duane and
fe'l t that it would be nice if the teens could enter at the main entry. Diana
stated that in the many times she goes by the teen center each dayn it appeared to be one of the quietest bu'ildings in town because teens fe'lt that it was not
coo'l to use a teen center-'that it was mostly used by pre-teens, She expressed
disappointment that the torl,m was shirking its duty in providing employee housing.
Steve Patterson mentioned that the number of teens wou'ld be limited because of
the occupancy load requirements, and it was his feeling that there would be less
noise with a teen center than with employee housing wjth fewer entrances and
1.imjted hours. Ron Byrne from the audience agreed with the combination of uses,
but wanted to know if the town had received any estimates on moving the building,
Steve answered that it would cost from $40i000 to $60,000 to relocate the building,
and that it could not be included in the capital improvements for the next 3 years.
Duane moved and Diane seconded to approve the two revisions to the conditional
use permit for the proposed town of Vail l ibrary as stated in the staff memo
with the addition of.a 3 year time limit p'laced on the use of the said space
as a teen center. The vote was 3.1 in favor with l,lill voting against and Dan
abstai ni ng,
u\?frb?,
I^IALL l*va*f ,
I
'' ,.it, ,,.! ,J
L-r 4zo
rf I
llqilt^HP ll^Pous
frLtN4 4 2
. i'----', .-'rt/>7€1/e
UncolnDeVore
'| 00O West Fillmore Sl.
Colorado Springs. Colorado 8O9O7
(303) 632-3593
Home Oflice September 9. L982
Mr, Robln Roberts c/o Sunrlse Construction
P O Box 1517
Avon, CO 81520
Rei Eighland !,leailows, rittng *2 Lots 3 and 26
Dear !{r. Roberts:
This letter is wrltten to outl-lne the scoPe of our investiga-
tions in regards to the two above referenced lots in the
Eighland Meadows, Ftltng *2. It ls also wrltten ln order to
Elirify our position regarding tincoln-oirvorers lnvolvernent
wlth the construction which Ls currently taking pIace.
On or about August 25, L982, personneL of our Glenwood Springs
branch office vrere contacted by Mr. Phil Kosky of Sunrlse
Construction ln regards to work on Lots 3 and 26. -rt was our
understanding at that tine that Mr. Kosky wlshed us to review
prevlous soils investlgations which had been conducted on the
Eltes and to lssue (if posstble) a letter lndicatlng confor-
mance of the construction with those letters, and recent
napping conducted for Claycombe Englneerlng for the Town of
VaiI.
On August 27 t Lg82. Micha'e1 T. Weaver, a professional geolo-gist of the Glenwood Sprlngs office of Lincoln-Devore,
inspected both Lots 3 and 25.
Lot 3:
At the time of the August 2? inspection, the majority of the
excavation for the proposed resldential structure appeared to
have been completed. The excavation consisted of tuo stePs of
about 8 and l2-foot high, whicb stepped down the Lo€. Visual
inspection of the rnateiials exposed ln the excavatlon indl-
cated that the materiaLs conslsted of collpvlal or debris
slide deposits, which overlle glaclal inoraine deposits. Most
of the rnlteriai excavated from the slte aPPears to have been
bauled away off-site. A bulk sanple of soil was obtalned for
proctor dteisity determinatlon of -the sotl llkely to be used as
backfiLl on thls site. No seePage or sprlngs vtere noted to
occur within the excavation proper.
Coloro& lpringr, Colorodo Pueblo, Coloro&Grond Jsnstioa, Colotqdo Glcnrod lpingr. Colorodo frcnrran, WyOcr:ag
./. ', lt ( ,
','/.
,f
Mr. Robln Roberts
S6ptenber 9. ]-982
Page -2-
Lot 26r,
At the tine of our inspection on August 27 ' L982t the excava-
tlon for a proposect re-taining w111 had been completed. This
excavation ias- noted to be on the order of 18 feet high. At
the tine of our inspection' one 6-foot higb section of a
railroad tie crib witt fraa been virtually completed at the
base of tbe retaining wall excavation, leaving an aPPrgll1?te
l2-foot higb cut. aE ttre tlme of- our inspection_, backf illing
*i"-pi"""edtng behind the 6-foot high sectLon-. _-A sanple
repr'esentativ6 of the soils being used as backflll behlnd the
wail was obtained for testing in- the laboratory to determine
its naxlmun proctor denslty. No springs or seepage were noted
to he occurring at. the tine of our inspection ln the excava-
tions exposed
Since Mr. Weaverts lnspection on August 21 , Ylr.- Weaver haS
. reviewed the two reports by Inter-Mountain Engineering' !t{.for Lots 3 and 25. Also, personnel of this office have had 'conversations with Mr. weaver regarding both Lots 3 and 26.
During the period between August 27 _and_August 30, _personnel of th6 Coloiado Sprlngs offite developed a Proposed scope of
work andt cost estlnate for geotechnical reports and sloPe sta-
btltty analysis for each Iot. on August 30r.1982' !1lr. Weaver
;;;i;'wJnt fo the site and presented-our posltion regarding
livolveurent, proposed scope of work and proposed costs for
detailed geotictrirical analysls and slope stablllty analysls
for the tio lots. The conversations on August 30 were wlth
ur. Phil Kosky' our basic posltlon expressed during that
August 30 nee-ting was that Ehe two Inter-ttlountaln Englneerlng
i"p"its-didl not iontain slope stabillty analyses nor contaln
th-e information necessary .for Lincoln-Devore to perform slope
stabllity ana}yses on the lots. It n3s enphaslzed tbat in
order foi f,tnc6ln-Devore to analyze the present and proposed
constructlon on the lots, a detailed geotechnlcal analysls and
slope stability would have to be perform-ed.- The approxiruate
cosi estisrate for reports concerning each of the lots etas
given at that neeting. No written proposaL has been presented
it tnis tirne, hosevei, if one is desired it can be provided
upon request. The reply by l'tr. Kosky-to !tr. Weaver on August
3-0 was €hat t4r. Kosky would contact his attorneys' the lot(s)
owner, the Town of VaiJ-, and recontact Lincoln-Devore
i.g"iat"g any decisions- or acceptance of proposals. To this
dafe, neittrei PhiI Kosky nor yourself has recontacted
Lincoln-Devore for any iaaittonal slte analysis or testing.
To sunmarlze our involvement on the two lots, the work pre-
sently iccornplished by Lincoln-Devore on the two lots ls sum-
marized below.
r, ,/,,- r
/.1 i; ,'.. t{r. Robln
Septenb,er
Page -3-
1) tincoln-Devore made a slte lnspectlon on August 27, )'g82.2l tlncoln-Devore has reviewed the soils reports by
fnter-Mountain Eqgineerlng, Ltd. for Lots 3 and 25' Eighland
Meadows, filtng No. 2..3) LlncoLn-DeVore has collected solls samples to deternine
the maxiuum Proctor denslty of backfill- on the two lots.4, Llncoln-DeVore has verbally indicated to Mr. Kosky our position for involvement on the sl.tes, our proposed scope of work to analyze the sitesr.and estirnated costs for each Iot.5) No denslty testlng of backfil-l behind any structures or
walls has been completed to thls ilate by tlncoln-Devore.Neither the ohrner, contractor nor builder have contacted us in order to proceed with any denslty testing.6) Mr. Weaver has bad conversations with Mr. Jeffery I.l. Spane1 wlth Inter-Mountain EngLneering, Ltd. regarding both Lots
3 and 26.
basedl upon our site inspectLon, revlew of recent napplng per-
formed for the Town of VaiI, revLew of the Inter-Uountain
Engl.neerlng, Ltd. reports, it can be concluiled tbat appllcabi-lity of existing and proposed constructlon to exlstlng solls
and geology conditions (includlng slope stabillty) cannot be
acconpllshed by Llncoln-Devore wlthout additional detall-ed investlgatlons. We cannot elther approve or dlsapprove, at thls polnt in tlrne, construction whlch is currently taklng place or that is proposed.
I hope thls has clarified tlncoln-DeVorers posltlon regardllng
these projects. If you should have any guestions, please con-tact tincoln-Devore at any time.
Respectf uIIy subnitted,
Roberts 9t L982
DevOR.E TESTING LAB., INC.LINCO
By:J
Prof
Colo
JwE/heh
cc: LD - Glenwood Phll Kosky -
Town of Vailr
ssionaL\ Geol st
dlo Springs of t
Springs
Sunrise Constructlon Attn: l!tr. Blll Andrerrs
Di
bq/e engrteerng irc
141 e rneodoa, ck. suile n-10
crcssroods sfnpprr€ aenler
r,oil cdso681657
93/4762170
Ab@ | oc...w,+
4t
t--g
Jo16'lz'tp{
-4l
I lf
I
I
-t
I
I
;
' gatrtqo?cA" 5;t-Lc,+,1 oo*G'bf tc
wwF
cLEt{J,(AA?tCfw
hrr.wu
+,4grz.o.L"
!r?fL::,Ee f.,AJ ee- ldt
t*,Li* fu.
+4Ctz'o.L.,rdLe
5iztA66+'rr Fd,- >/strl)
\oe-v
,...-(Ltet, conT. .r4b
-4tr+ p''.<- AzalrJ
l,Alefa>- *e A*l
?ftt'. '
SECT ION
A'-;l,tf(9
@-
bo/e engneerrB; trc
143e rne6,vcr sutie n'10
crcssrccE snmpfig cerl?ef
\orl. cotcrocb 81657
303147c2170
tb4c tt o.c.
*q-er-Ltl
4 qeAva-
!P|€-1c'oz.
d.d
F-':
f4- $t+9
*+c4e'o.c- l''':d'
4Q eeeroaTe?l"l a l,l
WL q€EIJEIER
p4;rrrl tlJ d<AVtu
v^'zrz>.-!zt a.bt
FIq'.
PEva$/AY 71176p.r8
l'E ex?-,ur.1t..
SELT lotl
bq/e engtneerrg. rrc
14il e rnedr ct. surte n10
crGsrod shoppr€ ceni€r
voil. cdorocb 81657
3o3/a762170
VJ. i ts.o-qd o.c
*i
?e*a (+firil
?\tC @t'E'f4-
,7gAt|.J tr! tlAVA-
ttanawtw rwtu tync* Azg.)w'l^^6
g- Pt4+-l toe- +tAal
4' €l+t, (AA'
. TACT.ED dsAV*
e-ptdc.
*1w'o.c_),s
a;
.yr'rp.leS - tW.e'JNJ
FTA'
bqde engEEering. rrc
lr3e redqi/d suilerFl0
crcsroG sroppr€ oentet
roil. co@ E1667
&3/4762't70
li 4 t.s.eut o.c.
tLo'
(-4naxb. 6'46
r>/ @ wwF
uflPA(Jf@
?'' tolg"
*( b*fo'or) 4t u-d.
qENCL
(1-)+6 co{r.
l+l a 14 +'4 wrqt
wc ?FRtverw. Pa{N N q+a''tq-
*r(alr.
#46tdoi,
5rcTDNA
bqreengiEstE| irr.14le nroro. suiprrl0 crBsro6 shmngenb,
vsl. cdqo6BIC6T
&3/4762170
10 peenFxw M
.1r_
l,btf.r't "F Ftot'. U--
-u- Yldt' 4- 4'Akvt Ftp. Ap#E fitA' ?o
Y6q p€W
,ffiTft,
€ee &ax .
v6NE 6R1
I
-TYE Awe- x y 't^R5 '/ 9o'9,''L'aag3
€t **e.t'l
&.l',ld l'. 10 tQttX
4o.
*,t-<^-.$ g1$o.<,.*Lanb
SECTlotl /a
,.
bqne engrrEerr€. nc
14i e. rneo&r/ cf suite *'10
crcsrd sh@prgcentet
roil. cctqoO 81657
3o3/47eir217O
0 Percoe lw wc
tt-
-+E1f'.ri "i lja,7-
i a-. tutt * 4',
*),;'vt 7nl 6€,&z
ftH: @ /ort ,EE L€Pq€( /\rr4l/4 €alz l46t* v utl ffie1,
'fiw aw- L___J 'r{hR5 -w.t
.rqI(5
'a %2e4 zt.E 4.o"taefl
a:-.
a+x 4.rd o4&.'4)tt o.q
bq/e ertgineenrg. trc
143 € rnedo,v ctr surte ft.10
cr6sroocb srl@pr€ center
\oil. corcrd 81657
3o3/a7e2170
W 6 *eaz+ro.c.
")'
*r. p.aik*-
(ov-t 4a* e)
lll+6 calt.
.,-Qtg rtai
'lz'e*e. "ia/u.
lita t*E
*lazAroc.
1 4 zezr*+te
w. TzMerER
--*8, P'4,H
' *Jb
t-+ c-lJ
tiezflo.c V,
4/)eA rrAT
vNLw---*J-tuAA
"t'- F41r'.
SECTION A,ru try.)Jrt tlJ qav%
)r
bq/e ertgrte€r'ng. urc
14! e rr6odo/v cf sude rF10
c'6StOOd3 Shrying cente{
r,ort, Cdgu6 81657
30J/a762170
Yclfloo t'&.
+..-- At.nT
eat o7*r4.
c"" udl€tti
sry'o,lJ 4'
algtiilTp
qeava-
6 fEeroetrw rc'
ituF)tcl
1W drc-xY '}{ aRj 'y' glrs:'J:W
@ tlgt*
St.
1"3'.#+4, t.6'e r€+.'4e;t'E &.
ry .,/1t4 A= Arvf(D
brle€ngr|€err€L rE
143e nedecf suite nto
crGsrods srloppr€ €nlBt
roil. orabBf657
g}3/a762170
t,
!
I .V234 Aao +'oo f t
.t w*t
JotcT'
sEcTloNrl]\
*1: \-/
fa1€ I S-AaRtr uA.tL
l"W c rt.T
+4c4t'o.L.r'tLe
1c4t'o.c. tr
5. Lr1REJr{F&cE?
d
1
{ 6-et$,cnA?rcfw
4AVEL
*1,g+g'ac.
(t\+a errT
It' eNyS
&t|du a
d *co
<AJfuFCEP (AI'EE
7d9-3EE Pu.U
+'c)-6.rJ,
dtlAVtu
ffTE 11
A lV-Lr
0 1.VC
1 t/t
bAsE N,- PETAIL
bo/e €rrgrteertr€. nc
143 e neo6'v d sulte n-10
crGsrooct shopp'r€ 6tler
\,oil ofuodo81657
3o3/a762170
lz'4 aoQ4"o.
| (51A€^ae**n6
1"1 ?A')
I
b'
Ftoo{ i
airAT.4'
n:Ztowt I t-f
E;, t?i- €Arl
tJo :J.6e
r4l-Ll<14r'.\1 i
u!.xh ( fi t+s
F.Tt>t<. - -
,/a/,,
ai z''l*oee? ztAb
wt/ te>u-tol,o w.wF.
1 tltttl,(hA? ctw
at^trpL
p4eto'O.C.
v&v-- *fir*A
F<.t- FVl.
,'
+4 or'i,3i
t/'
5ECT IQN
ts"Avflp
1t
6p6 (^J"(|,-' r _\__t_- r,:t4- Dk/s
Erc eng'.leerrg. irE.tgeq@l 3rEl6nto ct@10
rdlcs@tlhB&!fitg eng
s/r'ruoc&DE1657
{3147e12170
d^4 PJ,v't tottt
t/.'Q teedac.,
1-o'
gqgzto.c
. t -ttl L6'
+'Q gewogtreo
wc reElr'.=r&.q<Al{ rN gPAva-cat{4
Uour JOlSf
e)*s catt- rlo
*fu,1o*.f4-W
O lt.* t{ap |n w oewALL
o? etFlJ.'l"lt?{
L** A4 Jotst at4
V;e4oc
bo/e engneerr€L rE
143 e rrpdo'.r cr surte n-10
crGsrod shQprrg gtbr
roil. coho8t657
3o3/a76-21n
*aa-p.t
14- aod 4 f* 4-.-
T1?K+r_Y
4Le
1_,
|,'l'.t Jatst
iz)ta cog. rlo
1''ttti
gqsdo.c
14 rezrorxeo wc rez.tueT*.
tEr.l{ thl ({RAVEL
4 +a lettto-o ,
tl1,tt ()c 6aJ1Jrri FllI'L.
"' ,uc'r:{o bi-Lg,/qys
a-Lt (s- a-a{ ) aJ
* o €\t', lailW'tW
fl,.tr19-
ru
'tu.ffiJlJ(q
l?: a.ovt S|gf
I
I
l
-J
(51/-x
b*b
bq/€ enginee'trE rrc
143 e rr€odo/ dr suile r}'10
c-rGsrocrb sh@prrg center
\orl. colcrcdo E1657
3o3/a742170
6ltbxtl4-.
,
?r?:-A^tv,r-.'(sr+tn -l z N&t /"^We
:.
--.+.?. I
LSltxu>72 ce;-.
(tt Lba a gtd-oc
5t/itxlo'z'
gv*r tbYzGu
,4^lz eap+to
a6^ta
bo/|eengrFenrg 'rc 141 e rr€ocb/ d surte r10
crcsoocb sfEpprng gfer
\oil cdoroO81657
fi3/47e2170
L*o Ot*)Aa,
*1
4u
4',
7"
6'/L>lb
1(tAlLo
/&,. !
/l'Q aatF,rlb':(
uiuLo ALL Jori-lT5
4o Fd* ge()Jqfil
HqATH _---._.--
(a'
I
t
:
t'\i--rr--l r-rr-r r--r r-t t-
b r-i. r - 'n 1-
al+^11
'fPtalin
/4-'
tr) t'4 A r..'l'
o
e
€
--J M-:r6
'--- --d'hnloo
1g*tuz
AL'
4r;
ulzst
3flAIL
bq/eengirFenr€. torc
143 e rneodore cf. suiie n-10
cfGsroocb shomirgog|'g
r,oil cdrccb E1657
fi31a7+2170
-t l,
i i'.I'l\,
ilo <r-A6sR:R
7/stt4.
;r/.
JIJLEF" c'frl(k
vJW- t67z
faoe$1ils"il
'r.4Af'L.
----J t-- -
g
i-;:,--fi
boy,|eeprteenr€L irc.
tdl e rnedorr cF suite rrl0
crcvod sitoppirg er't€r
voil, cdqcrr 81657
n3/47621n
W 4 tsc.+t'oc
1-r'
]6 cAn tl' ,ri cav+)
vA7e3 -€F*-n-l*J r*
For*tq 1{ wronxeo
NC reZWVTW.
l+slJ,
.9ZA|U lN ({RAVEL
*+e+4o.c
{qen'oc
. t+'t UG,
#CTION A
-., l_t
--t/bxtLAL,
boye engneerr€ trrc
143 e meodr cf suite rr-10
cr6srocEts snoppng cen?er
!Orl. ccrorodo 81657
3o3/a762170
ft*@ VAt-'Fl"s
I
I
t -L_
-'UZb F,iA$crEAS
?-i? 'l,x g iot-uTs G !v^.r7-
V4' rY,* f .4f.'il9-4J ''=ANa"rrai
V/4'',2x APA 44zo) eL-lvJ:Do
fi ul"l,v alr+tA 1r31g,ear.ti-
bO{viPEtt ?lFzEb,
boyle mgneerng rrc
143 e rrteodorv dr suile n-10
Ct6stoods Sh@Ptrg Centef
!orl. cdsodo81657
303/47e2170
(b) 7r"+ ie7
rcvI3
2 (
(a)la'&11 tL rtr
i-fi4Av 2r1()J5 '' a,
:td.wr..l
5fMr5oil qt>stt+-b
tt4'VA13t:lWl
I
L
'-'t'
cflNL rd
f.T:
*ttltlt-ftt.
1'2"4
- 5TYEL (D"-
tEE P.-bJ"l
{:r=l-Tt
I
q-
Pllh]tr( AtW.efr4teN_
TY
ej11s,o!4-!tu.,
(aatat ) z
(=t/9.* talt 4, ^
(rAur-f-v)
boyle rBneertng rrc
143 e meoo,v cf sute n-10
crGsrod sh@p'ng centef
roil. colorodo 81657
30314762170
,ttb^rat/L a>,
(enzar-1
4t ^1 t11",1'
E;>i-''-
(4\L^o b-)t.l.eP
: - At"rt-
rar/( i) ''. r'lP:" r-r
L4^> t E:(f.
t*t).-i/i fi\ ':LA,
'ilrwTfr,
."::> La ?rMrhtent.t
au. (,Zro<t-.)
}AAN
t/5* t? t. 2-
+F
4,ta> t-t.z- ,3tt-.
F'Pc'€ -.
_:la
_-f
i l't 1 ;ii ll
';,tl -. ,i?.r
w'L{
-a,Vo'xlrlL a"
/ (z,oa+-\
-t
I
I
\t tl
:t:
I rl
la1 itU' tiJi ?-,,,
07 1-(?. -, '.'t{},'.rF':
s4:w'r (45') !?r+ftl_
Slsxtdrt- ar-.
,(vALt-gY wl
?t1(4.2.+5lrL -l{Pt4.L,
Y+"w( v
E.rr,.,r'.rz sr:-./
i/r.AI ;Ev ) --21
t-!*^t- lL et,
(lAlrev)
boyle engineering, inc.
143 e. meo&,v dr. suite n-10
crossroocls shopping ceiier
voil, colorodo 81657
3O3/4762170
September 7, l9gz
l4r. Robin Roberts
Tri -l.lark Deve'loPrnnt ComPanY
P. 0. Box 3222
Vail, Colorado 81658
Subject: Lots 3 and 26, Highland l'leadows, Filing 2' Vail " Co'lorado
Dear Robin:
As you know, thjs office has p;ovided you with structural engineering..
iervices and construction docirrBnts foi the above-noted proiects. Both
of these sets of constructjon docttrpnts were issued by Boyle Engineer-
ing, Inc. on April 27, L982.
The foundation designs for both of these projects were initjally
based upon assuned soi'ls information. The foundation design assump-
tions fbr Lot 3 were then verified with the soils and foundation in-
vestigation No. v-2035G dated Mqy, 1982, as pr"epared by Inter-Mountain
EnginEering, Ltd. and a follow-up letter b.y-!hq 9ary, firmr$ated.Ju'ly 7'
Lg-V.. The-issumptjons for Lot 26 werc verified by the sojls and foun-
dation investigation No. V2036G dated July, 19820 also-prepared by
Inter-Mountain-Engineering, Ltd. Both of these soils investigations.
neet the minimuun requirenents of the Uniform Bui'lding Code, and at the
tim ttrey were jssudd, appeared to be tota11y adequate for the verifi-
catior of our foundation des'i gn assumptions.
0n August !7, 1982, Claycomb Engineering Associates' ,Inc-'-issued a
drainige and-s1ope stabjlity ana'lysis for the,gntlF Highland l'leadows
Filing-No. 2 are'a to the Torrn of Vail. Specifical!y' tnis study is
their-Job No. 1845.001, and it also'contains a geologic hazards jnves-
tigation and subdivision evaluation by Lincoln DeVore (Job._ No. 44 708-GS
daied August 16, t98A). As you knowo we obtained a copy of this report
through your office and rcvielved it on September 1' 1982.
According to these reports, Lot No. 3lies withjn four different-geo-
logic hazard zones; n'arelyn 3G, 4G, 5, and 6. A1so, Lot No- 26 is
shdwn as totally within a 4G zone. A Zone 5 consists of mapped land-
slide deposits,-andadequate setbacks from these areas should be main-
tained for construct'ion. Developnent ndar these zones may not be eco-
nomical . The elfect of adjacent constructjon on these zones should be
thoroughly investigated prior to design. Zones 5' 4G and 3G range
from v6rf steep to gentlb slopes. Active groundlater is pr€sent in al'l
Mr. Robin Roberts
Sept6mber 7, 1982
Page 2
of these aneas. Also, al 1 of these zones contain potential'ly unstabl-e
ilooes in the active ground'later areas. The report necomends that de-
i;ii;d geoieinnica't investigations be perfonred for a'l'l 'lots in any of
these z6nes in order to ana'lyze groundwater conditions andrs'lope-sta-
UiiiiV-ion.ideratj ons and a'lio to provide foundation vecormendations.
Having reviewed Clayconb's and DeVore's reporto I.have to also recgm-
nrJna inat you engag! a soils engineer's services to perform.detailed
gii;i"if;ni"ii-inv6s[igations for-both of these lots. Boy'le Enginee.ring'
inc. shou'ld then be qiven the oppoYtunity to review these detailed re-
ports anU nake whateier rnodific-ations that might be requir^edto the struc-
iura] design of said prtjects to lrEet the recornendations of these ge.o-
iectrnicil investigatibns. Only after this process i-s comp'lete should
construction be continued on these sites. As stated ear'lier' whe-n we
ieviewea Inter-Mountain Engineeringn Ltd's soi'ls r€polts to verify our
assumptions, they appeared-to be totally adequate for our design purpose.s.
H;;il;; ;fter nivihb read Claycomb's and DeVorc's reports, we have good
oison [o suspect ttrit ttre tor.nndation des'igns for-both.Lot.3 and Lot 26
;h;uia le Uisba upon more extensive geotechnical. investigations due to
the unstab'le natui'e of soils in High'land lhadows Filing No. 2.
I am aware that both sites are excavated at this time, and that sottB
iubstantial cuts pr€sently exist. Clayconb's report specifica]ly recom-
nends that cuts oi this haight not be left exposed any longer than is
alloiutety necessary. You iave requested additional structural design,
iiom thiioffice foi the walls to yetain said cuts. In the interest of
stabilizing these cuts as soon as possible-o we.will-be providing you
with this iesig infomation dircctly, although I 4S[t add sonewhat re-juiianitv. Thii information is being provided so'lely for_t-he purpose o.f
dipeaiii'ng your ordering of materials', and it, too, should be rcviewed
afler the-dfitailed geotictrnica'l reports are jssued and prior to construc-
tion of these wa'l ls.
This 'letter is sirnply to inform you of the geological situation at both
of these sites and'o? our position tegarding this matter. llle sincercly
hope you follow our recomnpndations, although we^realize that there is
no'way we can insist that you do so. However, i.f yoq choose to continue
ionit-ruction without obtai-njng the morc detailed geotechnical studies'
we will insist that you sign i statement in which you wi]l agree to in-
dernrify and ho] d us hannleis for any and all consequences that may re'
su'lt from you decision.
I sincercly hope that this positjon does not sever our working rclation-
ship. Please'ca1 'l us when we can be of further service to you.
??f"ll{:ff IiT; rn:;nE
n-ro
cro3sroads shoPPlng c€ntot
vail. colorado 81657
303/,476-2L7O
VaL1, CO 81658
Page Oae of Tvo
Vai1, Colorado
Phll Kosky
CI-ear
Dan Packard, Phl1 Kosky
For the nolth unlt :
- In generaL, 12tt ttlow-JoLststt have been replaced by 2 x 12re for floor f raml-ng.
- If the Jolsts under the eotry, storage, and mechanical rooms are hem ftr 2 x L?rs at 24"
spaclng for a L7t span, they are sub-code.
- Coanection detall G should be cartLed out at the northwest deck.
- The post needs to ie installed at the nldspan of the 5 1/8 x L3 ll2 glu-lan bean ln tbe
garage. Due to a l-esser helght, the post nay be a 6 x 5.
:- The post needs to be insralLed at the mldspan of the 5 1/8 x 12 gJ-u-lan beam io the dtotng
room.
- The 6 x 12 header and nidspao 6 x 6 post are not yet itr at the north bay window.
- A trlpJ.e 2 x L2 header has been lnstalled instead of the 5 1/8 x LO Llz g1u-Lan required
at the southlrest deck.
- Detail- B needs to be carrled out at the livtng room roof.
For the south unLt :
- 'The unl-t ls framed up to the upper floor level, except for the Low roof over the eaat
end of the garage.
- The hen fLr 2 x L2te at 12tr spacLng fot a 23t spau over the garage are sub-code.
- The (3) 2 x 10 bem at the stalr hole has been replaced by (2) 2 x 12. fhe (2) 2 x L2
beam shouLd be trlpled.
- The 5 1/8 x LO Ll2 glu-Ia header ehoul-d be lustalled at the doonvay to the west of the
1l
:
I
I
-.t
.-.----=\
stalrs.
Gary Muralae
Danlel J. Packard, E.I.T.
ilt?.llffit1rTine n.ro
crorsroads shopPlng csntsr
vall. colorado 81657
3O3./476-2L7O
8224
Lot 26, F/ehland Meadows
PhLI Kosky
CIear
20 10 :30
Dan Packard, PhJ.l- Koslgr
Page Tlro of [\lo
The (6) 2 x 6 coluur at the walL corner, south of the dooway meutloned above, should
hsve sol-l-d bearlng through the Jolst apace.
PhLl requested aildLtlonal framing deta1ls for the beam connectloos ia the ltvlng/dinlng
roof area. These are lncluded. Note that the (4) 2 x 6 cohrnn for DetaLl A should not
be placed ln the angled closet !ta11.
The crLb retalning wall along the south side of the duplex has aot been constructed.
We woul-d suggest that thls be done pllof, to the eprLng ruo-off perLod. The exLstlng cut
could be much more uastable at that time due to the l"lkellhood of ground ltater presaures
and seepage lfLov.
Robln Robert
P. O. Box 3222
Vail, CO 81658
Gary Muraiae
0.'^,lq.?eJ^.
DanLel J. backard, E.L.T.
I, Robin C. Roberts, DRB Sunrise Construction/Tri-Mark,
read all soil reports done by Intermountain Engineering
Structura'l Des'ign, done by Tim Boyle Engineering on two
one on Lot 3 and one on Lot 26 both in Highland Meadows
West Vai'1, and take responsibility for the construction
two duplexes.
have
and
dupl exes ,
Filing 2,
of the
t6yte englneerlng, Inc.
1/*l e. meadow dr. sulto n.lo
crossrosds shopping @nbr
vall. colorado 81657
3O31476-2170
ro Ylr, 4 Qollq5e,"
{ezwN oeiNU* W, Cavr^r4$^rrnl O(N,
D[Ierno@
LETTER
Dare 6'lL- 8'7-.
subred {6[ . t4A4:V-. 80P!&pA
WS ?+ LV
*Wt+r-ottz r4?ACIrr^x
FoRr ra8-2 Annalb tdD @r!E edd! tas& O|4SO
at
boyle engineering, inc,
professionol structurol engine.ers 18, rgES
Mr. Steve Pat t erson
Toran of Uall Building Depi.
?5 South Frontege Rd. ld.
Uej. l, Colorada 81857
SubJect, Lot ZE
Hiqhlend Meadours Subdi vi s ion
Vai I n Colorado
Llear Steve,
Thie ie to infom4 you that I have revieued both the Geotechnical Study
fer the nbove referenced lot prepared by For & Assoclatea of Colorado,
Inc. tJob No. f-!181-8088 dated Jr.rly 16, 1984 end Job lrlo.
1-1101*8086- 01 dated September 10, ig84) End our oriEinal deslgn for
the foundation. Furtherrqore" I have rqade f, visit La the siie to
inEpect the condition ef the foundation at thts Foint tn til'le.
I heve found that the f,sc*ora of sefety are in an acceptahle earrge for the entire bui ldlng syster,r as far as Bliding end overturn are
concerned. The Eeotechnical report stotes that tha oaltr should be
designed for a 180 pcf equivelent fluid Fressure. l{e deaigned the
feundatlon r*relis for a 45 pef pree6ure. Tharefore I cannot Juslrif y
that the individual connponents meet the constrarnts sf the g€otechnical
study. Hourever, I an comfortable r,rith these components as deaiEned
based upon the servlceab!.lIty that they have exhibited to date. Therp
erp€ no signe of distross ln the structure or any of the individual
conponents, and theEe ualls have llkely exper!enced the greateet
loadlnq corditisn that they rdill ever have to reEist during last
sprlng's runoff Fer i od,
Feel free to glve 14€ a call lf you have any quBstions regordtng this
o€ I t€r' ,
Apri I
Fincerely yours,
iN6, INC.
Ti
ffi$i't';_"c;"f
ri tsoo6 t
.fu'n--t,
e ta3 e.ffie8dah, &:g$+dnqo o crossrooos shopping canter . vcit. cotorodo 816s7 . 303/476-2170.
o 325 south moin stre?t . the purpl? building . breckanridge colorodo 8C/.24 . 3ffi/ g-6633 e
if ronuNo.c-sooo-r f f
": ' FoR UEE wl?H coLoRADo REGlox henrcan LAND.T.TLE Aaaocr^TroN owNri.s "oa,\.l-"o"" E- rsTo (AMENDED ro-tz-?ol "r
SCEEDULE A
Amount of Ineurance g 116, OOO. 0O pohcyNo 4105554
Dateof policy February le , :rgAZ . 2z3O p.M. Sheet t of 4
l. Name of hsureil:
I,ORI J. RoBERTS and RoBIN c. RoBERTS
2. The eEtate or interegt in rhe ra'd descfied hereia and which is covered by -Lie policy is:
IN FEE SIMPLE
3. The estate or interest referred to herein ie at tate of policy vested. ir:
roRr 'r' R.BERTS and ROBrN c- ROBERTS, as tenants in common
FORM NO. c.6ooo.2 .Fi FoF uaE wtTH crol.oi^Do iEero|r tERrcAN L.AND rrrrlr Ara€rct^troN LoAn ,o{t'- rrzo (AHGNoED ro-r?-?o,
; ) , FoR uaEwlTH c,oLoRADo REGtoN\dEnlcAN LAND rtTLE A8soct^TtoN owNEr.s *Lrgy-Foir B-tgzo (AuENDED ro.tz.?o).,
SCEEDU-LE A-Conri-ued
The land referred to in this policy is situared in the srate of colorado, county of
Eagle ' and ie ileacribed ag followe:
Lo-t 26,
ETGHLAND I4EADOWS, FITING NO. 2, ,
a replat of Vail Village West iiling NO. 3,according to the plat iecorded Januiry l2r'tSlS,in Book 280 at page 793
t,fr.
..
FORM NO. C-€ooo-3B
FoR uaE wtrH coLoRAD<' REGto( rERlcaN LAND TrrLE AaaocrATroN owNER.a ( rt-.o*" E-re?o (AMENDED to.r,-zo)
SCEEDULE B
Thie Policy doee not insuro agaiiat loss or damage by reaeon of the following:
1' Rights s1 6teirng of parties in possession not ehowtr by the public recorde.' 2. Eaeenents' or craims of ease-eate, not ehorsn by the public recorde.
3' Diecrepancies' con'ficts in boundarv lineg ahortage in area, sngr6.nhrnsnrq and any facrs which a cor.roct euney and inspection of the premises woula ir*rr* ""a *ilch are not shown by the public recorde.t #J T;"T,Hil"ri::'#frTffi,ffor, or marerial heretorore or herearrer furnished, irnposecr by
" I}t*rt" pav{le; *{ Ty tax' epecial ass€smenta' chgrs-e-o1!i91 imposed for water or Ee!f,er o, p.y.ltianrothersPecialtaxingdi.ti"t. Taxes ina-assessmehtJ noi-'yet due
6- Right'of the proprietor of_a-vein o.r Lode to extract a'd remove his ore therefrofr, -"tt"iri' the same-u.-iJQa__ro penerraEe or inrersecr ihe prem'''"9"r-h:lt6ui eiantea;^na:d;ni"Jf [3r. for Dirches and cana].s consEructed by the Luthority -of_ t-rre uarced. states_ as reserved in united s.ares patenile"6ia6.r-i"-il;o;"i5=ar page 15 and 3or.7' ffi:H*:""':ii-il-1:";:*',.: "" ;**, on rhe recordeir pr.at or.nighJ.and
8' order incru$|1g,-::rj::!^properiv ir, !!,. vail village wesr warer and sanitation D;osEriet-=e.oid.a-dAdi il'i i6tg, in BEok ig6 ^x page 23v.9. Order incl,fling subjecr properry in rhe Va prot eciion' oiJErict" iiI"Ii. h
-;"6'; r;: i#;,ui* tr'f:o*iifi
Xrt'F"*e 2 3 8 .10' RestsEictions,'which do not :?!:p a forfeirure or reverter clause.but ouitting restrictions, ,{ "q", based o1-_r3"., color, reLigion,.tr l3:*TAt ftF#; i;rlit"r',.d'io-iili'i.."t r6cord!-'ranuary 12, LsTs
11' subdivision rmprovements Agreement between^Higlr-co.ntry corporation
firu.
.o. cor:nrv' or ealr.J-r;E;;e;; i.iii$=iz, -igzi, li-ir# 280 at page
L2. Deed of Trust to the pubLic ror the use of Eo secure
dated
recorded
frou 3 T:rrstee Iligh Cor.ntry Corpor3tion, a Colorado Corporation
",1 !|re_9"rmry of Eagte
H3ot3, Sot8lo 3"
* or ar ron
l{arch 15, L97g March 21, 1979 in Book 26g at page Ll4
f FoRM No. c-€ooo-3c f ' : r Fi- ' FoR usE wlTH coLoRADo REGI&' AMERIGAN r'rND TITLE AsaocitlTtoN LoAN Fo$giy ,rro ,^"*oao ro-r7-zo,
.l FoR uaE wrrH coll'R^Dct iEGloN AMERIGAN urrio rrrr.r ecroctATroN owNEa.a poI.rcy-FoRM E-tg?o (AMEND eD lo.n.?o,
/r
SCEEDUI.E B_Continued
13. Deed of Trust f,rom s DAVID SEpMAKER, PATRfCK McNALLY
::..1l"*J.icorrustee of tbe -9unry of Easte for the use of,. 3 ETGE COT'NTRY CORPOiATTON : 952,400.00 : if.rnuaqlr 15, lggo . : .Tanuary_.29r l9g0 j.n Book 297
DAT'PSINAIS, 8. AI\ITCONY
at Page 925
L4' Deedof rrustfrom: Lori J. Roberts and Robin c. Roberts to the Public Tnrstee of the Counrv of Eaqle fortheuseof , David shumak6r aka David r. shunaker tosecure : g 341167.50
: ilanuary Zg, L9g2
; February L6, LggZ in Book
to secute dated
recorded
tlored .
recorded 336 at page 538
TO:The Torm of VaiJ-
B.rilding Depa:r.trnerrt
73 South Frontage Road
Vai1, Colonado 81657
Robin and lori Roberts
P.O. bx 3222
Vai1, Colomdo 81658
A}trD:
RE:
TO:
Building Envelope: nighland Meadows Subdivision
Peter r-Iannn
Building Depar'lrnen't
We the undorsigned have reviewed the enclosed site plan for lot 26
tlighland Meadows, Filiry 2. We realize that the Roberts wiIL be
buildfug out of tlre proposed building envelope. We understand t}te
problons and give our. pemission to altqr ttre building enveJ-ope to
acccrnodate the prnposed buil-ding.
#'/"
'lne lcrhln oI val.J-
Buildir€ Deparfnent
73 South Frontage Road \/:'il , Colo:rado 81657
Robin and lo:ri Roberts
P.O. bx 3222
Vai1, Colonado 81658
Buifding frrvelope: Highland Meadorvs Subdivision
Peter Jama:r
Building Deparhent
And:
Re:
To:
We tlle r.rrdersigned tlave neviewed ttre enclosed site plan fon l-at 26
Eighland Meadows, Fiiling 2. We real-ize tfiat the Roberts will be
buifding out of tlre proposed buil-ding envelope. We ulderstaad the
problems and give our perrnission to altsr the bdfdhg errvelope to
accorncdate the proposed buiJdings.
C (
ctlEcK
for .:.. . . sFR, .R, n P/S ZoNE DISTRICTS .'
Fil ing
3]'?F.?
ZONE
Legal Description.: Lot 26 B'lock
Architect
Zone' District Ai' proposed Use.
''' "'Height Allor.red€€$.Proposed
Setbacks : Front-Requirea*Zo i--Floijisea ' Sides-Required 15" proposed
. Rear -Required'15' proposed '0<. - tS
[,laterccu rse-requi re d
GRFA: . Allor.red lLl't6-1. '
.
propo:bd ' ,l€l -l,r+184 ._-_---------_:-./.GRFA: ?rimary Allor,red primrry propose@lZ,lgg_
|--!--
Secondary Al'f orrred _ : ,' Secondary proporq@) ./ZrfJ__
Site co'erase: afr"*a(fs7")' .Szot ' e.opor.-u 3r,,.lG) -
.-7-
Landscaping:.'Required . proposccl
Parking:'. nequirea e: propc::ed /4@
Drive: Slope permitted !'L
"-lope
Actual
Envi ronmenta'l/llaza rcls: ,Aval anche
t4125 d z
0vner Aotrs 4o4a+
Fl ood P'i ain
'SloPe
Corrrnents.:
. nN{
D.:tc.:
C
3 & 26, High Mead -2-
on and enforcement
The eff,ect of the uested variance on I i air, distribution of population,
sDortation t Eratt'rc'aci'lit tjes and utili.ties, and [b-fiC safAt
No impact.
Suth other f.qc90r:r-aJr!Lgriteriq as thggormnission-deems applicable to the proposed
varrgqge.
\:FINDINGS
a grant of special privi'lege
classified in the same
Tfte. deqree to uhlich rel ief from the strict or I iteral inte
df E ffirTTtrre qtrl ffi Acn'i46ffi ffii6 6r ET6EIFGI-r-e qtrlffi Af iAFl
of treatment amonq..sites in the vicinity or to attt
rcffitFiufsrgilT
The granting of the variance wou'ld not constitute a grant of a special privi'lege
or be contrary to any objectives of the zoning ordinance. The staff cannot find any clear objective in.the provision in question and wil'l be. amending the
zoning code to eliminate this provision.
Ths Flanningl..and Envkohmental. Commission shal.'l make the fo]'lowinq findinqs
That the granting of the variance wi'll not constitute
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties
di stri ct.
That the granting of the varlance wil'l not be detrimental to the public hea'lth,sgfety'-or welfare,.'or materially injurious to properties br imprbvemenis in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for the following reason:
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation
wgYJd result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inionsistent with the objectives of th'is tit'le.
. .$.TSR. BE,cqUI-lEJ{ DAT I 0N
The staff recorunends approval of the requested variances. There appears to be no apparent reason to require a 60-40 floor area split on the stbeper'lots.The-design-of-the second unit upon each 1ot, however,'should remain slbstantially different in design from that of the first unit upon each lot. If there is agreement on granting these variances, the staff wi] I amend the zoning code to
remove the section.
;91 -t
a
(C
MEI4ORANOUM
T0: Planning and Environmental Corunission
FROM: Oepartment of Cornrnunity Development
DATE: Apri'l 14,,1982
SUBiIECT: Request for variances for'lot 3 and 19) ZA, Highland Meadows-Filing 2
to'a]]ow the construction of two dwelling units each of equal floor
area, on each lot instead of limiting the floor area of the secondary
unit-on each 'lot, to 4O% of the maximum GRFA a'llowable as required
by the hazard regulations of the zoning code; Section 18.69.050.J.
Applicants: Tri-Markn Lori and Robin Roberts'
-uElcRrPIoN gE uRrANcE REQ
The applicants request to build a duplex upon each'lot in which the floor areas
of eath unit are the same (50/50) rather than a Prjnnrv/Secondary (60/40) which
is requ'ired by the hazard regu'lations of the zoning code. The hazard regulations
state-that as one of the restrictions on lots where the aveiage slope of the
site beneath the proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty
percent in a Two Famity Residentia'l Zone Djstrictn.the secondary.unit-shal'l- __hot exceed 40 percent ot tne a'l'lowable total GRFA and shall not be substantial'ly
simi'lar in design to the primary unit. Both of the subiect lots are in excess
of 30% and are iubiect to'this prov'ision. The applicants request a variance
from this provision to enab'le them to build straight duplexes (50/50) upon each
si te.
The reasoning for the estab'l ishment of Primary/Secondary Zoning was to encourage
one sma'l ler possib'le employee dwe'l ling unit and eljminate "lnirror imggeu duplexes
having similir designs ior each unit. The staff can find no real relationship
between the slope of a site and the ratjo of floor areas between units. The
footprint of thb building would be the same regardless of the ratio between
units. The designs of the proposed units are not "mirror irnage."
CRIiTERIS AND FINDINGS
Uoon review of Criteria and Findinqs. Section 18.62.060 of the Municipal Code'
-the Department of Corununi.ty Devel.oqment re
C o n sldgr.qt i o n_of .. f a c to fs
-Thg_lgfationshiq of the' requested variancg. to .+her. S -,f-r-.-.-i_-{rses and strugtures rn tge_vlc]n'lg:_
;;t * * *tative impacts upon adjacent properties, uses' or structures.
a:
.-ryA's1,ve 'a -
APPLICATION FORM FOR A \IARIANCE
ThLs procedure Ls regulred for any proJect
Ihe apPlicatLon wj.ll not b€ accepted until
t{A!{E OF
ADDRESS
APPLICAIIT Robin & Lorl Roberts
P.0. Box 3222 Vail Colorado
requesting a Variaace'
all Lnformation Ls subnitted'
t
,. ,
I.
A.
B.
PEOTVE 476-2212
NAl,lE OF
ADDRESS
APPLICAIiIT I S REPRESENTATTVE Dennis Co'le - AttorneY'
P.0. Box 682, Edwards, Colorado 81632 PFONE y26-3541
c.AIXXBORIZATI OWNER
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS P.O. Box 3222, VaiI EONE 476-22L2
T{ ...,r"
i;Y"
E.
F.
D.I.,OCATION OF'PROPOSAL
Lot 30 - Pat Dauphinais'
P.0. Box 1151
Vail, Co'lorado
Vai'l
Davjd Shumaker' AnthonY McNallY
81658
ADDRESS |l|est
LEGAI, DESCRIPTION Iot 26 block Filing
t18Y /^al"-P'''-'
FEE. $100.00 pfus an anount equal to the then curlent first-class Postage
rate for each property ouner to be notified hereunder'
A list of the names of owners of all property adjacent to the
subject Property and their addresses. ,
" h f zl
Lot 25 - Mr. & Mrs. James Gernhofer -
Mr. & Mrs. Steven Steitz
P.0. Box 406 ' Avon, Colorado 81620
.t0
/
- Planning Department :".' ' 75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81557
Dear Planning Department:
Thls statsnent wlll try to describe the precise nature of the
varlance we request.for Lot 3, and Lot 26, Highland Meadows,Filing 2.
The Town of Vail.code states that any lot over 307l slope within .,:
the Toum of Vall that is zoned duplex would automatical'ly revert to a_primary/secondary zoning. The floor ratlo on duplex zoning is 50/50, whereas primary/secondary in thls case would be 60/401
''., -- I . ,' ,, Frqn our understanding, the purpcse of primary/secondary zonlng .. ' . ls Just to avoid a mimor lmage structure. The GRFA ls-stlll -
.,*J: t,",: -':..-,,.- the same, therefor the nass of the structure could be the same r' ;1: . ;:,..-;: - as a dupiex.
:-.,t . .,..'.a.. . ,..-r';lt:: ''.1 . .
;i.1!'-':l;'-l;,i,i-r'Ue purchased our lots in Highland l,leadows because ttrey.weie'duplex j:r.-;.1.y;;1-.: loti, not primary/secondary-lots. .If you nill take igood loi'k
:,iA:i;::l$.i., ind conslderation of the plans submitted you can see we have no'
-:rt:.-i':
Tovm of Vai'l
Planning Departunent ' '. 75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Golorado 81657
Dear Planning Department:
This statement will try to describe the precise nature of the variance we request for Lot 3, and Lot 26, Highland l{eadows,Flling 2.
The Town of Vall code states that any lot over 30% slope wlthin ..:the Town of Vail that is zoned duplex would automaticaily revert to a_prlmarV'/secondary zoning. The floor ratio on duplex zoning is 50/50, whereas primary/secondary in this case unuld be 60/40.
Frsa our understanding, the purpose of primary/secondary zoning ls Just to avold a nimor lmage structure. The GRFA is still
the same, therefor the mass of the structure could be the sarne
. as a duplex.
the slope of our.'lot
lgRlel !9rygjute.-q_l
' - , _
_1 -- : : : 4 _ - .
Torym of Vall ' :.
Planninq Department Plannlng Deparfircnt
75 South Frontage Road .
'Vail,'Colorado 81657
Dear Planning
to
Lot
try
for
Tom of Vail . Plannlng Department -'' ,75 South Frontage Road
Vall, Colorado 81557
Dear Planning Department:
This statement will try to describe the precise nature of the
variance we request for Lot 3, and Lot 26, Highland Meadows,Filing 2.
The Town of Vall.code states that any lot over 30% slope within
r''c' "r, to a prirnary/secondary zoning. The floor rafio on dup'lex zonlng i:." '_..., is 50/50, rhercas primary/secondary in this case r,ould be 60/40.
ng, the purpose of primary/secondary zonlng niror lmage structure. The GRFA is stlll
the nnss of the structure could be the sane
J'i{l
"o.i:;
f4 c nAFF__a
lll,l.r,'l:
ssce.
llir';'' ^r'\ r,r;i:,rr, l,:.:.r.r:ir'l lgN: t.rrr .._f,$
l,l:lI:l: l l' j lr;:; (,1; l!ll(.tJl;(.'l'il Ga u uc-- - -.. tfr F A. Da {,r/-s - -
'l'ltc fol lr,r.'inli irrform;rtiorr i:;
l]ol rd llt'lrrrr: :r fj.n:ll :rlrprovtr I
A. lllrll.l,lii{: l,l.ATI:RIAl,S
Foof
Siding
Othcr I','al I Matcri.als
Fascia
Soffits
Windol.rs
$lindovr Trirn
Doors
Door 'I'rin
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
Flashj.ngs
Chiriureys
Trash [nc].osures
Greenhotrs es
Other
.? ' /-\
Fgos.Dr0 LtrnrQ-ou
" {,rr'- . - )eLce Szee
ceD$__b_fi: Dk i3-u,t -,
- r/tt' Ptiwooo_ B i\t B?ov,tn
, ftu-n- u/.-ao[ - Ak Edaw,r
/.. t-l_ i(.?rc< dloetr Dr B?o,,r*r. .
_'Cptr;-En eornrey cttp DE 'B?au,t
/.nF44S, - - - D* /3ed",llJ-t'4" e -- - '\€r=r gub
B. LANDSCAPiNG
Name of Designer:
Phone :
PLANT MATERIALS
Botanica] Name Common Name Quanti ty Size
rREES hce Ew-z,qs Gl,ou"e )3;"ll.f- &tp:ifusE 4 6rz I e:B
!<QtwstfirUWurea_ Fenjts_Dt6e6) 1-
Prur^3
Ftrnuts
irert-,,+ta-'rnrt^_c
S'rQn:c
-fe.Ce
La'N B
ffit
3-tuJ B
-{trat
lrl (8
3
SHRUBS 3'ry corf,
NcttJE
J,l ,3fic,. rf,LLO DR ilarr,tr.r
ul t Et t z il q rn l- ,n-ara lJarn $L--EE@jJl:,fuelstu-y }-tr "0^l
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
. (303) 47G5613
l{ay 26, L982
Robin Roberts
c/o Bridge St. Realty
286 Bridge St.
Vai'l , Col orado 81657
Sincerely,
.7^ &7=-
d]m )ayre
TQwn Pl anner
JS:df
department of community development
RE: DRB Submitta] of 5-19-82
Dear Robin:
The dup'lex for Lot 26, Highland Meadows #Z has been approved by the
Design Review Board on May 19, 1982. The staff shou'ld rev'iew the color of retaining wa11s. Trees designated to be saved should be protected from construction activity. The soi'ls test required for the"lot shou]d address.the possibility of slump on a'l'l areas dt tne 1ot, including the area between the ]ot and the street.
"illr..: l.t; e
l- f.t,4 i:1,
{I
/.i- l'1 t t'u/
Ft rr" i .:? y'-
\-/J l t 'er-
l l,-I .!r
Narifu
'l'hc lol lr,l,'inii irrl rirri.rt ion i:,
lloa rd bl f ,r r,: :r fi.nrl :rlrpror':r I
A. lllrll,!lli.;i ; i.l\]'l:nlAl,S
Roof
Siding
0ther lia1l l"latcrials
Fascia
Soffits
ltindovrs
Window Trirn
Doors
Door Trin
Hand or Dcck Rails
Flues
Flashings
Ghinmeys
Trash Enclosures
Gteenhous es
Other
B. LANDSCAPING
Name of Designer:
Phone :
PLANT I'IATERIALS
TREES
rr..r1tt i 1'q111 t'ot' :;ulrr;, r Ltl I lry tlrt:
c;r lr Irc ,! jven:
'l'ype o!- lt:rt.,rllnt!
it|l)l i(';rrll lo thc l)c:; i1:rr lir,yj1.'t
-c_"_.!u!
HA '.. tr:;:"r-i-,tL 4H bVE?
cwA hw;r
*+A d.\Lttf:..rL
,2;t\4'rp','.1i'1
f ir-l &L#vL
_2. I A t!)"rtiJ.,
Botanical Name Common Name Quantj ty Size
Lt1 | 4 telet?Ep A/ /4?eH Ig?8.:Io Ioa': Dtb,v?
_I/4 " PLvtAp, i.!.qr) Ou,_bvz*,) 4
PatLl,b l\aae
+ ?7ttz- f-t)Dr
lat &3*r4 /p OL:, ?:vut.i'l
AV-,Hza*lm
Dtz, btuv4r'[
SHRUBS ,',' ."r: r.,- ta r' ]
Lr-., '/ | { -'--4-. i +J *a'
s0D ve+SQUARE FOOTAGE
SEED TYPE SQUARE FOOTAGE
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
TYPE OR METHOD
OF EROSION CONTROL
C. Other Landscape Features (retaining wa1 ls, fences, swimm'i ng poo'ls, etc.) Please specify.
,'1, ' l-lt,'.-, tu Cr r.1 r'^ ,iitll''..,rl "1 ,L!.ol-t ,r: 1gt uAlLY___WbL
Prolect Applicatlon
Project Nam€:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner. Addrsss and Phone:
Archilect, Address and PhonE:
aE94
Legaf Description:Ut *b , Block r , Flling L, Zone
-
comments: {/6 r/lgtl, i - 'c
Design Review Board
DISAPPROVAL 6-o
Summary: .ITAFF WrU- Af.VtEtN C,2t-o,'1- DF .d.f-tlAlA /4U Ul4tl-
seconded ar, ToYfu'l A
E statt Approval
(..
ENGINIERI}IG CHEEK LIST
C
Subdivision
Lot
B'lock
Fil ing
1.
(A) Topo Map
(B) Site Plan (c) utility Plan
(D) Title Report
(E) Subd'ivision Agreement
2. Engjneering Requirements
Submittal Items (Acceptabl e)
u7-
(Not Acceptable)
Arri€(i'f applicab'le)
. (A) Cu'lvert Size
-
JMh Sgat- -
t s i D ri v eway G ra dFIBF-man f mETu O -le"-A,S-'---:72
3. Source of Utilities
-
El ectri c
Gas
Se"ter
l,la ter
Tel ephorie
T.V.
B
c
D
E
.4-corninentr.A@_&/@
rc@@
Approved:
Di sapproved:
,/
i.
Bill Andrei.'s
/.' /'f(\- \.
UTl l.l1 .,.Crtr\'l'toN Vt:lil FICNf loN
SUBDIVISION
JOB
Lor__:aL_BLccK Err rtt.rn n ) ,",'," .+
ADDRESS
The location of utilities, whether they
lines, must be approved and verificd by
accompanying site plan.
be nain trunk
the following
linos or proposed
util:.ties for the
Date
Mountain Bell
Western Slope Gas
Public Sewice Conpany
HoIy Cross E!.ectric Assoc.
Vail Cable T.V.
Upper Eagle ValLey Water
and Sanitation District
3 -4-&7
NOTE: These verifications do not relieve the contractor of his
responsibility to obtain a strect cut pernit fron the
Town of Vail, Departnent of Public l{orks and to obtain
utility locations before digging in any public right-
of-uay or easement in the Town of Vail. A,, building perult
is not a street cut perrnit. A street cut pernit must be
obtained separately,
This fo:rn is to verify service availablity and location.
Ttris should be used in conjunction with preparing your
utility plan and"scheduling installations.
Wg
i=12-t> IJoNe
1291-
AloD(
3 -3 -r:-
APPLICATI0NFoRREVOCABLEPERMITT0ERECT0RMAINTAIN N. A STRUCTURE ON A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
oerc &--16 -o '/
PROPERTY e or pri nt
PROPERTY TO BE
descri ptjon on
Inside'lot ,l r )
DEScRTnTIoN 0F STRUCTURE 0R ITEM(S) INTo RIGHT-0F-uIAY. Ct:tPbry\1, ,1f\,qrW4q
11l'rq-!r -1 "o chnr'rinn anrnnachmpnt-' DroDertv line' sjdewal ks ' curbs!intakes ' hydrants'
'A;;;;; pi ins-srrowi ns encroachTgni : propertv- l'i l:'. :i i:Iull: l^:;:;:;i,';:;i.i;;:';;v";;i';;-#;;i"[ it,i'i6nuni" i1.lh9 ?fgl::l-i""u (to scale or
ifi;:;;i.;:;i"i.i"iiii;; (;) ;""ii-ui' er evations (ir appr i cabr e)'
Does structure PresentlY exist?z
Fence--
hJal I
Landscap'i n!.-
0ther
hr--J"<-- * z-
OI^INER OF
NAME OF
ADDRESS
APPL I CAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF (If necessary, attach
Corner lot
SERVED I L}Id/b BLoc K-suBD .
separate sheet. )
Proposed date for commencement of construction
In considerat.ion of the issuance of a revocable permit for the structure above indicated'
applicant agrees as follows:
'l . That the structure herejn authorized on a revocable permit basis is restricted exclu-
sively to the 'land above described.
Z, i6ii in6 p.rmit ii iimiiea specifically to the type of structure des*ibed in this
appl ication.3. ifilt ini ipplicant shal1 notify the Town Manager, or his duly authorized agent' twenty
four hours in advanie of the tinre for commencement of construction, in order that proper
inspection maY be made bY the Town.
4. fnat t6e appticant igi..i to indemn'ify and save harmless the Town of Vail from and
in.i"ii-uii";j;i;;,-iuiis, damages., c6sts, losses and expenses in any-manner resulting
from, arising oui-6r, o" ionnecied with the erection or maintenance of the above
identified structure.
5. That the permit may be revoked whenever it js determined that the encroachment, obstruc-
ii;;,-;; biner sliirciure constitutes a nuisance, destroys or impairs the use of the
righi-of-way by the public, constitutes a traffjc hazard, or !he_ property upon which
the encroac-hment, obitruction, or structure ex'ists is required for. use. by-the Rqblic;
or it may U" r.u6lea-at-iny time tor iny reason deemed sufficient by the Town of Vail.
6. if'ai-tfretapplicant will reirove, at his -expense, the- encroachment, obstruction' or
structure i,rittrin ten days after receiving notice of any revocat'i on of said perm'it.
7. ifrai-ii,e-appiicani-igreis io maintain an! 'landscaping hssociated with the encroachment
on the right-of-waY.g. That jn tie event laid remova'l of the encroachment, obstruction, or structure is
not'accomplished wjthin ten days, the Town is hereby authorized to remove same and
have the iignt to make an assessment against the property and collect the costs of
remdval in ihe same manner as general taxes are col1 ected.
9. Th;t the permit so issued is n6t assignable, and is issued solely to the undersigned
appl i cant.lO. fhit ttre app'l 'icant has read and understands all of the terms and conditions set forth
in this application.'II Snpci a l conditions:v l,sv I e
gnatures
Manager
TJ
.,.1
o
tu
t,
tr o o
o
o o.E o tuo od
6F{r{A A 0rtr t{ .'{
..{.HF
o Oq
F{€
,l
=.5
oo tro -.t |{o(ut\OA .rl \-.,
a,ot tr crd lJ c,CI +J r.l tO
Ul-to c, Fi ooa tr!o G+r .r{ (t)
'{ErJ AoC'AO o€u, o.t Ot0.-d tr -co o 0, a,o Eoo c o oE 5 0c, o kt'trq{a o (lor+{ u € co x iJ .r{ .l.1 lJ >€ ${..{ .d O -Y dc r,(E4 o oo, o0 t ,q F{ ."{ti Fru J
t,
o o
@
o ,A
{J
lu
,.(,
'IJ c o l.
6 A A 6
-+,o
an
.J ct,O .rl
E ]J€oc 5au
!to ct t{
(u tnE E o'o oo gt{-o
EO o rJt,qt '.1 F.l
rrk oo cl
FIO r-l O .rl .r{
'+,...,0,ct
oO F{qt t 6..ootr o OA rr\
h krc ot ol,Aut
o,o
>rr .0,t{ .o o
'.1 @ k.k crtro !Joo X€0, 0,t{ci qqro
tr 'E'horo Orrd E 6 o.Elo ttr cEl trl u,t tol 'o ..{ |'.qk=.:J q, o+,F o..l o o Frc z A ot
..{ !NO N>5 .-{ocul ct .Fl. .'{l .F.) cl >\ Dl tr r-{ |qt '{ .Cl 6ul r.l k Ll oool trdz,l €0r\l a oo rrl
OI o o !l U .l.{ ol 6 Frl r..l +J \.,1 a.'{l oc@l &=@l
F\I F{l
k
!,
.J
.r{
!)
o
o
E
IA
FI
x
=
o
d o
i,.
d
..1
.'.t
ri
.E'
6
o
00
qt
I{(!
o0
o u o
h tt
J1 u
0,
E:
o.t{tr go
! -Fl drJ
'o 'r-1
lrtr |l,o !o
o
EO
.rl
.o
Q
G'
o
IJ
6
tr o o r{
r+l
r{
tu t
o r{
o It
k .r{
6 !
o
t
o
o
c0
d
tl
d .rl
c,
IJ
tr .d
o
t.
6
o A q
6
@
r{
F{
+J
TJ
0t
o
o t.
rt{
00 c r{J
r)
o !
u
tlJ oc q .'{.'{ (,
EA
LZ q d'H
CX
JJ 1 v -x !..<
r tl V
,v
-P I
*
q
t
J
)I )
A t'
;
o
Fl
Fi
+,tt
tr ,r{
l.l
o
1..o
lu
o
lr
o
o
tu
00
t{
(tt (,
I
1
t<l q .'c
H
,1
)q
ol
-l
ol
kl
orl .ol
El 5l 'l rrl .f{l
trl 'l :l
.l
*
v I
>4
d \l
Iv
q
(
J
d
d
)
I \,
.U
;
o .lt
V
0
c\.
fr o
\o
<\
ao O .. o
ol o, !
'l.ll E O oF{|{!u C, ..{
} j. tt o 'rJ atro,.r{ O
.o tro,rj ouo,qo !l ct o ol .r{ F{trl i-{ (,
A liA>r qr('k
tt +,(00c 3Zr'l
0, {t E E ./\o Ot{.C,o (a o o.,{aJ ..1 r{ !'tr tr 0J .dcr0r>E
o orJ o k O O CFI O tr C.r{ q-{xtr ooooa)
O.JOJJ ctA ! 0).r{OOlrk
rl -C oOO O
r{q)E O
0, 'd (! (')(J
3.rl! o)
A trU.! 0J C /.\EO!.r{O oo(0 =o 3 EO\o o(n ac o x XOtr!r.l
ts >e.|tr50 .:tq{ q rro oo O L rt .'.1
0, O0.r{ ar O O Ar+E > O.r{!trdk5 o d o-o O\"'o o r-, o oo p o o€ .
= 0J o'rJ .
(/) ! !. 0J r-l \!oo>=r0 o >.rto!OCOr{Oq,tr 0J U'rt \,, >O .rl E3c)C0rt{
(E !.o o (/)15
ocJ o3 fr€! 3 O C ; r-r.C .r{
(0 (0 O.5 q-{ F{(9.C o '-{O o -'l <U 'o -{tr}..{ .'O td (!
ooclo@ r{O(! t{tr
F-{ € O .r{.-l .r{ o0 JJ .P C
'Fl t{ O
. o! tr o 0,€ o (0 0! h crlqruo E -C Crp (')'oo!c6 .ri tr (0 C O€ ^€.,{ O oO- O r+{ -c o clr) >-c tr !..{ o ol 5 r{ -t x E ol o r...t o +Jl ol, c c 6- r.Ol C O r{ rn Zl.?t U \./ 0,lo. (0 oo! p
-.r I ro tr o oo (ul o!.rr o c€t{l (a cr -c tr..r rJ olE .'.{ o .o 5 trl tr k o xd o ol|t! 5 r-l d! O.C (Jlrr !'+{E --l o
I
/t.t
\o
(\,1
o
c,
?
@
col \t
!
Ell o-
Lt.3 o.h Exoj;o'oe.gr Ltt!,oo vtu(l)F
t,J4:J !c,!.,.J3br1,qJc!>Ov)
E5.s)ooooEo Elcrcr;xu,4 r-{X.r{(!ko oExrlotr A(0()rlOO qrtt..,-t.c,
tr.trAOUrHtr O€'-{O,C.'.tG ooo0(/)Ed o!clullr.!r+.tOOI of{!uozooqJ ua(ococr oE.r.tk.rlu ooo E-UkkOrE.F{vt rrooEo .'.{ @ O .p |J O c, }lr .9 ! c € r. k o 0(0 o,
- il \./ td - Cl d ED H "9rJa'ata,uF{*-o)otro<docai o>t .rt a c') | o .Ft .oo o o ct o o r{ .\ tr ori o lU A C ! tr cU O .rt +lu C ! Ji . o ."{ co )O 0, C Ft .O O AA L. > r{ !:) (0 (U .F{ OU 0,A Ct O O lr. !, E- a).c O ! E qJ.O >| |J lr g € (d O >O t{ t, Eo E C o \ r.. or.r O ..{ 6r/') .r qt .r q, !. q{ qE +{ C aO tr O ..1 (o lr-r A g 0? g Fl r. c(!0l rd ! .,{ o .,{ A r-{ \./ n .-c n (|) € E o .J do F{ 0, t. ..t 'O o.o C J .J C E rr C $ V) oOC O C O 9{ .E v >| (ucJ !. .rl O.- O
O d .(, +J CJt O. O, 1,.ct O O c.' C 'rJ O a O OO a,kOEo.cotre.o o c o rro Q.' €.r k O € q, t, - q, EOJ !
- ! o i. c rJto o - o- 0.u) O k O, 5 t6A F{ OE (dO ! C \ O .D O = O C r..; o r{lU O tr !. r{ -C O -Ck O g .1 € ..{ .rs ri o -c tu c, -a |. Fr O.Fl O O (0 ,C o rJ o0 ch @ p .o r,r JJIJ q, ! C, .. C ..t C, t. .,{ O q,.c o > .r{ Eu 6 l4 tri -(i'd @ O t{ E tr F{ O.} lrO O C H aJ O O .rt r+{ r.r f. OFt ..{ U C !J , O q{ OO O(J rr C O O O"d O O (i O F{O rl \ A .c tr .q E€ q{ O 9 t0 t{ +, o (' E. tr C, ! rJ qt O F{ Ci t{ +.1 ,{a, c "o E - F{ o ij q, o(a I t{ o, c, o ot{ r! ! oo }ro 6/\ rr o oo ! .c ;ct o.c q0 o t{ .Ft c k! t ,+i ; r.{cc t, o
' o c (' o E O..-{ rU .r{ O dO(' O .a € o, O .r{ ! t{ tr tl, O Ct ,C ;.- EO 9|4. I O, o al '.{ ! O 'r.r Or. .r.r r{O'{ tr ! o r5 >C rJ d aO ,s
-!! g { o ! .ri o .Ft tg oo cq,Fl c, () Fr J ut Ju v i ;; oo
o
'r{tr
IJ
l.{
0)
\'
N
,*rfr"toN REouEsr
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE " ,'r, , .,1 ,,JOB NAME
MON
CALLER
TUES THUR FRI WED PM READY FOR
LOCATION: '
INSPECTION:
"- I I
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
E UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
O ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
D FRAMING
r_.r ROOF & SHEER - PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr
O FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP- POWER
MECHANIGAL:
tr HEATING
O ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
D CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
,.Ft APPROVED
,CORRECTIONS:
O DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
.'
DATE INSPECTOR
!""*-t K.1t,
t'1JI
rr,rstcrro; REeuEsr
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE JOB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
INSPECTION: MON TUES WED THUR FRI AM PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
O UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
r.r ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION O POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr
tr tr FINAL FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL O FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
,*#"toN
TOWN OF
\
REOUEST
VAIL
DATE JOB NAME
MON
CALLER
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:TUES WED THUR FRI AM PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
T] BOUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH/WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEEF
" PLYWooD NATLTNG tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
tr
tr
tr
tr
TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
u
tr FINAL tr FINAL
VED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
INSPECTOR DATE
\
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
I
INSPECTION
TOWN OF ..-\sgL.. \..-N,*
e-€ I
REQUEST
VAIL
JOB NAME DATE .,
CALLER
TUES WED THUR READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:MON PM AM FRI
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
D FOUNDATION / STEEL
D UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER ' PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION O POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
o
tr FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
tr
tr
tr
tr
TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
-CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
D
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
onre A- l\-tl JoeNrnMe-:fgj
INSPECTION:MON
INSPECTION REOUEST
TOWN OF VAIL
oALLER (r^u lur..-,
-*Ro,^,€
/2--i-TUES // WED.) THUR FRI V \__-'-=,:(Z) ^M ..!0),
IT NUMBER OF PROJECT
READY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
I] FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER .- PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL
ErylNAL
ELECTRICAL:
r] TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
U o
tr FINAL 76ko'-
tr APPRovED (-fu$korPRovEE
CORRECTION S: / I
tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECT
I
PE tNs CTION REOUEST
TOWN OF VAIL PERMI
DATE
T NUMBER OF PROJECT
r- .i JoB NAME
INSPECTION:MON
' .-, ,,,, -
'''r-l'u11'
CALLER
TUES WED THUR FRI PM AM READY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING D GAS PIPING
O INSULATION O POOL / H. TUB
E SHEETROCK NAIL o
tr tr
T] FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
D HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
tr tr
O FINAL O FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
./,('
DATE INSPECTOR - t /
ll'.'- i ),^,Jr)il
PE tNs CTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:MON
JOB NAME
'',., ,.J. ,i ,',CALLER
TUES WED THUR FRI PM AM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
D ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
D INSULATION N POOI / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr
tr FINAL N FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
D TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
O HEATING
tr ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
D CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
Q. APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR